Pretty neat to see this study, showing that a home’s Walk Score is correlated with a higher value. Depending on the city, one’s home can be worth almost $3,000 more for every Walk Score point. In Seattle, it’s $1,413.
Matt Yglesias comments, “though Walk Score is a fun tool, the methodology is far from perfect, and you would almost certainly see a stronger walkability/value correlation if you had a better metric for walkability.”
That’s true. Walk Score’s laughably wrong about some things (the bodega around the corner from my house is not a “grocery store”), but it’s a great idea that can only be made greater.
Luckily, neither you nor Matt are telling them anything they don’t already know. I like that they’re honest about the shortcomings in the algorithm.
But yes, it’s a fabulous idea, and it’s even more exciting that it can be demonstrated that dense, walkable neighborhoods is not only environmentally sound, but economically sound.
A takeaway here is that those homes were more valuable, not because of their Walk Score rating, but before it. People already were doing their own walk scoring before the tool was ‘invented’.
It’s also interesting that the top scoring Seattle neighborhoods are the ones with the most density. (I also didn’t realize the company behind Walkscore was in Seattle…)