Putting a price on walkability

As a Realtor that specializes in Walkable Neighborhoods, I can say this is not a brand new trend.Particularly after 9/11 there was a big move from NYC into the Small New England Towns thruout the Northeast.

To address the idea that living in these types of areas are not safe.When living in a dense area it becomes a community where people know ea.other and watch over ea. other. They learn the patterns of life around them so if anything out of the ordinary happens they are aware of it, so it keeps crime to a minimum.

Also, you will find many of the New England Small Historic Towns were originally built to support the Whaling, shipbuilding & later mill industries.As a result homes were built for mariners & workers nearby,banks & public buildings were built & Main Streets developed. There were no cars so it had to be walkable or by horse.
My point is not only is it walkable to transit stops,shops,banks, libraries, public spaces, restaurants,etc. but also usually there is water to walk to.
On top of that you are also getting a more diverse, authentic life experience.

So although this is a newly appreciated lifestyle choice, it in fact was realized by the earliest settlers the importance of relying on each other as a community.

I can understand people's desire to have privacy and quiet, but these things are not incompatible with walkability. I live in Portland, OR in a neighborhood of mostly single-family homes on 50'x100' lots that is very green, quiet and pleasant. Yet, it is quite walkable, because it was developed in the 1920s before all of the idiotic zoning laws that governed development in most postwar suburbs were put in place. Places like this, sadly, are few and far between (unnecessarily so in my opinion), which is probably why my house cost about 1 1/2 to 2 times what a comparably sized house in one of Portland's non-walkable suburbs would cost.

Walkability was HUGE for us when we bought, as I have zero desire to spend the next 15 years chauffeuring my kids around everywhere. I grew up with the freedom of being able to take myself places, and I wanted the same for my kids. So we ended up a block down from where I grew up.

We have the best of both worlds: a close-in suburb that feels like a small town. So I have the privacy of a 3/4+ acre lot, with the great schools/low crime of a suburb, but I'm a block and a half off the main drag, where I can find everything but a good grocery store — restaurants/ice cream parlors, library, schools, churches, interesting shops (everything from skateboards to sports memorabilia to medical supplies to dog grooming to "antiques" to golf), and the annual 4th of July parade. Away from the main street, within a few blocks are a weekly farmers' market, community center, and small shops like a yoga studio and yarn store; high school is 1/2 mile or so away (free 4th of July fireworks!), and within 1-1.5 miles is the YMCA, a big state park with hiking/biking trails, and a park-and-ride with express buses to downtown. Oh, yeah: and my commute to downtown is 16 minutes without traffic, 23 minutes with. All for @ $200-300K less than the same house one county over in unwalkable uber-suburbia.

I recently moved to a walkable location where I can walk to and from work, the gym, 5 different grocery stores, the bus station, downtown main street, post office, and many more places. This is all in a very small city with a population of 40,000. Now that I have experienced it, I will always look for property in a walkable location. I no longer own a car.

My address scored a 63, which I guess is OK for the suburbs. The problem is, the supermarket they highlighted for me is across a very busy 4 lane highway that I would not dare try to cross on foot. I'd imagine the people who put this together made that kind of mistake numerous times. So much for the accuracy of their data.

I'd say the calculation is flawed. My neighborhood rated a 51 -somewhat walkable. Perhaps, but that assumes you can make it across the very busy highway without being run over!

Urban walkers are usually healthier and thinner than their suburban counterparts.

My community has a "walkability" score of only 6 but after spending 12 years inside the perimeter (ITP) of Atlanta my wife and I really enjoy the change. We walk now just like before.

Lack of walkabe access in many neighborhoods, particularly the suburbs, is no accident but a deliberate result of decades of post-WWII zoning laws to keep commercial establishments and residences separate. I would gladly live in the suburbs if I could walk to many basics such as a coffee shop, restaurants, grocery store, pharmacy, etc. I hope surveys like this, and the higher cost of gas, will help encourage change the zoning laws.

The one thing I like most about living in Germany, apart from the superb public transportation system, is the walkability. In Düsseldorf, the sidewalks don't just peter out after a few hundred meters like they do in a lot of US towns. There are plenty of forested areas with hiking trails. Bicycle lanes run between the sidewalks and the streets.

