Walkability

The Walkability indicator measures how friendly an area is for walking to common destinations such as retail, community services including health care centers, recreation areas and parks. Walkability may also be influenced by factors such as the availability of quality footpaths, sidewalks or other pedestrian rights-of-way, conditions of local roads and traffic, and land use patterns. Walkability has been shown to have a multitude of health, environmental, and economic benefits. Walkable neighborhoods promote more physical activity through walking and biking, and often have reduced pollution from greenhouse gas emissions generated by vehicles. Communities designed to be walkable have been shown to encourage fit and healthy lifestyles, fight obesity and promote sustainability. The Walkability indicator is used as a proxy to evaluate access to local amenities and retail. Although the Walkability indicator is under the Neighborhood Characteristics domain, it also influences the Transportation, Economic Health, Employment Opportunities, Educational Opportunities, Health Systems and Public Safety, and Housing domains. Data to measure walkability is derived from scored factors that include employment location, households, sidewalks, and block density.

Neighborhoodsort ascending Indicator Value Rank
Zion City 30.3 78
Wylam 79 15
Woodlawn 82 7
Woodland Park 32 72
West Goldwire 32 72
West End Manor 45.8 56
West Brownville 42.3 61
Wahouma 76.8 19
Tuxedo 79.5 13
Thomas 63 41
Tarpley City 45 57
Sun Valley 28.8 80
Spring Lake 22.8 93
Southside 92.8 1
South Woodlawn 79.5 13
South Titusville 65.5 39
South Pratt 67.5 36
South East Lake 53.5 48
Smithfield Estates 32 72
Smithfield 80.3 11
Sherman Heights 43 60
Sandusky 36.3 65
Roosevelt 32 72
Roebuck Springs 40.3 62
Roebuck 26.3 88
Rising - West Princeton 82 7
Riley 78.5 17
Redmont Park 55.8 46
Powderly 28.3 81
Pine Knoll Vista 30 79
Penfield Park 25 91
Oxmoor 35 66
Overton 50.3 51
Oakwood Place 71.3 32
Oak Ridge Park 27.5 82
Oak Ridge 46.8 55
Norwood 79.8 12
North Titusville 65.5 39
North Pratt 52.3 49
North East Lake 67.5 36
North Birmingham 83 5
North Avondale 83.5 4
Mason City 31.8 76
Maple Grove 26.5 87
Liberty Highlands 50.3 51
Kingston 59 43
Killough Springs 21.3 94
Jones Valley 70.5 33
Inglenook 72.3 31
Industrial Center 18.3 96
Huffman 32.8 71
Hooper City 33.8 68
Hillman Park 21.3 94
Hillman 27.3 83
Highland Park 49.3 53
Harriman Park 44.3 59
Green Acres 26 89
Graymont 74 27
Grasselli Heights 44.8 58
Glen Iris 24.3 92
Germania Park 51.8 50
Gate City 33.3 70
Garden Highlands 27.3 83
Fountain Heights 81 9
Forest Park 69 34
Five Points South 72.8 29
Fairview 76 22
Fairmont 37 64
Evergreen 76 22
Ensley Highlands 75.3 25
Ensley 83 5
Enon Ridge 61 42
Echo Highlands 33.8 68
Eastwood 37.3 63
East Thomas 56.3 45
East Lake 76.3 21
East Brownville 27.3 83
East Birmingham 88.5 2
East Avondale 78.5 17
Druid Hills 80.8 10
Dolomite 48.5 54
Crestwood South 17 98
Crestwood North 55.8 46
Crestline 18.3 96
Collegeville 57 44
College Hills 69 34
Central Pratt 72.5 30
Central Park 74.5 26
Central City 79 15
Bush Hills 76.8 19
Brummitt Heights 25.3 90
Brownsville Heights 27 86
Brown Springs 66.8 38
Bridlewood 31 77
Belview Heights 75.5 24
Arlington - West End 74 27
Apple Valley 15 99
Airport Highlands 34.3 67
Acipco-Finley 84.5 3

Key Citations:
1. Ewing R, Cervero R. Travel and the built environment: a meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2010; 76:3(2010):265-294.
2. Mota J et al. Perceived neighborhood environments and physical activity in adolescents. Preventive Medicine. 2005; 41:834-836.