How walkable is your neighborhood?

5th and Colorado
I recently discovered (sadly, I don’t remember how) WalkScore.com, where you can enter your (or any) address and have a “walkability” score calculated for your neighborhood. They use Google Maps to find out how far it is to a long list of important services and amenities (grocery stores, libraries, schools, coffee shops, and the like), and you get points based on how close you are. There are some issues (and they’re very up front about them) with using straight line distance as a proxy for walkability, but it’s not a bad approximation and a good start. There’s also no way they can take into account your preferences for things like schools and restaurants; you’d get points for living next door to a McDonald’s, for example, even if you’d prefer to go a little farther to the nifty local burrito joint.

Our house here in Morris scores a 54 out of a 100, which is probably about as good as you’ll get outside of a dense urban area (the Sears Tower in Chicago scores a whopping 94, for example). Personally, I think Morris is about as walkable/bikable a place as one is likely to ever find: Flat, reasonably compact, and with good roads and (mostly) sidewalks. It’s clear that Google Maps is confused about some of the businesses here in Morris as some of their distances are broken and they don’t know that we have a coffee shop a few blocks away (they list one nearly 25 miles distant!).

In total, it’s a cool idea, and I wish that it was available in the UK as we’re preparing to spend a year in Colchester without a car, and it would be nice to have a similar service while we look at houses and flats.

For amusement check out the scores of Bill Gates’s home and Shrub’s ranch in Crawford. Real environmentalists, these guys :-).

No tag for this post.

Related posts

Science and reason on vacation (again) from the White House

Science buzz!!!
Our fearless leader has apparently nominated someone (James Holsinger) to the post of Surgeon General who is sadly confused about basic issues of science, logic, and argument from evidence. Not good for the nation’s chief doctor, although hardly surprising from Our Friends at the White House. From ABC News:

“You have to wonder given the quality of some of the nominations that have gone forward recently, whether the selection group in the White House has gone on vacation,” Gergen [former adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton] said. “There has been a growing criticism the administration favoring ideology over competence, and this nomination smacks of that.”

Greg Laden nicely takes apart the “naturalist fallacy” in Holsinger’s argument, and I definitely recommend heading over to read that. The short version is that Holsinger’s fallen into something like “the parts don’t fit, ergo homosexuality is unnatural and wrong“. What’s “natural” and what’s “right”, though, have little or nothing to do with each other. My eyeglasses are clearly unnatural, as was my life-saving appendectomy, but I’m hardly returning either of those. Similarly, it’s “natural” (at least we’re genetically predisposed) for men to be physically larger and stronger than women (on average), but that clearly doesn’t provide any justification for physical abuse and intimidation of women by men, or adults beating children just ’cause they’re bigger.

I’m off to write my Senators and express my unhappiness with yet another Shrub appointee…

Related posts