And there are plenty of places within easy walking distance, too. Let's see: two supermarkets, a bakery, and a hardware store directly across the street; Post office 0.5 km away (mapquest); branch library 0.4 km away (mapquest); Catholic church 0.2 km away (my estimate); lots of restaurants and stores right on my street. I live in a small neighborhood, but I can easily walk to a rural area or get to the city's center via streetcar. So I have the the best of all three worlds.

The my apartment rent in Düsseldorf is €250 ($375.43) per month. In Middletown, RI, I was paying around $800 per month for a similar flat and there was hardly anything within easy walking distance.

I grew up in an isolated area where you could get practically nowhere without a personal motor vehicle (public transportation was worthless there). I didn't realized how much I disliked that until I lived in a place where I was able to get around easily without a car.

Well unless you are shopping at costco or you are buying groceries for an army i don't see why you won't want to walk to your grocery store. Of course i should add that you won't want to do that if you just plain lazy but thats an acceptable reason. Go ahead take out the hummer in the garage for the ride to the grocery store .5 miles away.

Good direction, but the scoring seems to assume that if one has to walk more than 10 blocks to amenities, the walkability factor goes down. We live literally across the street from the town's best elementary school with a large dog friendly play field, and routinely walk/jog the 10-12 blocks to restaurants, parks, supermarket, city hall, post office, etc. By walking the extra 3-4 blocks more than this site would ascribe to ideal 'walkability", we have much less traffic in our street, and a reasonable size yard with a house (not a condo) on it. Like I said…good idea, but even Americans can walk a mile comfortably.

Walkability is improtant because Americans are getting squeezed financially. Those that live close to work and shopping will have more time to enjoy life (or work overtime) and not spend so much time stuck behind the wheel.

We can't rely on cheap products from China and low gas-prices to keep up our way of life forever. Noticed how $4 gas caused lots of foreclosures in the exurbs? Same thing will happen as more basic costs go up. Something has to give…

What's your mugability score???

Seams to me, if the neighborhood isn't safe. The walkability score isn't worth too much.

Is the local climate conducive to outdoor activity? Walk ability doesn't do you much good when the wind chill factor is 10 below zero.

I.E. Warmer temps is definitely a plus.

How about a boat ability, or bike ability score?? I ride a mountain bike for 95% of my local trips.

Yet another suburban backlash article. Sorry, but I value my privacy way too much. If you can walk to all these places you are living on top of other people. Walking to a grocery store is absolutely pointless since you could never carry a reasonable load of groceries home. Suburbia blew up for a reason–it's better. All this stuff if just contrarianism.

I just returned home, after a walk to the Post Office with my daughter and pet dog. I agree with this article 100%. We used to live in a huge house in distant (isolated) suburban St. Louis – now we live in a small house in Ridgewood, NJ – a very walkable town – and we love it!

One of the winners in "walkability" is the advantage not only to people without cars, but to seniors. We not only get our excersize but can shop, eat out, have the cleaning or laundry done and not be more than a block or two from home which is on a shady ,neat, small homes street with nice and helpful neighbors. How lucky can we be.. :Walkability: is a winner.I'm talking about Long Beach Ca.P>S> We also have sunny days and an ocean breeze.

Friends who bought in the suburbs when gas was cheap now envy me: walking distance to work, supermarket and drugstore a few blocks away, boutiques for clothing and unusual gifts… I don't own a car because I don't need one.

What planet are you people on?

In my apartment complex, we drive our cars to the mailbox cluster and to the dumpster.

Why would anybody want to walk when we have TV and Internet. When you get bored with that just drive on down to Walmart. Them Chinese companies make all kinds of trinkets you can buy cheap to divert you attention for a few minutes.

The walkability score is an interesting concept, but keep in mind that there can be seasonal or physical paramaters that alter the experience from time to time. Here in the Ardmore section of Lower Merion, most of the time you can get about without need for a car, but a bad winter changes the playing field. The community isn't that efficient in clearing its sidewalks after a snowstorm – streets get fairly efficient clearing, but the pedestrian paths are often left uncleared and accumulate dangerous ice and snow. Secondly, some of the the shopping districts are built around a major road, Lancaster Avenue/Pike, which is not at all pedestrian friendly – you can take your life in your hands at times when crossing this street.

