Not sure if we've done this before - here's a site for rating how "walkable" your neighbourhood is:
http://www.walkscore.com/
My area's score = 78.
Quote
Walk Score: 34 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
82 out of 100 — Very Walkable :)
Walk Score: 2 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Quote from: Savonarola on May 15, 2009, 03:02:59 PM
82 out of 100 — Very Walkable :)
Hey, you live near Detroit. That sould be an automatic -100. :D
55 out of 100 — Somewhat Walkable
Some of the places considered walkable are pedestrian deathtraps. :lol:
Walk Score: 46 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Better than I expected.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:05:26 PM
55 out of 100 — Somewhat Walkable
Some of the places considered walkable are pedestrian deathtraps. :lol:
Yeah, the thing measures distance only, takes no account of stuff like whether or not things are across an 8 lane highway. ;)
Plus, why walk when you can ride like kings? We are the princes of the universe after all.
Walk Score: 83 out of 100 — Very Walkable
Walk Score: 87 out of 100 — Very Walkable.
It's too low. The one that's dragging me down is the park. They name one 1.5 miles away when there's actually one .5 miles away that's far nicer. They're also over-estimating the chemists and the coffee shops which are both closer than they're guessing.
Walk Score: 38 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
That's about right.
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 03:12:50 PM
Quote from: Berkut on May 15, 2009, 03:04:53 PM
Walk Score: 2 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Woah.
I live in a failed suburban town.
The residential area is very nice, but the attempt to create the attendant town was a total failure, so there is just some houses and a golf course out here.
6 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
:punk:
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 15, 2009, 03:14:56 PM
Walk Score: 87 out of 100 — Very Walkable.
It's too low. The one that's dragging me down is the park. They name one 1.5 miles away when there's actually one .5 miles away that's far nicer. They're also over-estimating the chemists and the coffee shops which are both closer than they're guessing.
87 out of 100 isn't low ... :unsure:
I'm not sure if anywhere would get a perfect 100%, unless you lived inside a library/coffee shop attached to a public park.
Quote from: Berkut on May 15, 2009, 03:17:07 PM
The residential area is very nice, but the attempt to create the attendant town was a total failure, so there is just some houses and a golf course out here.
I could never live in a neighborhood with an attached golf course. My golf nickname is Divot. Also, miniature golf sends me into histrionic temper tantrums involving club throwing and tears. :Embarrass:
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:09:08 PM
Plus, why walk when you can ride like kings? We are the princes of the universe after all.
DUI?
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:05:26 PM
55 out of 100 — Somewhat Walkable
Some of the places considered walkable are pedestrian deathtraps. :lol:
You're poorer than I was led to believe.
Quote from: Caliga on May 15, 2009, 03:19:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:05:26 PM
55 out of 100 — Somewhat Walkable
Some of the places considered walkable are pedestrian deathtraps. :lol:
You're poorer than I was led to believe.
?
You might want to get your retard vision corrected.
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 03:18:57 PM
87 out of 100 isn't low ... :unsure:
Sorry, I meant that it's lower than it should be because there are actually equivalent amenities that are a lot closer than the ones they list.
Quote from: Berkut on May 15, 2009, 03:17:07 PM
I live in a failed suburban town.
The residential area is very nice, but the attempt to create the attendant town was a total failure, so there is just some houses and a golf course out here.
I see - a score of "2" suggests to my imagination a house located in the Alberta badlands, with BB as a neighbour 20 miles away. ;)
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 03:05:03 PM
Quote from: Savonarola on May 15, 2009, 03:02:59 PM
82 out of 100 — Very Walkable :)
Hey, you live near Detroit. That sould be an automatic -100. :D
Actually I took a look at the center of the city; One Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI and it is:
32 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
And it's that high only because they're counting amenities in Windsor, Canada; which is inaccesible to foot traffic.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
?
You might want to get your retard vision corrected.
Walking is for poors. Patricians such as myself are carted around on litters or chariots.
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 03:21:51 PM
Quote from: Berkut on May 15, 2009, 03:17:07 PM
I live in a failed suburban town.
The residential area is very nice, but the attempt to create the attendant town was a total failure, so there is just some houses and a golf course out here.
I see - a score of "2" suggests to my imagination a house located in the Alberta badlands, with BB as a neighbour 20 miles away. ;)
Whitehorse is surprisingly walkable.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 15, 2009, 03:21:43 PM
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 03:18:57 PM
87 out of 100 isn't low ... :unsure:
Sorry, I meant that it's lower than it should be because there are actually equivalent amenities that are a lot closer than the ones they list.
