What's your Walk Score?

[citymama]

Just curious - what's your walk score where you live? And how important is walkability to you? I know I live in a more urban setting than most people here - our current home has a walk score of 95. Walkability is hugely important to me - proximity to public transit, groceries, restaurants, schools, etc.

You can calculate your walk score here (using the beta version of the new tool, "Street Smart" which shows real street distances to stores and other amenities, not just distances as the crow flies).

http://blog.walkscore.com/2011/01/preview-street-smart-walk-score/

[MontrealMum]

Let me preface this by saying that I think that this is fun, but the tool is maybe not all that accurate. The score was 99 for the main city that I live in (no surprise). 49 for my village...which I have to dispute as the places that the tool identified as "grocery stores" w/in walking distances are places I'd never set foot in, or quite frankly, even heard of. Apparently walking 10 min to a REAL grocery store is too far by their calculations :D It's also off in a lot of its other calculations to "ammenities" (some of which are no longer there). Maybe they're Canadian deficient. ;)

So, I've got to say, if 10 min is too far to walk - this system is a sham in terms of walkability calcuations. From a long time big city dweller I've got to say, we're used to walking much farther than that all the time. :) Also, considering that the car ownership rates here - in the city center and the surrounding villages - are pretty low, I'm thinking we're pretty walkable.

[kijip]

We are in the 61-70 category, however, looking at the amenity list in sub areas that factor into the score (such as banking, schools, grocery etc), there are A LOT of things that we have and are walkable that are NOT on the list- for example it lists a fairly far away bank ATM as the only banking amenity, but there are three bank branches much closer that that ATM to us. I wonder if accurate amenities would jump up our score some. Though we certainly are not in the very best spot for walkability. ETA: And MM, we are not in Canada so the inaccuracies are not limited to the great north. :)

[citymama]

Yeah, I noticed some inconsistencies too. For eg, where we currently live really ought to be a 99 or whatever the highest possible score is, but it's a 95. Where we used to live for a short while came up as a 92, but there's no way it's just a tiny bit less walkable than our current place. Right now we have gourmet markets, natural food markets, inexpensive Chinese produce markets, other ethnic grocery stores (Mexican, Middle Eastern, Indian) all within a 1-10 minute walk of our doorstep. The other place has one smallish grocery store about 0.3 miles away. Sorry, they are NOT equal in grocery store access! Ditto for restaurants and stores - we have everything from thrift stores and dollar stores to high-end boutiques, toy stores, record stores within a few minutes of where we are right now, not to mention some of the best restaurants in the city. Having an outdoor supply store and pet store in the other place does not make it a shopper's paradise.

But still, I think this is a fun too to get a ballpark estimate of the walkability of where you live. It's definitely something I see on real estate listings in this part of the country.

[MamaKath]

Score is 2. I miss living where we could walk on errands.

[Melaine]

I got 10 but am not sure my area even deserves a 10. Walking with kids isn't safe in my neighborhood because there are no sidewalks and cars fly around.

[Canna]

We live in what I would consider the suburbs. My walk score is 65 - "Somewhat walkable" - it seems accurate. We are in easy walking distance to a number of things (elem. school, high school, Walgreens, deli, hardware store, bakery, nail and hair places, great toy store, great video store) and somewhat easy walking distance to other businesses including supermarket, other restaurants and shopping. We have a bus stop at the corner of our block also. A number of families on our street have just one car and/or have one member that takes public transit to the down town area.

We looked at walkscores before buying our house - it was one of our considerations in choosing our house/neighborhood.

[hillview]

We are an 86. That seems fair in the grand scheme of things. I grew up in a 92 place :)
/hillary

[crl]

66, which is terrible for SF. But it lists things that do not, and never have existed, such as a "restaurant" that is really a BBQ grill on public land. And does not consider some places that I routinely walk to as close enough to count apparently.

It is an interesting concept.

Catherine

[KrisM]

Mine is 32, which surprised me. No, we can't walk to grocery stores or places like Target, but we walk to restaurants, the library, the park, the bank, etc. We live in a village with sidewalks.

My parents house is 35, which surprises me more because to walk anywhere, you're walking on the shoulder of very busy roads! Sure, they can walk to a park or the elem school, but otherwise, walking isn't going to happen.