I find Walkscore to be a really good indicator. It may not be perfect, but I have yet to find an assessment with which I disagree. Case in Point, there's a neighborhood of single family homes in Raleigh, NC that has a very high walk score. It's a city neighbhoorhood named Cameron Park that is immediately walkable to not only retail but very good schools, libraries, city parks, restaurants, nightlife, professional services and the state's largest university. Oddly enough, the one thing that it's less walkable to are the larger employers.
It's a neighborhood oasis that's quiet and safe without congestion or noise. So, it is possible to have a high score that is affiliated with the good life and not suffer some of the negative aspects that Fred in Chicago presumes. And, as the article suggests, this neighborhood is one of the most expensive in the city due to its enviable location and walkability. Frankly, I think this article is many years too late. I have anecdotally seen the escalating trend in home prices in walkable locations for the last few decades. I now split my time between two homes in Raleigh and Miami Beach and paid a premium for my properties based primarily on their pedestrian locations.

Yes! Walkability is essential not for exercise but because a neighborhood becomes a full, discrete entity only if it is part of a dense business district. Only then is one's life really and satisfyingly integrated into a coherent community. I was so lucky to reach Green Bay while the suburban flight mentality still prevails; two years ago I bought my historic 3600 sq ft colonial for 70k, a block from an up and coming, historic, vibrant urban district. Now I shop, eat at cafes or fine restaurants,visit art galleries, the museum, riverfront parks, grocery store, post office, pharmacy, farmer's market, all less than 2 blocks away!

There is a major social shift in the United States away from suburbia and auto-dependence. Living on a human-scale is emerging as the new American Dream. Glad research is finally getting behind this evolution of values.

Not all places which have a a vibrant neighborhood within walking distance are in urban or decaying neighborhoods. That is the reason I bought my home, across from a park, 5 blocks from the train station, and center of a really small mini town, with a supermarket, three gas stations, 3 Italian reastaurants, sushi bar, Dunkin Donuts, 3 mini markets, 2 nail salons, 4 hair dressers, three banks, and two chinese reastaurants, an art gallery, a store for collectibles, dry cleaners, Hallmark shop, and a holisic salon. Oh not to mention there is free family movie night every weekend at the museum attached to the train station. I almost forgot, a Synagogue, Catholic church, Baptist church, and a Presbyterian church. Plus an elementary school, two swim clubs, and a an assisted living convelessence home.

In addition it has a major bus route, which goes to the larger malls.

That is the reason I bought where I bought.

I live less than a mile from the Atlantic Ocean front with a very well known boardwalk and got a very low walkability score. PSsst this things a bust.

You have to take this information with a grain of salt.

While crime statistics isn't part of the equation, even that is misleading.

I agree in the premise that urban developments are more walkable than the 'burbs. As one commenter pointed out, you have community hubs that are within walking distance while the build outs since the 50's and 60's tended to rely on more use of a car to get around. (Can you say suburban sprawl?)

I think that what we're starting to see is a trend back to urban redevelopment where you can walk to work, walk to the stores and get out and about. And this isn't a bad thing.

I live north of the Chicago 'loop'. I can walk to my client's sites so I don't have to worry about either public transportation or the high cost of parking in the city. I'm too close to bike to work.

How much is it worth to save 2+ hours a day from not having to commute?

I would think much of this would depend on your age as well. At 47 y/o, for me, "walkability" isn't a factor. Privacy is. I want a home where the neighbors aren't five feet away to hear me sneeze and where the homes have character.–I don't want a garage with a home attached nor would I live in an area where all the houses are the same.

My neighborhood is very walkable. It has 40 miles of highly used walking & biking trails that are built into the community, not built as afterthoughts. Bridges over streets, the whole nine yards. Plus year round nice weather.

Acoording to this website referenced in the story, we rate a 57/100 for walkability. The website is a joke. Try again.

I live in Las Vegas, the only city where more-walkable neighborhoods were less desirable. That's because in LV, if your neighborhood is near lots of stores, you generally live in high congestion on major roads. Vegas's efforts to bring walkability to insulated planned communities has primarily been shut down by the economy, though my last neighborhood was close, with two parks, a library, some shopping, and restaurants all within a few miles. It was also in a new (built around 2002) upper-class master planned community. It still didn't hold a candle to my old neighborhood in Oak Park, IL outside of Chicago. I frequently went months without seeing my car when I lived there.

