Walk Score Ranks The Most Walkable Cities of 2015

New York Ranks No. 1 and Increases Lead Over San Francisco; Revitalization is Pushing Detroit and New Orleans Up the Ranks

New York, the nation’s most walkable city, has increased its lead over No. 2 San Francisco in the latest ranking by Walk Score®. The two cities essentially tied for first place in 2011. Walk Score, a Redfin company, ranked the most walkable U.S. cities with populations of more than 300,000.

Walk Score Ranking of Large U.S. Cities

Rank City Walk Score
1 New York 87.6
2 San Francisco 83.9
3 Boston 79.5
4 Philadelphia 76.5
5 Miami 75.6
6 Chicago 74.8
7 Washington D.C. 74.1
8 Seattle 70.8
9 Oakland 68.5
10 Baltimore 66.2

“New York is clearly leading the way in walkability by reclaiming space from cars for people,” said Matt Lerner, Walk Score co-founder. “One look at Times Square shows how New York has become a leader. It’s just one example of a place that went from being a gridlocked road full of cars to a park for pedestrians.”

High Line Park

Other Highlights:
Miami is becoming more walkable, with a Walk Score increase of more than three points since 2011, likely thanks to a surge of commercial development. New home construction has increased population density in some neighborhoods and made it easier for people to live, work and shop in the same part of town.

“People can now walk where they used to have to drive, especially in neighborhoods like Wynwood and the Design District where a lot of new restaurants and shopping and entertainment centers have opened up,” said Aaron Drucker, Redfin’s Miami market manager. “Even in traditionally walkable areas, like South Beach, public transportation is improving and becoming a more attractive option as parking rates and traffic are both on the rise.”

Detroit has seen a 2.2-point Walk Score increase since 2011 to 52.2 this year.

Downtown Detroit has become noticeably more walkable over the past few years thanks to Dan Gilbert’s initiative to move his company, Quicken Loans, and others from the suburbs back to the heart of the city,” said Lauren Buttazzoni, Redfin market manager in Detroit. “Following these companies has come a slew of new restaurants, locally owned shops and small businesses. It’s not just millennials but families and people of all generations who want to live near work and enjoy the action and amenities of city living. As a result, real estate in the city is in great demand, new lofts and condos are being built, and prices–in rents and sales alike–are rising. It has all been a great boon for the motor city.”

New Orleans has changed, too, as the city continues to reinvent itself following Hurricane Katrina. The city is rebuilding with walkability in mind as it develops affordable housing and revitalizes commercial districts, which may have helped the city’s Walk Score increase from 55.6 in 2011 to 56.3 today.

Methodology
To calculate the rankings, Walk Score analyzed over 10 million locations and computed more than 2 billion walking routes for 2,500 U.S. cities. For the second year in a row, the Walk Score ranking uses the Street Smart Walk Score algorithm that incorporates walking routes, depth of choice, pedestrian friendliness, population  and neighborhood data. The changes in scores between the 2011 and 2015 rankings reflect changes in methodology (Classic Walk Score vs. Street Smart Walk Score) as well as changes in the cities themselves.

Why Walkability Matters
Our goal at Redfin and Walk Score is to help people find the right home, not just any home, and what often makes a home “right” is location. Walkability is about convenience, quality of life and everything outside the four walls of a house. When you live near the people and places you enjoy most, you can spend less time and money on transit and more time doing what you love.

For the full ranking of America’s most walkable cities, click here. To see how your home fares in terms of walkability, get your score here. If you’re looking to buy, Redfin features Walk Score on listings of homes for sale. Renters can use Walk Score’s Apartment Search.

Discussion

  • Josh C.

    It is slightly ironic that the images above is of downtown Portland yet the city isn’t mentioned once in the article.

  • Rachel Musiker

    Hi Josh,
    The photo, which is of the High Line in New York City, is one representation of walkability. While Portland didn’t make the top ten list, it’s of course home to some very walkable neighborhoods like the Pearl District (Walk Score: 97) and Old Town (Walk Score: 97). I’m curious–which Portland neighborhood or location do you think it resembles?

  • chris1jt

    Not quite sure I understand Chicago’s low ranking… I’ve lived in that city for 7 years, never owned a car, and visited all but 15 of it’s 77 neighborhoods. Understandably there are some areas that aren’t very transit or walk-friendly (outer neighborhoods, just like NYC or other cities with massive footprints), but I’m having a seriously hard time believing that a city with the second largest transit system in the country is 6th overall for “walkability.” There is just no way that Boston, Philly and Miami are less car-centric than Chicago. Seems the methodology might need some tweaking…

    • Ralph

      I lived in Boston for several years and now live in Chicago. Boston is far more walkable than Chicago and definitely less car-centric, at least from my vantage point. I should also mention this as someone who lives in the Loop, and I never lived in Boston proper (but could walk across the bridge from nearby Cambridge). Transit isn’t really part of the study if you read the methodology in the article.

      • chris1jt

        Interesting… Every time I’ve been to visit friends in Boston they’ve used cars to get around. But it makes sense that smaller footprints lend to higher walkability.

    • Christine

      I would even argue DC is far more walkable than Chicago, it is closer to Boston in many ways. I always felt like I needed a car in Chicago even with the eL.
      What usually brings down a city is the fact this considers every neighborhood in the city. DC east of the river for example is not walkable, even though many of the neighborhoods west of it are. In Chicago the entire south and southwest side is car dependent.

      • chris1jt

        Yea I agree the biggest cities are always at a disadvantage due to obviously larger areas that need to uphold higher average “walk scores.” I just don’t see why NYC would be rated so high with that in mind. Plenty of transit deserts in that city (where my family lives) just like parts of Chicago. And I live on the south side. Never owned a car. Red and Green plus numerous buses get me everywhere I need to go. In my opinion it’s more of a mindset than need, unless you really live in an area where zero bus or rail lines are nearby.

