Walk Score: Cool Green Google Map Mashup
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 07.25.07
Walking matters." A walkable community promotes better health, reduction in greenhouse gases, more transportation options, increased social capital and stronger local businesses." Treehugger has noted before that suburbs make you fat because it's hard to walk anywhere. Or, as St. Augustine noted, "Solvitur Ambulando." So how walkable is it where you live? Find out with Walk Score, which "uses a patent-pending algorithm to calculate the walkability of an address based on:
* The distance to walkable locations near an address.
* Calculating a score for each of these locations.
* Combining these scores into one easy to read Walk Score."
You type in your address and it puts it on a Google map and gives it a score. 70 to 90 is very walkable; 90 to a hundred is a walker's paradise. We nailed a 78! Use this fabulous tool before your next move. ::Walk Score found by ::Odograph at Grist
From their website:
What makes a neighborhood walkable?
Walkable communities tend to have the following characteristics:
* A center: Walkable neighborhoods have a discernable center, whether it's a shopping district, a main street, or a public space.
* Density: The neighborhood is compact, rather than spread out, which brings people closer to stores and jobs and makes public transportation more cost effective.
* Mixed income, mixed use: Housing is provided for everyone who works in the neighborhood: young and old, singles and families, rich and poor. Businesses and residences are located near each other.
* Parks and public space: There are plenty of public places to gather and play.
* Accessibility: The neighborhood is accessible to everyone and has wheelchair access, plenty of benches with shade, sidewalks on all streets, etc.
* Well connected, speed controlled streets: Streets form a connected grid that improves traffic by providing many routes to any destination. Streets are narrow to control speed, and shaded by trees to protect pedestrians.
* Pedestrian-centric design: Buildings are placed close to the street to cater to foot traffic, with parking lots relegated to the back.
* Close schools and workplaces: Schools and workplaces are close enough that most residents can walk from their homes.
Thats a pretty cool find. So i'm guessing the fact that it can't calculate a walkscore for my house is a bad sign... (and not surprising)
That's why im overweight!!! Now i have even something new to blame it on! rock on!
I wish I could walk more but having 2 young kids and being pregnant while living in the hell on earth that is Oklahoma, it just doesn't work. Maybe once the kids are older.
this is pretty cool. anyone know of one for biking thats would put you in a larger radius?
My NYC hood gets an 85. Not surprising..
This is great. It illustrates how density is a great thing. My place, located on the East end of Toronto rates a 54. Not horrible - but not great. The one thing that highly benefits me, is being right on Danforth with a Subway Line.
My parents, who live in suburbia (Mississauga) score an 18 and even that is much better in comparison to some of the other areas around there.
Too bad that you can't collaborate, which would be specially useful for non-US residents. I can walk to a lot of places in my city in Brazil but there's absolutely nothing listed for me on the site.
Go Miami Beach (zip 33139) with a Walk Score: 92 out of 100!!!
If you dont walk it's cause you are lazy, dont use the kids excuse! by the time they grow up you wont be able to walk and you will all be fat and lazy and sick. Get out and walk!
My house in Lancaster, PA has a WalkScore of 92.
You don't have to live in a big, expensive city to have a great WalkScore!
It's a great idea, but it has some way to go yet. For a start, it uses "as the crow flies" distance rather than actual walking distance via the street network, so while it shows the benefits of density and mixed use, it can't account for the difference between neighbourhoods with well-connected pedestrian routes and those bent out of shape by culs-de-sac, motorways and private land.
They could always use a routing engine such as that provided by Google, but of course the problem with those is that they're aimed exclusively at drivers, and in many urban situations are hopelessly misleading for pedestrians.
Billings (where I live 3/4 of the year) is not a walker's paradise. I could have told you that without Walkscore. As a person without a car, I'm usually foot-bound, taking the bus (it's sucky but occasionally useful), or carpooling with friends.
However, I was surprised to find my neighborhood had a 54 out of 100 score. On the other hand, though it is technically only 1.38 miles to the cinema at the mall, it takes three hours to walk there due to the sprawled out streets, constant road construction and congestion, and the way in which the city is shaped.
That definitely needs to be worked on....
Perhaps they could mix it up with Mapquest for an accurate walking time.
For a start, it uses "as the crow flies" distance rather than actual walking distance via the street network
No, it uses driving distance, which within a standard city grid is almost always the same as walking distance for short distances.
They could always use a routing engine such as that provided by Google
It is a Google Maps mashup.
This is indeed a novel idea.The system perhaps can't exmine my walkscore,because I come from China.I'd like to know whether the website provides service for the residents living in China.If not so,the system should be further improved so as to meet the demand of people in other nations.I always visit websites in American,I think some websites should expand service not only aim to Amercans but also aim to other person outside of U.S jus as Google which is a global system.
Downtown Frederick, MD got an 86. Fantastic! That's why I love this city :)
Yup. I'm sure lazy for not putting mine or my unborn child's health at risk because I refuse to walk anywhere in 95+º heat. :)
Agree with the comments on location, I work in the centre of Sydney Australia, and had to laugh at getting a 0 out of 100 score for the centre of town. Love Google maps, but come on Google, catch a boat, and take a walk on foreign shores!
Our house in a very small city (8500 people) in Canada scored 38, but we chose our property specifically for its walkable location within town. It's just that this town doesn't have many of the amenities it's being judged upon, forget about having them within walking distance: no bookstore, movie theatres etc. until you get to the closest major city 2 hrs. away.
But, if you're willing to sacrifice hanging out in a Chapters every other day, you can walk to all the real necessities you need right here.
My address scored a 97, but there's no way I'm letting out the secret of where it is. Now if I could just get 97% of my neighborhood to walk, I wouldn't get run over trying to cross the street.
My old town scored in the eighties, but walking in that neighborhood required an armed guard.
I believe that walk score is cool, but nowadays more and more people prefer to drive cars. Homes are often located in an area where some establishments are easier to get to by car than on foot. I've recently found a type of service on drivescore.fizber.com which is called Drive Score. It shows a map of what establishments are in your neighborhood and calculates a Drive Score based on the number of places within a convenient driving distance. It doesn’t mean that drive score is better than walk score – they are equal and both necessary in the modern world!
I think that we should take into consideration both - walk score and drive score.
I agree, walk score is very good. But are many people travelling now on foot? Practically all families have cars, and practically everyone moves in a car.
All my friends have cars, all members of my family have cars, I have a car. We very seldom go on foot.
We live in the century of high speeds. We are always in a hurry. Do we really have time for walking? Probably, it is time to invent something new, something more actual? For example, drive score.
Walk score is still actual. But more actual, to my mind, is drive score. You should also pay attention to it.
I think that we should take into consideration both - walk score and drive score.
I agree, walk score is very good. But are many people travelling now on foot? Practically all families have cars, and practically everyone moves in a car.
All my friends have cars, all members of my family have cars, I have a car. We very seldom go on foot.
We live in the century of high speeds. We are always in a hurry. Do we really have time for walking? Probably, it is time to invent something new, something more actual? For example, drive score.
Walk score is still actual. But more actual, to my mind, is drive score. You should also pay attention to it.
I think that we should take into consideration both - walk score and drive score.
Great Idea, but bad in the implementation.
I tried my friends home, who lives in suburbia and walks no where, and my home, with almost every convenience located within 5 blocks. And good stuff, too. We scored the same.
It simply cannot judge the quality of the stores/restaurants/grocers/libraries/etc. nearby.
It should include post offices.
It should include mass transit stations.
Not bad! My neighborhood in Stillwater, OK earns a 71. Better then I expected, at least.