Birkdale Village in North Carolina is a great example of a walkable community maintaining its property values and performing better than surrounding car dependent sub-divisions. Here in Birkdale we have walkable access to an entire outdoor mall, supermarket, gym., starbucks, restuarants, and more. Its amazing how many of our neighbors that we see at the gym or walking the dogs or sitting in the cafe. In fact, there's not a house for sale right now in our entire section of the neighborhood. Compared to the surrounding neighborhoods, we are doing great.
This is a great article but you should follow it up with what we as a society or a government can do to improve our walkability. LEED Certification offers one possibility but what if every home that was listed for sale had its walkability score calculated in the way that we calculate a gas mileage rating for a car. Simply putting a number to it would raise awareness and help significantly.

I live about 2 miles from the famous Niagara falls, My home to the Brink of the falls is 2 miles , and i have been walking to it , for 23 years. I am soooo lucky to be able to do so. I am 70 and walking has kept me medication and pain free. as to know . i vill not move unless to a same walkable place.

I checked my house in a very walkable neighborhood in Salt Lake City and found out that the information used to compile the data was extremely incomplete. It's a nice concept but a long way from being a reliable source of information when trying to locate a home. Maybe other areas of the country have more complete data???? Just my opinion.

I tried the Walkability index for my address and agree that the overall score is a pretty good match, but that there are some individual data items that are either a bit inaccurate or out of date (some new restaurants not listed and some closed businesses listed).

But being an avid cyclist, my hope is that there will be either another Web site for "Bikeability" or an added option on the current "Walkability" site. Many of the businesses listed for my address are perhaps too far for a walk, but are within an easy biking distance.

My neighborhood is extremely walkable, but not according to WalkScore.com, because they don't have any of the stores or the gym or anything like that even LABELED. I sure hope anyone looking to buy in my neighborhood relies on what's actually here rather than that site.

Some factors left out of the survey:
* Do you have to lock your door when you go for a walk?
* Is it safe for your children to be out walking, riding bicycles or skateboards?
* How breathable is the air?

5 years ago, I lived about 5 miles from the nearest grocery store/strip mall, which was also the location of the nearest bus stop, and the nearest bike trail. Schools weren't within 3 miles. There was a church about 2 miles away. Emergency services, 25-30 minutes. I don't have a car, so if I still lived there, I would have to hire a driver every time one of my kids has to go see a doc, dentist, etc.. And one of my kids is diabetic and wears glasses.
Today, I can catch any of 4 buses within 4 blocks of my house. There is only one part of Anchorage, AK I can't get to within about 40 minutes on the bus. It's about 30 minutes to the kids' dentist, 25 minutes to the Pediatric Sub Specialty Clinic. 20 minutes to the Neighborhood Health Clinic (that allows time for the 6 block walk from the bus stop to the clinic.) 10 minutes to the VA Medical Center. No bus runs to Elemendorf AFB Hospital, but it is within a 10 minute walk from the gate of the base, which is about 3 blocks from the end of the bus line. The elementary school is 4 blocks away. We have 2 grocery stores/strip malls within a mile. There are several restaurants within about half hour walk, and even a movie theater about 40 minutes away. I'm about a 5 minute sled ride from over 150 miles of biking/walking trails that zigzag all over the city. That doesn't matter much in the summer, since I put my sled up on wheels, I can use the sidewalks and back roads. Wintertime is a completely different animal. Not much tears up sled skids faster than road gravel, which does get plowed onto the sidewalks. Remember that part of town that was inconvenient to get to on the bus? Well, 20 minute bike ride, half hour to 40 minutes on the sled. In case you haven't figured it out yet, I'm talking about a dog sled. And just so you know, my dogs aren't racers, they 're cargo haulers. They are fast enough for my needs, but I don't think we will be winning the Iditarod any time soon.
I rent a modest size 3 bedroom home on a small lot in a residential neighborhood. I pay $1375. I wouldn't pay more than $900 for the same thing where I used to live.

Caroline, who posted before me, is spot on – I grew up in Cambridge, MA, and within a half mile of my house, I had my school, my little sisters' school, the local mechanic and gas station, at least three dozen restaurants, two grocery stores and a bunch of little mini markets, doctor's offices, you name it! We'd go to visit my grandparents in rural Oregon and didn't know what to do with ourselves because the nearest anything was three miles away.