[BabyBearsMom]

Mine was 76. But while I could walk to starbucks and whole foods, I don't because it would involve walking on a really busy main road with no side walks...also, I'm lazy :bag

[kristac]

:hysterical: 2 out of 100. It's a mile just to get out of my neighborhood. The closest store/resturaunt is 1.5 miles.

[vludmilla]

I am surprised that I am a 48 because there are lots of things that I can and do walk to near my house. I can walk to the elementary, middle and high school that DD will go to eventually. I can walk to a private school, two churches, delis, restaurant, ice cream shop, hardware store, small grocer, farmer's market (in season), music conservatory, small art gallery, university. All of these things are a ten minute or less walk.

[egoldber]

I am curious about their criteria as well. It gave us a 12, because apparently 1 mile is it's limit on walkability. We have a lot of amenities at 1.2-1.3 miles.

I do admit that while we have walked to many things in that 1.2-1.3 mile range, it is just a touch outside my comfort level walking with the kids. In the summer it is sooooo blazing hot and humid here, so even nice weather means I don't like to walk there.

[lizzywednesday]

We got a 24, but I think that's awfully generous, considering the pluses are down a 4-lane highway with no pedestrian overpasses or other safety measures!

I'd prefer to be in a more walkable area; since getting a car in 2003, I've put on about 50lbs. (I used to walk to the train, the grocery store and the laundromat when I didn't have a car. Now I drive everywhere because walking is incredibly unsafe.)

[Melaine]

I'll admit that I have walked to absolutely ZERO destinations from our home since we moved here. I've been thinking (with my weight gain) that it would be great to be in a better walking community.

[jenfromnj]

Mine is a 75, which seems about right--we live in a suburb (about 30 minutes outside of NYC) but are right near our town's downtown district, so can walk to stores, restaurants, bank, park, library, etc, within 10 minutes or so.

I do agree with some of the PPs though that the program seems a bit flawed--for instance, in my case, it showed the nearest park as just under a mile, when there's a larger park that isn't listed that's less than half a mile away. There's also a new branch of our bank about .3 miles away (less than a year old) that's not factored in.

[JElaineB]

I scored a 3. We can walk to my son's elementary school and a city bus stop and that's about it.

[pb&j]

26. I'd probably nudge it a little higher than that, as we have some things within walking distance that the tool didn't consider, such as a gym, and our elem, middle, and high schools. They're all just outside the 1 mile radius, but easily walkable in my mind. There are also sports fields and a pool that aren't on the tool.

And construction is currently underway for a sidewalk that will lead to the PO, library, grocery, hardware, drugstore, and, not to be underestimated, beer brewery, along with several other restaurants and shops, and a big public park with playing fields, etc.

We don't really have any public transportation, though, so if you wanted to get out of our village, you'd be car dependent.

[pastrygirl]

Mine is 17, but I think it's really zero. There are no sidewalks and the streets are too narrow and winding to walk around safely.

I grew up in NYC, and really miss being able to walk everywhere!!!

[tmahanes]

It said mine is a 2 but one of the things it called a store is actually manufacturing plant. Other than that the only thing in walking distance is a private school.

Sent from my Ally using Tapatalk

[katydid1971]

4:jammin: I'm so proud. The only thing that was listed as walkable was the park around the corner (we do walk there a lot).

I have to laugh because it lists the lumber mills around me as "shopping"

[cono0507]

Mine is 28 which I think is not an accurate reflection. We walk to the gym, pool, library, restaurants, school, parks, shops, farmers market, etc on a regular basis. I guess we just walk a little farther than they think is walkable?

[tribe pride]

Mine was 54. Our neighborhood is a little odd, in that we live very close to downtown in our (small) city, so distance-wise we are very close to many restaurants, grocery store, library, etc. However, there are minimal sidewalks and large hills to walk up and down in order to get anywhere, so I'm hesitant to take our stroller anywhere.

The home I grew up in was a 0! I grew up in the country, and it was several miles in order to go into our small village. But actually, because it was so rural, I feel like we walked quite a bit in order to get around our farm, to visit relatives living down the road, take long walks, etc. So not walkable in the traditional sense (i.e. close access to amenities), but still the ability to get some exercise and enjoy the outdoors. Maybe it depends on how you define "walkable"?

