Getting around score

[homebucket]

Some neighborhood figures:

SF
Civic Center - 297
Tenderloin - 291
SoMa - 290
Downtown - 274
Chinatown - 268 (100 walk, 100 transit, but only 68 bike score)
Inner Richmond - 252
Outer Richmond - 229
Excelsior - 220
Bayview - 219
Outer Sunset - 217
Ingleside - 215
Oceanview - 208
Visitacion Valley - 188
Crocker Amazon - 183
Sunnydale - 175

Downtown Berkeley - 267
Downtown Oakland - 274

[TWAK]

Davis?
CA. It's easy to get around!

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by TWAK

Davis?
CA. It's easy to get around!

Overall it gets 178 (50 walk, 38 transit, 90 bike).

For the neighborhoods of University Ave (248 total) and Old East Davis (235 total), they both have a bike score of 100.

[JManc]

The Tenderloin is 'walkable' but you have an obstacle of tents and bums.

Originally Posted by Wigs

JMan, here's the map area of downtown Utica

Everything east of Park Ave/ south of Elizabeth is not downtown. It's predominantly multi family residential (East Utica). At one time exclusively an Italian enclave and still some of the best food anywhere.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

I'm assuming that the score for Houston by sopas is for the whole city.

You are correct. So, I revisited that last post of mine and decided to do the downtowns of those cities:

The largest metropolis south of me:
Gaslamp Quarter, San Diego (No "official" downtown listed), 265

Bay Area:
Downtown Oakland, 274
Downtown San Jose, 230

California's Capital:
Downtown Sacramento, 256

The so-called Sun Belt:
Downtown Phoenix, 217
Tucson (no downtown listed, I wasn't sure of any equivalent neighborhoods listed)
Downtown Dallas, 252
Downtown Houston, 223
Downtown San Antonio, 220
Downtown Austin, 250
South Downtown Atlanta, 219

[Crawford]

This is an interesting exercise, but not sure I'd weight them equally. Walkscore is generally a lot more important than transitscore, which is generally a lot more important than bikescore.

And none of these scores are really for quality of walking/transit/biking. They're for access to stuff via walking/transit/biking. A place can be hostile to pedestrians but high walkscore if there's a ton of stuff in proximity, and a place can be a pedestrian paradise but low walkscore if there's little in proximity. The algorithm is basically a distance measure.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

So the unicorn is 300. That must be someplace in Manhattan. DTLA is really high. Good job there.

Just out of curiosity, for Manhattan, I did...

Financial District, NYC, 285
Greenwich Village, NYC, 295
East Midtown Manhattan, NYC, 277

And in my rudimentary search of NYC, the highest score I saw was:
The Bowery, 296

The Bowery scored 100 each for Walk Score and Transit Score and 96 for Bike Score. Impressive!

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This is an interesting exercise, but not sure I'd weight them equally. Walkscore is generally a lot more important than transitscore, which is generally a lot more important than bikescore.

And none of these scores are really for quality of walking/transit/biking. They're for access to stuff via walking/transit/biking. A place can be hostile to pedestrians but high walkscore if there's a ton of stuff in proximity, and a place can be a pedestrian paradise but low walkscore if there's little in proximity. The algorithm is basically a distance measure.

all true, but generally speaking, places that score over 200 on this triple measure are very likely going to be more appealing to urbanists than places that score below 200.

i'm sure exceptions can be found in both directions, but i would think that the overall correlation, while certainly not absolute, still holds.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This is an interesting exercise, but not sure I'd weight them equally. Walkscore is generally a lot more important than transitscore, which is generally a lot more important than bikescore.

And none of these scores are really for quality of walking/transit/biking. They're for access to stuff via walking/transit/biking. A place can be hostile to pedestrians but high walkscore if there's a ton of stuff in proximity, and a place can be a pedestrian paradise but low walkscore if there's little in proximity. The algorithm is basically a distance measure.

Yeah, that's why I thought it was interesting SF Chinatown only scored a 268 but DTLA scored a 270, even though the former is clearly more urban (this composite score is basically how easy it is to get around without a car). It was because it was held back by a bike score of only 68. But most people don't bike around Chinatown anyway. They walk.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Yeah, that's why I thought it was interesting SF Chinatown only scored a 268 but DTLA scored a 270, even though the former is clearly more urban (this composite score is basically how easy it is to get around without a car). It was because it was held back by a bike score of only 68. But most people don't bike around Chinatown anyway. They walk.

