Classification Categories

The American Walkability Atlas classifies neighborhoods into seven walkability categories based on National Walkability Index scores. The categories provide additional detail beyond the EPA’s four broad classifications while maintaining the same underlying National Walkability Index methodology. They describe how the built environment supports walking through the combined effects of street connectivity, transit accessibility, employment diversity, and the mix of jobs and households. The National Walkability Index itself is calculated using these four variables developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Research has consistently shown that neighborhoods combining connected street networks with mixed land uses and accessible destinations encourage greater walking, improve accessibility, and support healthier travel behavior (Cervero & Kockelman, 1997; Ewing & Cervero, 2010; Frank et al., 2005)

• Very High Walkability (17.32–20.00): Compact, mixed-use neighborhoods with highly connected street networks, abundant destinations, and excellent transit access where walking is a practical choice for many daily trips. These neighborhoods typically contain downtown districts, historic urban centers, or major mixed-use activity centers.
• High Walkability (14.60–17.31): Well-connected neighborhoods with diverse land uses, strong street connectivity, and convenient access to employment, shopping, parks, schools, and transit. Walking is practical for many everyday activities, although some trips may still require driving or transit.
• Above Average Walkability (11.88–14.59): Balanced neighborhoods where walking and driving both play important roles. Residents generally have reasonable access to everyday destinations through moderately connected street networks and a mix of residential and commercial development, although destinations may be more dispersed than in highly walkable areas.
• Moderate Walkability (9.16–11.87): Neighborhoods where walking is practical for nearby destinations but automobile travel becomes increasingly necessary for longer trips. These areas often combine older walkable sections with newer suburban development, lower intersection density, or reduced transit accessibility.
• Below Average Walkability (6.44–9.15): Predominantly suburban neighborhoods characterized by separated land uses, limited destination diversity, lower street connectivity, and greater dependence on automobiles. Walking is generally limited to recreation or short neighborhood trips.
• Low Walkability (3.72–6.43): Low-density neighborhoods with disconnected street networks, limited nearby destinations, and minimal transit access. Most daily activities require driving because employment, shopping, and services are located relatively far from residential areas.
• Very Low Walkability (1.00–3.71): Rural areas, large undeveloped landscapes, airport districts, industrial areas, parks, or highly dispersed suburban neighborhoods where the built environment provides very little support for walking. These locations typically have very low street connectivity, few destinations, and limited pedestrian infrastructure.

Planning Implications

The National Walkability Index provides planners with a valuable screening tool for evaluating how neighborhood design supports walking and access to daily destinations. Because the index combines street connectivity, transit accessibility, employment diversity, and the balance between jobs and housing, it helps identify neighborhoods where the built environment already supports walking and those where targeted improvements may be needed. The EPA developed the index specifically to support land-use planning, transportation planning, public health initiatives, and scenario analysis by providing a consistent nationwide measure of neighborhood walkability.

Neighborhoods classified as Very High or High Walkability typically represent established urban centers, historic neighborhoods, transit-oriented developments, or mixed-use districts where planning efforts should focus on preserving pedestrian infrastructure, maintaining transit service, encouraging infill development, and protecting neighborhood accessibility. These areas often serve as models for future walkable development while also requiring strategies to address housing affordability and displacement pressures associated with highly desirable walkable environments.

Neighborhoods within the Above Average and Moderate Walkability categories often present the greatest opportunity for incremental improvements. Investments such as new pedestrian crossings, sidewalk gap closures, bicycle infrastructure, transit enhancements, mixed-use redevelopment, and improved street connectivity can substantially increase walkability without requiring major redevelopment. Research by Cervero and Kockelman (1997) demonstrates that improving density, land-use diversity, and street design can significantly influence travel behavior, while Frank et al. (2005) found that neighborhoods combining connected streets with mixed land uses encourage higher levels of walking and physical activity.

