A few months ago, I was 95/100 in downtown Atlanta. Now I’m 0/100 on the outskirts of Greensboro. Hooray!
Somehow I got a 23. Apparently, there is a Mexican restaurant on my street, despite the fact that it is 100% residential. Maybe they mean the places behind the buildings, but I don’t think it is on my street. I think the fact that there is a casino across the way skew the score somewhat, considering it seems to consider the bars and restaurants inside as separate businesses.
92/100 and fairly accurate. I fell in love with this neighborhood precisely because of this.
My old neighborhood was a 67.
Which is deceptive. It might appear walkable, but the truth was that there, I needed a car. (The program doesn’t seem to differentiate between 7-11 type places where you might be able to buy food like products and actual grocery stores. There’s a difference between the two). And it puts way too high a priority on restaurants.
It also failed to realize that freeways and hills are deterrents to walking.
On the other hand, my new neighborhood is in the high 90s. I think it is. Over Christmas, when I wasn’t going to work, I could walk everywhere I wanted or needed to go. I love my new neighborhood. Not that I didn’t like the old one - but it wasn’t walkable. Cyclable - but not walkable.
It lists one of the local museums as a library. Not quite.
97, and actually quite accurate. I could conceivably spend the rest of my life within half a mile of my home and never want for material goods or services (though I might grow bored).
And, boy, it does NOT work for Montreal. It listed a grocery store IN VERMONT. No wonder my walk score is low!
- I thought it would be better.
And yet it does for North Sydney.
My score was 91 /100, which is accurate. That’s why I like living where I do and why I haven’t had a car for 20 years.
78, but it listed as walkable some destinations that are pretty far, 2.5 miles and not through easily walkable part of town.
Got 13. What. The. Frack?
My house is within ten minutes walk of the The Centre MK which has five of every type of shop, a theatre, cinemas, art gallery. And I’m surrounded by parks and woods.
Their reference location for all Milton Keynes seems to be about a mile north of where I actually live.
Useless.
I got a 20, but it should have been higher. There’s three bars within 1/2 a mile of my house, but they listed the nearest bar as the one at the airport 3.5miles away. Also, there is a pharmacy less then 1/2 a mile away, but they listed the Walgreens downtown.
- Which is accurate if you are considering businesses/community centers within walking distance of my house. Health benefits of walking is listed as the primary reason that walking matters; however the site fails to consider the availability of leisure walking. I live on a rural dirt road and walk 2.5 miles daily.
And who wants to walk to a clinic if they are ill? I’ll drive the 7 miles, thank you.
Weird, my neighbourhood got only a 40 out of 100.
However, having specifically picked that area to avoid owning a car, I’m convinced they’ve got it wrong, since from reading the description we’re probably closer to a 75 or 80. Aside from some hard-to-find specialty goods, I can usually get whatever I need within 15-20 mins walking from home.
They need to revise their search method, because they’re using words rather than categories. For example, not every supermarket will include the word “Supermarket” in its name - to get results using keyword, they’d have to put in all the major chain names (in my area, that would turn up Sobeys, IGA and Loblaws, all currently missing from search results).
I’d hate to see what the results look like for Montreal, where the law requires that businesses be named in French.
We got a six. Not surprising since we are in the 'burbs and you really would be pressed to walk to anything from my house.
But my mother in law, who lives in one of the most walkable areas in the Twin Cities (Seward) only scored a 60. I can’t imagine what you can’t walk to from her house.
38, but ferinstance, the CVS they chose is listed in one neighborhood, zip coded in another neighborhood and*** actually *** about 7 miles away, as opposed to the 1.28 they say it is, and in order to get to the Red Wing shoe store under the ‘clothing and music’ section, you have to pass; Best Buy, Marshalls, Target, KMart, Famous Footwear, Shoe Carnival, Kohl’s, Champs Sports and a couple of smaller independent record stores and a resale shop.
Now, the place we’re GOING to gets a score of 92. That I believe, because I’d be able to see Michigan Avenue from the Balcony.
Walk the 'hood. Really.
12, which seems high. Of the things they listed, quite a few aren’t reasonable walks. Reasonable? One gas station, one diner, one bank, maybe the library but it’s up a long steep hill. And somehow, they put a Hanover movie theater right by my house. I wish!
But we got nature!
94, which seems about right to me in Brooklyn, but the information is both outdated and in some cases, simply wrong. Of course, for all the defunct/miscategorized businesses, there are plenty of real life services that don’t appear at all, so it seems to even out.
Our cabin gets a 34, which seems odd to me. I think it’s much lower in reality – you can walk to a little grocery (awesome) and a really trashy bar (also awesome, but the site thinks it is a restaurant, which is scary), and then also lists some things that are farther away but aren’t actually walkable at all in terms of the terrain. Also, it’s a cabin in the country, so the point is to be able to take long walks in the woods, but maybe not so much walking to a department store.
66 and it was remarkably accurate. The only things that are more than a half-mile away are a movie theater and a hardware store (both good things, IMO) and a bookstore (not good, but the library is 0.21 miles away.)
100/100. But that’s not very surprising given my location. I’d take 50/100 and half the rent.
33/100, but that’s only because it’s WRONG, lol. I have a grocery store within 1km and it’s picking up some other store I’ve never heard of 4.5km away.