[AshleyAnn]

Mine got a 6. But in my house's defense it is smackdab in the middle of a very large subdivision so just getting out of my neighborhood is a bit of a walk. We don't walk much with DD because its not stroller friendly but DH and I have been known to walk to some of the closer locations on occassion (ok mostly the local bar, which is 2.7 miles)

[YouAreTheFocus]

Mine is 80. Honestly I thought it would be even higher. There are 15 restaurants, a movie theater, 2 grocery stores, a library, bunch of shops, all w/in 0.2-0.3 mi...what more does WalkScore want?

[AnnieW625]

I personally think that Walk Score measures hipness not real walkability for basics (unless maybe if you are in San Francisco). The Belmont Shore area near me (about 8 miles actually) that gets a 95 has hip local shop, The Gap, a Jamba Juice, a Starbucks, a Coffee Bean, a Peets, and numerous restaurants, but only one smallish Vons which is a walk from most of the neighborhood. You still have to drive to Target, Albertsons, Trader Joe's, and Whole Foods.

My neighborhood was built in 1950 with the SAHM in mind (I am not lying it really was built the way it was for that purpose) and it gets a walk score of 52. Granted there aren't great hip restaurants in my area like there are in the area that gets a 95, but all of the tracts all have parks in them (sometimes more than one), an elementary school, and two or three tracts share a middle school, and the high school has the largest area draw, but even then it's still somewhat walkable, plus there is a drug store and supermarket no more than 3/4 of a mile from the middle of each tract. It also has sidewalks all around so no excuse there. It's just not hip.

[WatchingThemGrow]

We're at 74. We walked to preschool this morning because it was beautiful outside. :D We're in a school walkzone also, but I'm not thinking it is a hike I want to make twice a day. :bag (just realized it is only 1.1 miles away)

The house we were looking at (decided the death thing creeped me out a little if you saw that post) was a 62, but the amenities to walk to there are not nearly as cool as the ones where we are now.

The problem with our walkability is the state road right behind us. It's pretty busy, so pushing the buttons and waiting next to the side of the road always makes me a little uneasy. I think something to consider when you're looking at walkability is to really consider what YOUR life is going to look like there. If there isn't a school/daycare/etc that YOU can get into or frequent, that can really change how car dependent you are. In my situation, I could walk lots of places, but since I need to take my triple stroller to walk to the park, I don't do it as much as I want to.

[septmama2b]

Mine is 81, which did not surprise me. We walk to everything we can when the weather allows. We moved into a more urban neighborhood a year ago, and our old house in the suburbs had a score of 11. I don't think I could go back to the 'burbs.

[larig]

Let me preface this by saying that I think that this is fun, but the tool is maybe not all that accurate. The score was 99 for the main city that I live in (no surprise). 49 for my village...which I have to dispute as the places that the tool identified as "grocery stores" w/in walking distances are places I'd never set foot in, or quite frankly, even heard of. Apparently walking 10 min to a REAL grocery store is too far by their calculations :D It's also off in a lot of its other calculations to "ammenities" (some of which are no longer there). Maybe they're Canadian deficient. ;)

So, I've got to say, if 10 min is too far to walk - this system is a sham in terms of walkability calcuations. From a long time big city dweller I've got to say, we're used to walking much farther than that all the time. :) Also, considering that the car ownership rates here - in the city center and the surrounding villages - are pretty low, I'm thinking we're pretty walkable.
:yeahthat:

I'm only a mile from our nice grocery store, .75 to our organic coop, and our weather is such that it is almost nice enough to walk whenever I need anything. (I used to walk more, but DS isn't as cooperative about walking as he used to be.) ETA: we scored a 51.

[smilequeen]

We get a 0. Our suburb is woodsy and committed to maintaining trees, nature, wildlife. There is a minimum acreage. Nothing is in walking distance though. Wouldn't trade my kids exposure to nature and still close proximity to city amenities for anything right now.

[fumofu]

78. Except it lists only Safeway as grocery store (vs Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, and a mom & pop European open market), and no listings for Target, Walmart, Sear's, just a bunch of stores that are in walking distance from us.

[MontrealMum]

Reading other posters' responses I'm now wondering exactly how the distance is calculated. For instance the nearest school to my home according to that site is the private French Catholic school. In walking terms it's 4 blocks away, so not bad, though I don't know why the English public at the top of our street (only 1 block) comes out as farther away. But I'm wondering if they may have plotted my route to the French private as crossing directly through various backyards and alleyways - scaling fences along the way - rather than walking up one street, turning, and turning again to walk down the street that the school is actually on. You know, how a normal person would walk?