Makes sense, the Google tool is certainly not infallible, though again 87 is a damn high score nonetheless.
Quote from: Caliga on May 15, 2009, 03:22:45 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
?
You might want to get your retard vision corrected.
Walking is for poors. Patricians such as myself are carted around on litters or chariots.
Hmmm, so having a drug store, ice cream shop, and pizza parlors within a mile in a small town makes me poor.
To repeat,
You might want to get your retard vision corrected.
Quote from: Savonarola link=topic=873.msg38953#msg38953And it's that high only because they're counting amenities in Windsor, Canada; which is inaccesible to foot traffic.
Mine is something like 55...but there are amenities listed as 1 mile away that are 1 mile as the crow flies / 2.5 by foot traffic or more.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:24:13 PM
Hmmm, so having a drug store, ice cream shop, and pizza parlors within a mile in a small town makes me poor.
To repeat,
You might want to get your retard vision corrected.
Drugs are sold by Mexicans (poors). Ice cream is made by hippies (either poors or pretending to be poors). Pizza = Italians (poors). Living by poors equals being poor, since we make poors live in poor neighborhoods. My point is TEH STAND.
Quote from: Savonarola on May 15, 2009, 03:22:00 PM
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 03:05:03 PM
Quote from: Savonarola on May 15, 2009, 03:02:59 PM
82 out of 100 — Very Walkable :)
Hey, you live near Detroit. That sould be an automatic -100. :D
Actually I took a look at the center of the city; One Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI and it is:
32 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
And it's that high only because they're counting amenities in Windsor, Canada; which is inaccesible to foot traffic.
:pinchL
Quote from: Caliga on May 15, 2009, 03:26:04 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:24:13 PM
Hmmm, so having a drug store, ice cream shop, and pizza parlors within a mile in a small town makes me poor.
To repeat,
You might want to get your retard vision corrected.
Drugs are sold by Mexicans (poors). Ice cream is made by hippies (either poors or pretending to be poors). Pizza = Italians (poors). Living by poors equals being poor, since we make poors live in poor neighborhoods. My point is TEH STAND.
Your point is on you fat hillbilly head.
Also, I'm done with you Cal. You have offended me.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:28:41 PM
Also, I'm done with you Cal. You have offended me.
I've called Cal far worse things than "poor". :D
Has Caliga gone too far this time? Stay tuned next thread. :bowler:
Walk Score: 20 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on May 15, 2009, 03:30:54 PM
Walk Score: 20 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
:huh: That's surprising, given how overcrowded most towns in eastern Mass. are.
Quote from: Caliga on May 15, 2009, 03:30:17 PM
Has Caliga gone too far this time? Stay tuned next thread. :bowler:
You hurt my feelings.
Quote46 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Which is too bad since I do not own a car. ;)
Quote from: Caliga on May 15, 2009, 03:31:36 PM
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on May 15, 2009, 03:30:54 PM
Walk Score: 20 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
:huh: That's surprising, given how overcrowded most towns in eastern Mass. are.
Pepperell is a big spread out town. Low population density.
20 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Am surprised they even had my address. The score is completely wrong though, I can walk to dozens of restaurants, bars, pharmacies, 7-11s, etc, within a few minutes.
QuoteWalk Score: 54 out of 100 — Somewhat Walkable
Lies. It's only "somewhat walkable" if you're not worried about the very real possibility of death. Major roads, many parts of which are lacking sidewalks, insane drivers, somewhat sub par lighting at night, etc. There are only a couple of places on their little list that I would even consider walking to (some of the listed things are right off/across the highway: hell no).
Walk Score: 45 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
BTW: what are coffeeshops at walkscore? Places to buy coffee?
26. No surprises here.
My new residence, 86 out of 100. Also learned that it was built in 1925 with a 742 square foot lot. :tinfoil:
72.
It can't even find my current address. I figure that means it's not a very walkable neighborhood, which of course I already knew.
Quote from: Malthus on May 15, 2009, 02:59:54 PM
Not sure if we've done this before - here's a site for rating how "walkable" your neighbourhood is:
http://www.walkscore.com/
My area's score = 78.
I'm almost positive this was on the last site, and I think you brought it up. :huh:
Walk Score: 26 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
Unsurprising, if unfortunate.
My last apartment above the bar I worked at: Walk Score: 95 out of 100 — Walkers' Paradise :cool:
57, but I suspect the map of Warsaw may be not up-to-date.
I mean, within a walking distance from my flat, I have my work office, four cinemas, three theatres, two gay clubs, three fitness clubs, two shopping galleries, two public libraries, two post offices, three parks, countless shops, cafes, restaurants, bars and pubs, and a metro station.