  • tg113

    chicago has a low transit score because riding on a cta train is miserable. they have a miserable recorded announcer that makes you cringe and makes you forget everything else you were thinking about until you pray to get to your stop to get away from this and back to some sort of reality and sanity. if someone tells you different they are liars. this is the only reason i do not ride the train anymore because hearing this recorded announcer and the miserable feeling you get afterward is totally brought into consideration comparing to whatever you wanted to do. this is also why chicago loses a lot of business. because people do not want to ride the train to go anywhere. so they stay home or just go to places in their own neighborhood. but when you get tired of that you probably will buy a car.

    • Alex

      wat

    • Ark

      Excuse me?
      The CTA announcements are very audible and friendly. Have you ever traveled on the DC metro or Philly subway where the train operator announces stations that you can hardly decipher?
      Miserable feeling? May I suggest you consider that it might be you, and not the trains?
      Chicagoans are active patrons of the trains, you must not live here, or are generalizing your biases.

      • tg113

        no. the miserable feeling i get is from the announcer and people like you. life is not as miserable as chicago makes it. i been all over and chicago is backward. and i was born here. lol the first thing people accuse you of when someone tells the truth about chicago is that you are not from chicago. lol

        • Alex

          I live in Chicago and have never heard anybody complain about the announcers’ voice. It’s actually the same announcer that does the voice in the monorail at Disney.

        • chris1jt

          Man… Seek some medical help. Sounds like there are some issues you need to sort out.

          TG from Curbed Chicago, am I right?

    • disqus_IG93K4Xq6q

      And then you have to dodge the corner drug dealers & flying bullets and pray you can get to your front door without getting killed. Yes, I’m talking the North side Lake front districts. Edgewater, Rogers Park & Uptown. And then some…

    • chris1jt

      Hah, well I will give you the fact that sensitivity training with CTA employees is nonexistent, and the announcements are horribly muffled. But those exact issues exist with the MTA as well. If riding the CTA is so horrible, then why do we have the third largest ridership in the country, second largest ridership in terms of people per rail miles and second largest regional transportation ridership (METRA, PACE and CTA) in the country?

      I agree that the country’s oldest transit system (CTA) is in need of some big rail repairs, but those capital projects continue to move along smoothly and almost all slow zones have been eliminated. Rail ridership also posted strong gains the past few years.

      If muffled announcements are what’s keeping you from riding public transit then let me be blunt: you’re either very close minded or constantly bothered by petty issues.

      And Chicago is not losing business… We have the second largest and busiest CBD outside of NYC in terms of employment (600K jobs, the most the city’s ever seen), and have netted more inbound corporate relocations or projects than ANY other city in the U.S. for the past two years:

      http://www.siteselection.com/issues/2014/mar/metros.cfm

      http://www.siteselection.com/issues/2015/mar/top-metros.cfm

      Yes, there are unfortunately many blighted neighborhoods that suffer from empty lots, storefronts and crime (just like any major city), and business needs to be addressed there. But overall, we have more vibrant neighborhoods than not.

      All I’m staying, is this methodology seems off…

    • Nick Bradley Sr

      I’ve been riding the CTA my whole life and yes, in the winter time the blue and red lines become rolling bedrooms and the smell in the summer is pretty intense…but it’s a generally safe, reliable, and affordable way to get around. The only time I ever had an issue with the announcer was when I lived right next to an L station…hearing “ding-dong…doors closing…Cicero is next” in your bedroom while your trying to sleep will haunt your dreams LOL

  • Redpilleater

    Where the heck is Portland? I live in SF but think Portland is just as good if not better for walking (and biking)

    • ScottRAB

      Portland is ok west of I-205, but very poor east of the freeway.

    • Alex Brideau III

      And interestingly, now LA outranks Portland in transit friendliness (albeit just barely)!

  • Marisa

    From a business perspective, I’m beyond impressed with Walk Score. They developed an index that is essentially a universal standard in real estate and rental listings toady. They did it in the name of “walkability”–with a mission to “promote walkable properties”. The “walkability” of a unit adds value and the Walk Score basically substantiates that added value. But the remarkable thing is that, through quantifying information that can already be garnered from Google Maps or, you know, just seeing if there’s some restaurants around when you visit the place, they’re targeting our growing addiction to instant information to promote properties that are already inherently valuable with a report that could also just be called: “10 Worst US Cities for Parking”.

    From a statistics perspective, their patented mystery algorithm is based on the distance to certain amenities with a decay function applied the further you have to walk (with 0-5 minutes given maximum points and 30+ minutes given 0), adjusted for population density. Unfortunately, these are the only details they reveal about their methodology. Considering this, and exploring the other metrics provided by their data sources, the walkability index looks like it might just be a list of cities with the highest respective urban and intersection (why LA is not on this list) densities. Conceptually, if you have narrow streets (ex. one-way instead of two) you can utilize the extra space to shove in more residential units and if you can build these units vertically, you can shove in hundreds of people. The extra space comes at the expense of drivers since blocks are shorter, parking is reduced, and volume of total drivers increases. Not only does demand for amenities increase, but also demand for them to be closer to residences…

    I’d love to have the time to run some statistical analysis on this so I’m not just rambling on the internet, but I’ll be too busy driving in circles around the endless Seattle parking hell and walking up steep hills in the pouring rain to wait 15 minutes in the grocery checkout line. Yay walkable amenities! (Walk Score: 94)

  • maria

    Miami being on this list is offensive. No one walks in the city! Everyone drives a car. I think the realtors in Miami must have muddied the scores on redfin. good job!