I mean, after seeing how many of you are saying that the walking "route" doesn't include sidewalks, goes over/next to highways and busy streets...I'm wondering if the system takes that stuff into account.

I just find it odd that my village scored so low since I would guess that the majority of households here have one car only, with a good chunk of them having no car at all (I should check the census data on that, LOL). We are "odd" for having two cars, though I don't think I drove more than once a week the year that I was home with DS. I walked with him everywhere either in the carrier or the stroller.

Oh, I'd also like credit to be given for my village actually putting the thought into plowing our bike paths with sidewalk plows :) When other parts of the city I've previously lived in rarely even plowed the sidewalks/streets. I think we should get winter accessibility bonus points :D

I do think that it's fun to see what comes up, and if I have some time I'm going to put in some of my former addresses just to see, but I don't think I'd rely on it overly if I was making a decision about buying or something. Much better to see in person and walk around to get a feel.

[KpbS]

We get a 0. Our suburb is woodsy and committed to maintaining trees, nature, wildlife. There is a minimum acreage. Nothing is in walking distance though. Wouldn't trade my kids exposure to nature and still close proximity to city amenities for anything right now.

Yes, we got a 5. That is fine by me. We are 1.5-2 min. from the nicest grocery store in our city, 1 min. to Walgreens, 5 min. to our fave library, 6 to Target, 3 min. to church, etc. Our neighborhood is very hilly and wooded and the likelihood of me schlepping 3 kids to the grocery even in the nicest weather is slim to nil. To the neighborhood pool/park, yes.

[daisymommy]

45 Car Dependent.
Yep, sounds about right to me!
Even then there is only 1 grocery store 2 miles away. Schools are 1.5 miles away. That's it! Everything else is 10 minutes by car. I'm in the middle of suburbia. Land of houses.

[tribe pride]

Reading other posters' responses I'm now wondering exactly how the distance is calculated. For instance the nearest school to my home according to that site is the private French Catholic school. In walking terms it's 4 blocks away, so not bad, though I don't know why the English public at the top of our street (only 1 block) comes out as farther away. But I'm wondering if they may have plotted my route to the French private as crossing directly through various backyards and alleyways - scaling fences along the way - rather than walking up one street, turning, and turning again to walk down the street that the school is actually on. You know, how a normal person would walk?

I mean, after seeing how many of you are saying that the walking "route" doesn't include sidewalks, goes over/next to highways and busy streets...I'm wondering if the system takes that stuff into account.

I just find it odd that my village scored so low since I would guess that the majority of households here have one car only, with a good chunk of them having no car at all (I should check the census data on that, LOL). We are "odd" for having two cars, though I don't think I drove more than once a week the year that I was home with DS. I walked with him everywhere either in the carrier or the stroller.

Oh, I'd also like credit to be given for my village actually putting the thought into plowing our bike paths with sidewalk plows :) When other parts of the city I've previously lived in rarely even plowed the sidewalks/streets. I think we should get winter accessibility bonus points :D

I do think that it's fun to see what comes up, and if I have some time I'm going to put in some of my former addresses just to see, but I don't think I'd rely on it overly if I was making a decision about buying or something. Much better to see in person and walk around to get a feel.

:yeahthat: I wonder the same thing, too. After plugging in the addresses of previous places I've lived, I'm very surprised by the results. I consider several of those places VERY walkable. Close to schools, restaurants, parks, the beach, you name it. Heck one was just a couple of blocks from the commuter rail station (outside Boston). And these places all had a score below 60. What, exactly, does it take to be considered highly walkable? For those of you with really high walkability scores, I'm impressed!

[mezzona]

hmm 66. didnt think my neighborhood was that walkable but i guess so. interesting.. 0.5 miles from costco. yeah, i wont be walking to costco.

[mmommy]

99! :applause:
And honestly, I can't imagine what would get you to 100 if this isn't it.

[salsah]

my area is considered "somewhat walkable" but it isn't as walkable as the site suggests. we did this before, and although this new beta version is more accurate, i still have the same problems in my area. there is one grocery store listed but it is actually a liquor store. there is one schools listed, but it is a high school. great for those with high school age kids, but not for the rest of us. the park listed isn't actually a park either. it is an orchard (with "no trespassing" signs). there are the same types of problems with most of the places listed in all the categories. restaurants include a catering business that someone operates out of their home. shopping includes a tailor.
i checked my parents' address (where i grew up) and it was listed as car dependant. i absolutely agree with that.