Edit: Oh, and the Polish Houses of Parliament ("Sejm"), several ministries, most embassies, at least five major hotels and like a cartload of churches.
Hell, if it wasn't walkable (I don't own a car) it would hardly be navigable at all, because it's like some protest or march going on every second day or so in this area.
20 at home. No surprise, it sucks. Though they do completely miss the existance of the supermarket a mile away and instead give me one 4 miles away.
Here they give me 12. Again missing a supermarket a few dozen feet away and pretty much everything else in the city instead directing me to Stockholm...
QuoteI mean, within a walking distance from my flat, I have my work office, four cinemas, three theatres, two gay clubs, three fitness clubs, two shopping galleries, two public libraries, two post offices, three parks, countless shops, cafes, restaurants, bars and pubs, and a metro station.
Edit: Oh, and the Polish Houses of Parliament ("Sejm"), several ministries, most embassies, at least five major hotels and like a cartload of churches.
Hell, if it wasn't walkable (I don't own a car) it would hardly be navigable at all, because it's like some protest or march going on every second day or so in this area.
I knew you were a lawyer but...damn you sound rich.
43. But mostly, because the next drug store is listed as 43km away (when in fact it's more like 40 meters); similar with library, fitness club (I see one from my kitchen window, two blocks from here). Movie theater 1.2km? Maybe. 2 stops with the subway. Bookstore 2.5km? Also not true. Hardware stores are also within ten minutes on foot. :P
Sounds like it's mostly Europeans having trouble with an incomplete map.
I got a 42.
Walk Score: 34 out of 100 — Car-Dependent
I don't have a car and walk almost everywhere, as said above the european maps are incomplete
Quote from: Tyr on May 16, 2009, 03:10:05 AM
20 at home. No surprise, it sucks. Though they do completely miss the existance of the supermarket a mile away and instead give me one 4 miles away.
Here they give me 12. Again missing a supermarket a few dozen feet away and pretty much everything else in the city instead directing me to Stockholm...
QuoteI mean, within a walking distance from my flat, I have my work office, four cinemas, three theatres, two gay clubs, three fitness clubs, two shopping galleries, two public libraries, two post offices, three parks, countless shops, cafes, restaurants, bars and pubs, and a metro station.
Edit: Oh, and the Polish Houses of Parliament ("Sejm"), several ministries, most embassies, at least five major hotels and like a cartload of churches.
Hell, if it wasn't walkable (I don't own a car) it would hardly be navigable at all, because it's like some protest or march going on every second day or so in this area.
I knew you were a lawyer but...damn you sound rich.
Well, my flat is smallish (one small bedroom, one living room, small bathroom and kitchen) but it is quite cozy and comfortable, and has a great location. I was lucky enough to buy it unfurnished and in a bad need of a renovation (some old lady used to live there before, and when she died her children - who lived in a different city - sold the place) before the real estate bubble began to grow, so I pretty much got a 500-600% return on my investment (probably a little less now as the bubble has burst and the prices started to fall again).
83. my place in my last city was 78.
incomplete addressing of googlemap noted. it should be higher...except the LCBO would remain a mile away in any case.
:w00t: but I knew this: Walk Score: 91 out of 100 — Walkers' Paradise
Hilarious though, my store is listed as a cinema. :huh:
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on May 16, 2009, 12:36:02 PM
:w00t: but I knew this: Walk Score: 91 out of 100 — Walkers' Paradise
Hilarious though, my store is listed as a cinema. :huh:
cheater :P
well it's a big part of why I don't drive. I don't need to. Never have the whole time I've lived in Vancouver. other hoods I've lived in are almost as "walkable"
Got a 55. Seems low, the neighborhood is very walkable. Bars, churches, a pharmacy, restaurants, liquor stores, supermarkets, a baseball field, police station, two elementary schools, a middle school, and a library all within a mile and a half, and most of that's with .75 miles.
My old neighborhood in Berkeley gets 100 out of 100. Doesn't really deserve that score though, the nearest proper supermarket was about a 10 minute walk away.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on May 16, 2009, 12:57:18 PM
My old neighborhood in Berkeley gets 100 out of 100. Doesn't really deserve that score though, the nearest proper supermarket was about a 10 minute walk away.
Ya my hood is more walkable than Berkeley and only got a 91
Ten minutes is not a long walk. :huh:
Anyway, I wonder if there is a site like this that does some analysis on whether not having a car is ultimately cheaper or more expensive where you live. I'm willing to bet that a good majority of the places where you could live without owning one are so expensive in other costs to more than offset it.