I would imagine biking in SF Chinatown would be kinda dangerous.

No joke, but on two different trips to San Francisco, my partner and I witnessed fender-benders between drivers in SF Chinatown. One accident even ended up in a fist fight between the drivers, and after the one guy got a good punch at the other guy and nearly knocked him out, the other guy got in his car and sped off, while the guy that was nearly knocked out ended up sitting on the curb with his girlfriend or whoever she was. My partner and I were so shocked at what we witnessed that we didn't even think to take pictures of license plates or anything, and even other witnesses just started walking away (including us). We felt bad for a bit but then we got over it.

BTW, we'll be going up to SF in October. We always love going up there.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I would imagine biking in SF Chinatown would be kinda dangerous.

No joke, but on two different trips to San Francisco, my partner and I witnessed fender-benders between drivers in SF Chinatown. One accident even ended up in a fist fight between the drivers, and after the one guy got a good punch at the other guy and nearly knocked him out, the other guy got in his car and sped off, while the guy that was nearly knocked out ended up sitting on the curb with his girlfriend or whoever she was. My partner and I were so shocked at what we witnessed that we didn't even think to take pictures of license plates or anything, and even other witnesses just started walking away (including us). We felt bad for a bit but then we got over it.

BTW, we'll be going up to SF in October. We always love going up there.

Yeah I've never biked much in Chinatown. There's just too much going on. Lots of double parkers, jay walkers, busses, etc.

[homebucket]

I also thought it was interesting they split "downtown" SF into so many different sub neighborhoods, even splitting up Union Square and the FiDi and SoMa, whereas in DTLA they just left it as the entire DTLA, when they could've split it up into South Park, Bunker Hill, Fashion District, Arts District, Little Tokyo. It'd be interesting to see what the Historic Core would get.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Yeah I've never biked much in Chinatown. There's just too much going on. Lots of double parkers, jay walkers, busses, etc.

Oh it's a mess. But that's what makes it fun. I love chaotic cities, they're the most interesting. Otherwise you end up with Helsinki, probably the most boring big city I've ever visited.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I also thought it was interesting they split "downtown" SF into so many different sub neighborhoods, even splitting up Union Square and the FiDi and SoMa, whereas in DTLA they just left it as the entire DTLA, when they could've split it up into South Park, Bunker Hill, Fashion District, Arts District, Little Tokyo. It'd be interesting to see what the Historic Core would get.

I agree. If they had split up DTLA, scores would probably go up among the smaller districts.

As a whole, DTLA is pretty walkable, and very transit handy; many different transit agencies' bus lines converge there, and by the end of this year (supposedly), when the Regional Connector opens, that'll put 3 more subway stops in downtown. More dedicated bike lanes are being put in too.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

BTW, we'll be going up to SF in October. We always love going up there.

Hopefully the Central Subway will be open by then for you guys to check out!

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

So the unicorn is 300. That must be someplace in Manhattan. DTLA is really high. Good job there.

Nowhere in NY gets a bike score of 100 for some reason. https://www.walkscore.com/NY/New_York

Also, as an aside, it seems that their ranking is off. They rank Little Italy and NoLita above the Bowery despite them having lower aggregate scores.

[homebucket]

SF doesn't have any 100 bike scores either.

These are the top 5 hoods:
Civic Center - 98
Mission District - 97
Design District - 97
SoMa - 94
Panhandle - 93

Oakland has a couple of hoods with a bike score of 99.
Downtown Berkeley has a bike score of 97.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by homebucket

SF doesn't have any 100 bike scores either.

These are the top 5 hoods:
Civic Center - 98
Mission District - 97
Design District - 97
SoMa - 94
Panhandle - 93

Oakland has a couple of hoods with a bike score of 99.
Downtown Berkeley has a bike score of 97.

The only bike score of 100 that I found was a neighborhood in Portland. I spot checked many of the other usual suspects and not one had a score of 100.

[pdxtex]

100 bike in Portland? Hmmm. I won't cheat I'll guess Sunnyside or Williams corridor. Bike scores are weird. I ride and drive but id rate low traffic and gridded higher than bike specific facilities. Just personal taste.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Hopefully the Central Subway will be open by then for you guys to check out!

That'd be great! I've totally been anticipating the Central Subway's opening!