Decatur Still Georgia’s Most Walkable City
Decatur Metro | December 5, 2011
Though it dropped three points from last year, Decatur remains Georgia’s “most walkable” city according to Walkscore.com for a second-straight year.
The city received a score of 63, 4 points ahead of the second-place North Druid Hills neighborhood.
The city of Atlanta, which obviously has some very walkable neighborhoods, received an overall score of 53, due to the large areas outside of the city’s core, which are quite unwalkable. Atlanta ranked 20th among the nation’s largest cities in walkability.
Latest from Decaturish
We’d fare even better if Atlanta metro transit agencies had open data that could be automatically incorporated. Sadly, as with all the other defining characteristics of a good transit system, Atlanta ain’t exactly tops.
Yep. If proximity to the Marta station was taken into account, downtown Decatur would have to be close to one hundred on the score, I’d think. As it is, my address receives a Walk Score of 86–“very walkable.”
So why is it that the neighbohoods of North Druid Hills and North Atlanta are counted as cities but Midtown and Va-Hi are not?
That is weird. I also wonder how North Druid Hills area is considered walkable. It is an auto traffic nightmare.
The Walk Score, from what I understand, is based on a location’s proximity to necessities and amenities, not on the pleasantness of the walk.
I’m pretty sure most areas are divided based on US Census statistical areas.
The North Druid Hills “neighborhood” is a shopping center with a parking lot. Good job walkscore.
Sounds “walkable” to me. Decatur’s a mallternative.
A shopping center, and, yanno, a few synagogues, churches, playgrounds, schools and restaurants. Seriously?? On what are you basing your info? We lived in North Druid Hills for two years before moving here and it was quite walkable. It doesn’t have the architechture or aesthetic charm, maybe, of Oakhurst or the Decatur square, but it is actually pretty easy to get around a lot of it without a car.
Agreed. They even got a sidewalk on Houston Mill. Much more than you can say for Lamont and Vidal!
+1
As I recall, Lamont and Vidal residents decided against sidewalks when they were proposed by the City.
I believe you’re right, Steve, which just reveals a larger problem with the system. Only in single-entry subdivision thinking does the argument that sidewalks are only for the use of adjacent residents a relevant argument. In a connected city working to become even more connected (it’s one of our key strategic goals, fer gawdsake), allowing resident wagon-circling to supersede larger goals is politically cowardly.
My understanding of the Lamont/Vidal situation is that there was never a poll, just some really vocal opponents who organized a petition. There were plenty of folks there who were disappointed that they did not get a sidewalk, maybe even a majority–who knows? But they didn’t know enough to organize a counter-petition. The problem is that the Lamont/Vidal decision didn’t just affect Lamont/Vidal, it affected anyone in the city who might walk on Lamont/Vidal which connects Scott and Clairemont and is an alternative to walking along busy highways. That’s why I don’t think it should be just a decision by the residents of the streets involved. Others who use the streets should be able to weigh in too. And definitely it shouldn’t be a decision of the loudest.
Does that mean that if me or my kid is run over by a car walking in the Lamont/Vidal area we can sue the neighbors?
Almost makes me want to walk there.
Yeah, right. Folks who opposed the sidewalks included folks who still believe that sidewalks bring ne’er-do-wells into the neighborhood–some of them were seniors and some have since died, some were folks who had planted stuff on the city’s right of way part of “their” yard, and some were folks who felt that sidewalks would aggravate storm water drainage issues.
Get with the program Vidal and Lamont.