Mono thinks he's saving money not having a car. *snicker*
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on May 16, 2009, 12:57:18 PM
My old neighborhood in Berkeley gets 100 out of 100. Doesn't really deserve that score though, the nearest proper supermarket was about a 10 minute walk away.
dude that's 800 yards. are you fat or crippled or something?
Nope. Maybe it was a bit further. It was far enough to be a pain the ass carrying grocery's back home.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on May 16, 2009, 12:39:52 PM
well it's a big part of why I don't drive. I don't need to. Never have the whole time I've lived in Vancouver. other hoods I've lived in are almost as "walkable"
:) I've never lived in a nonwalkable neighbourhood. I have often needed cars for workstuff (but not getting to work); never for living.
looking at gas, maintenence, insurance, that's conservatively over $100G I have never had to spend. far more than I spend in cigarettes. plus I am in good shape, which is nice considering my tobacco thing.
cars are fun though. I know that part.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on May 16, 2009, 06:39:25 PM
Nope. Maybe it was a bit further. It was far enough to be a pain the ass carrying grocery's back home.
steal a shopping cart. :violin:
Quote from: saskganesh on May 16, 2009, 06:43:11 PM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on May 16, 2009, 06:39:25 PM
Nope. Maybe it was a bit further. It was far enough to be a pain the ass carrying grocery's back home.
steal a shopping cart. :violin:
Then you can collect cans. :hobo:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on May 16, 2009, 04:13:47 PM
Mono thinks he's saving money not having a car. *snicker*
He probably is. Imagine how much a parking space would cost in Hong Kong.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 16, 2009, 06:49:49 PM
He probably is. Imagine how much a parking space would cost in Hong Kong.
Imagine what his 900 sq/ft flat would cost in a town where he would have to drive. :P
The comparison is between living where he does with no car and living somewhere he would need a car to get around and having one. Not having a car where he is now. Besides, Mrs. Mono will make him get one anyway and he'll have the worst of both worlds. :lol:
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on May 16, 2009, 12:57:18 PM
My old neighborhood in Berkeley gets 100 out of 100. Doesn't really deserve that score though, the nearest proper supermarket was about a 10 minute walk away.
Andronicos?
I remember this. It does strange things like considering a coffee shop (no pastries or the like) as a restaurant and calls the liquor store in my apt, a grocery store. :)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 16, 2009, 12:43:55 PM
Got a 55. Seems low, the neighborhood is very walkable. Bars, churches, a pharmacy, restaurants, liquor stores, supermarkets, a baseball field, police station, two elementary schools, a middle school, and a library all within a mile and a half, and most of that's with .75 miles.
In my case there are no bars in this entire county. :lol:
Plenty of gas stations though. :mmm:
Quote from: Caliga on May 17, 2009, 04:48:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 16, 2009, 12:43:55 PM
Got a 55. Seems low, the neighborhood is very walkable. Bars, churches, a pharmacy, restaurants, liquor stores, supermarkets, a baseball field, police station, two elementary schools, a middle school, and a library all within a mile and a half, and most of that's with .75 miles.
In my case there are no bars in this entire county. :lol:
Plenty of gas stations though. :mmm:
:lol:
There's a couple of parks, convenience stores, barbers and ice cream shops that I forgot about as well.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 15, 2009, 03:28:41 PM
Also, I'm done with you Cal. You have offended me.
Thou is removed from the shit list. Keep your nose clean mister.
:bowler:
Love your avatar Monkeybut.
82/100 :cool:
Not really surprising, I can walk to pretty much anything I need round here.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 17, 2009, 08:53:01 PM
Love your avatar Monkeybut.
If you can tell me where it is from, I may decide not to pick on you for 24 hours.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 18, 2009, 07:14:54 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 17, 2009, 08:53:01 PM
Love your avatar Monkeybut.
If you can tell me where it is from, I may decide not to pick on you for 24 hours.
The House sigil of the Draconis Combine. :nerd:
WRONG. It's the sigil of House Kurita, who control the Draconis Combine. The Combine isn't the house, Kurita is. :P
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 18, 2009, 07:21:55 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 18, 2009, 07:14:54 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 17, 2009, 08:53:01 PM
Love your avatar Monkeybut.
If you can tell me where it is from, I may decide not to pick on you for 24 hours.
The House sigil of the Draconis Combine. :nerd:
Good, but it is the emblem of the 1st Sword of Light regiment.
I will not pick on you for 12 hours.
Walk Score: 17 out of 100 — Car-Dependent