I don't get where Fred's coming from, other than he seems to dislike big cities – which is fine, they aren't for everyone – but to the millions of Americans who live in urban centers and enjoy having all of the above in easy access to you, the price IS indeed worth it! Furthermore, pay in cities is almost uniformly better than it is in suburban/rural areas, so for instance, living in an $800 apartment in Boston or LA is much like living in a $500 apartment in a rural area in the same state after everything balances out. There may be data missing but I hardly think it's "stupid" – not every person in America wants to live on a sprawling property that's a half-hour ride to the nearest gas station.

100 score here. I love walking for most of my needs: 4+ parks, school, restaurants galore, 3 supermarkets, various stores and museums, many bars, etc. You meet your neighbors, get to know the local shopkeepers, have a ton of stuff available.

Yes, it's expensive, but factor in not owning any cars and general time savings, and it's a good way to live for many people.

Walkability is of utmost importance as far as I am concerned. I read an article that said the average European walks about 10 miles a day. The average American walks under 2. It wasn't until a Honduran friend of mine made a comment about the "car culture" of North Americans that the concept clicked as to why I find suburbs unpleasant. Cities are not my idea of paradise either, I have lived in several where crime,lack of pedestrian police presence and traffic jams make that a last choice as well. I live within walking distance of my job and I have a bicycle, but being a pedestrian in Orlando is no picnic. It can also be dangerous. I hope developers and planners take a fresh look at how to make safe, profitable but affordable communities that people where can safely raise their children and grow old, and enjoy being on foot.
Maybe someday…

I just tried this out with my newest address in a downtown neighborhood that lacks most of the types of stores I would want to walk to — like a good grocery store and our favorite restaurants. It ranked 80/100 as "very walkable" — although it did include lots of places I either wouldn't go to, or wouldn't want to walk to (like a movie theater over 2 miles away — including a number of hills). I then tried it with my old neighborhood which I consider extremely walkable — all the restaurants we like, our favorite park and the grocery store we still use. It ranked only 65/100 "somewhat walkable." I'd say this is a neat feature but agree with the author it is still not perfect because it doesn't take into account the quality of the businesses close by.

These high score neighborhoods have stores, parks, restaurants, etc. within .3 miles or less. That is not going to lose you much weight, IMO. If you want a quiet, peaceful, car free place to live, then having most stores, etc. approximately 1 mile away would be better. That way when you walk to the store you would really be doing your health a favor and your home would be in a less congested area. Parks and recreation (bike trails, etc.) should be really close but not stores, workplaces or bars (IMO).

Also the walkscore.com website was missing a number of parks in my neighborhood.

Walkability was HUGE for me when I purchased my house last year. I walk for exercise and the occasional event. My neighborhood and adjacent ones are full of wide sidewalks, close to mall, grocery, post office and bank. I LOVE it!

I don't think walkability is a word, cnn.

While this web site and its' data are valuable, academic and consulting studies will have to be done to verify it and get at the root causes. I suspect it to be the case that one factor conditioning the phenomenon is that people who already live in urban areas are conditioned by experience to want to live in those kinds of spaces, and are accustomed to paying higher prices for their housing, while people who are conditioned by expeerience to want to live in suburbs would not go looking for housing in those urban spaces and would not be willing to pay higher prices. If I'm correct, then you have populations of home buyers living in alternate universes, which would greatly affect marketing or sales over time as places change. Nobody can prove or disprove my theory until more study is done…

Those of us lucky enough to grow up in New England towns already know this secret – we walked to schools, there was a town common or green, there were stores you could walk to, along with the library and post office. Many "new" towns take their style after an old New England town – hoping to bring back that sense of community so missing in suburbs.

The walkability score is really stupid. If you look at the places with the highest walkability score they are overwhelmingly very urban areas with a lot of business – you might as well call this the spendability score because it really show how many places are nearby that you could spend your money at. It also doesn't take into account safety of the areas it analyzes, urban congestion, noise, taxes, or a myriad of other factors. This is really a self-serving attempt to relabel cities and urban areas as 'walkable' thereby putting a positive spin on them without considering their other attributes.