Is your neighborhood walk-friendly?

emmline · Post by **emmline** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 12:56 pm

This is kind of cool...or maybe it's just my personal bent in favor of walkable neighborhoods, but this site ranks--on a 0 to 100 scale (100 being the most walkable)--any address you input (U.S. only, I'm guessing, but I haven't tested) on the basis of services within walking range:

Walkscore.com

My house scored an 82, and that's why I like it, although I would happily trade the local mainstream groceries for the ones like Trader Joe which I prefer. So, yeah...sadly, I can't really walk to my grocery store of choice.
You can score a zero--the house down a rural road into the woods where my daughter temporarily lives did, but I've yet to input an address that hits 100--though my sister-in-law's Manhattan condo, on the Upper West Side, got 98. I'm not sure what's missing.
(edit: I just pretended she lived one block west...i.e. closer to Broadway. That scored 100. So it can be done.)

rebl_rn · Post by **rebl_rn** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 1:16 pm

Very interesting, though not totally accurate - at least for my small town. Missed a closer (though still not very close) coffee shop and a much closer book store, and a few other things. Also has listed a "movie theater" that was converted many years ago (over 10) from a movie theater to a live theater.

One thing it looks like it doesn't take into consideration (and I suppose it can't because the info isn't there) is whether or not a neighborhood has sidewalks.
In the neighborhood I live in, the older part (about 15-20 years old) has no sidewalks, while the newer part does. I live behind a school, and lots of kids end up walking part of the way to school on the street because there is no sidewalk. It's dangerous. I've heard some speakers who work on developing walkable neighborhoods, and sidewalks are a huge issue.

crookedtune · Post by **crookedtune** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 1:29 pm

17. Yup, that's about right.

avanutria · Post by **avanutria** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 1:51 pm

It works for the UK - do house number, street and postcode. We scored a 75 but there was such a plethora of icons surrounding the house I'm not entirely sure why it wasn't higher.

My brother's house in Texas got 38, which makes sense as you really can't walk anywhere from there.

My workplace got 84, which is surprising as it's hard to walk anywhere useful within the lunch hour and get back again on time.

Doug_Tipple · Post by **Doug_Tipple** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:13 pm

My house scored a 43, although I consider it a very walkable neighborhood. My focus is on walking for exercise and relaxation. Every street in my older neighborhood has sidewalks that are usually set back away from the street. Also, every house was designed individually, so it is continually fascinating to look at all of the different house designs. The homeowners are out in their yards this time of year, and I speak to them as I walk by. "Hello, Mrs. Jones. I see that you got a new roof after that terrible hail storm". "Lord, Almighty, that sure was some storm!"

Modern tract houses are really boring esthetically, and I'm not sure that I could find my way home on certain nights. They may be closer to shopping and get a higher score for walkability, but I wouldn't want to live there as much as my current neighborhood.

Innocent Bystander · Post by **Innocent Bystander** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:41 pm

Mine scored 40.
It's clear that it rates your area on the resources within a certain distance, not the "walkability". For instance, I would NOT walk to Flackwell Heath Library, as it's up a very steep hill. I was interested to see a pub I've never heard of: "Mick's Live Music". I'll have to look that one up. And "the Hideaway" Coffee bar is closed now.
If it had some way of recording how many lunatic cyclists zoom past you on the footpaths, that might help. Also, how narrow the footpaths are, for how long. Up to the Ferry Inn is about a two mile walk, but one of those miles is along very narrow footpaths. If two people approach in opposite directions, one of them will have to step out into the road. Even if they're both really skinny and know each other well.

Nice idea, though.

chas · Post by **chas** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:52 pm

rebl_rn wrote:Very interesting, though not totally accurate - at least for my small town.

LOL! Not too accurate for the 'burbs either. It has a "restaurant" listed near me which is actually where a guy parks his ice cream truck. A "fitness center" is a meditation place in someone's house, and a library is listed that is part of a private company. Also, most of the stuff is across a 6-lane 60-mph road from us. And the distances seem to be as the crow flies. Even with all that cheating, my house only got a 29.

emmline · Post by **emmline** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:53 pm

Yeah, there's a section on there explaining what are and are not the function's capabilities...and ability to discern actual walkability--sidewalks, traffic, geographic features--is one of the weaknesses they admit too.
I also found that it identified some of the businesses strangely--
it classified Rita's--an Italian ice stand--as a "park," for example, and the Presbyterian Church as a library. Missed some altogether.

SteveK · Post by **SteveK** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:10 pm

I found pretty much the same thing as everyone else. Lots of miscategorizations (My spell checker doesn't like that. Maybe it's not even a word). It gave me a grocery store which is almost 2 miles but not one which is less than a mile. It listed a hobby shop as a bookstore. There is a real bookstore just around the corner from the hobby shop. The walkability score was 78 which is about right.

emmline · Post by **emmline** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:32 pm

Doug_Tipple wrote: Modern tract houses are really boring esthetically, and I'm not sure that I could find my way home on certain nights. They may be closer to shopping and get a higher score for walkability, but I wouldn't want to live there as much as my current neighborhood.

No, I don't think they do score higher, as a rule, because those developments tend to be built on old farms or former wooded areas away from town centers. Most suburban communities of that type are built with cars in mind. It's generally the older (and, I agree with you Doug, more aesthetically interesting) neighborhoods that tend to be closer to town centers.

Cayden · Post by **Cayden** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:33 pm

'Address cannot be found'

Just how I like it

Thomaston · Post by **Thomaston** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:37 pm

18 here, which is pretty sucky for a college town.

KateG · Post by **KateG** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:41 pm

My house rated a 5! But then, we're in the country and its about 8 miles to the nearest anything.

mutepointe · Post by **mutepointe** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:49 pm

46! We were so dissed. They did not even factor in how many people still sit on their front porches, how much through traffic there is and isn't, and especially the crack neighborhood that is less than 1/2 mile from our home although seperated by a railroad track and a bridge. I'll gladly give up the walk to the movie theatre to keep my neighbors that actually know our names.

Lambchop · Post by **Lambchop** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 4:41 pm

46, but I'll be darned if I know what the "Gulfport Technology Coffee Shop" is!

It also made no distinction between gas stations with junk food and actual grocery stores.