For neighborhoods classified as Below Average, Low, or Very Low Walkability, long-term planning strategies may focus on improving connectivity, increasing destination diversity, expanding transit service, encouraging mixed-use development, and reducing automobile dependence where appropriate. However, planners should recognize that some low-scoring neighborhoods consist primarily of airports, industrial districts, large parks, protected natural areas, or rural landscapes where limited walkability reflects intended land uses rather than deficiencies in community design.

Overall, the National Walkability Index should be used alongside local knowledge, field observations, pedestrian infrastructure inventories, safety analyses, accessibility audits, and community engagement. While the index effectively measures characteristics of the built environment, it does not directly evaluate sidewalk quality, lighting, traffic speeds, crime, shade, topography, or other factors that influence the pedestrian experience.

Understanding Neighborhood Walkability

Neighborhood walkability reflects the degree to which residents can safely and conveniently reach everyday destinations on foot. Unlike municipal-level analyses, neighborhood-level measurements reveal localized differences in the built environment that are often hidden when entire cities are evaluated using a single average score.

The National Walkability Index measures four characteristics that research has consistently linked to walking behavior:

• Intersection Density, representing street network connectivity.
• Proximity to Transit Stops, measuring access to public transportation.
• Employment Mix, reflecting the diversity of employment opportunities.
• Employment and Household Mix, representing the balance between jobs and residential development.

Together, these variables estimate how supportive a neighborhood’s built environment is for walking. Numerous studies within the urban planning literature—including Cervero and Kockelman (1997), Ewing and Cervero (2010), and Frank et al. (2005)—have found that neighborhoods combining connected street networks, diverse land uses, and nearby destinations consistently generate more walking than neighborhoods characterized by disconnected streets and single-use development.

It is important to recognize that the National Walkability Index measures potential walkability rather than the quality of the pedestrian experience itself. Two neighborhoods with similar scores may differ substantially in sidewalk conditions, street trees, lighting, traffic safety, ADA accessibility, or perceived personal safety. Consequently, the index should be viewed as a planning indicator rather than a complete assessment of pedestrian conditions.

Perhaps the greatest strength of neighborhood-level analysis is its ability to identify variation within cities. Downtown districts, historic neighborhoods, university areas, and transit corridors frequently receive substantially higher scores than suburban neighborhoods located only a few miles away. This level of detail helps planners prioritize investments where improvements are likely to produce the greatest increases in accessibility and mobility.

Geographic Patterns in Neighborhood Walkability

The neighborhood data reveal several consistent geographic patterns across the United States.

The highest-scoring neighborhoods are generally concentrated in downtown business districts, historic urban neighborhoods, mixed-use commercial centers, transit-oriented developments, and university districts. These areas typically contain dense street networks, numerous destinations within walking distance, diverse employment opportunities, and strong transit accessibility—all characteristics emphasized within the EPA methodology.

Many cities exhibit a recognizable “center-to-edge” pattern in which walkability gradually declines with increasing distance from historic downtowns. Older neighborhoods developed before widespread automobile ownership often retain traditional grid street networks and mixed land uses that continue to support walking today. In contrast, many newer suburban neighborhoods are characterized by curvilinear street systems, cul-de-sacs, separated land uses, and greater automobile dependence, resulting in lower National Walkability Index scores.

The analysis also demonstrates substantial variation within municipalities. Cities commonly contain neighborhoods representing nearly every walkability category, from highly walkable downtowns to automobile-oriented suburban districts. This variation highlights the importance of evaluating neighborhoods individually rather than relying solely on municipal averages.

Lower-scoring neighborhoods frequently occur in areas dominated by airports, industrial facilities, parks, open space, reservoirs, rural landscapes, or recently developed suburban subdivisions. In many cases, these low scores reflect the intended function of the land rather than poor planning outcomes.

Overall, the geographic distribution reinforces decades of planning research showing that connected street networks, mixed land uses, transit accessibility, and compact development patterns consistently support higher levels of neighborhood walkability.

Overall Pattern

The National Walkability Index demonstrates that neighborhood walkability is distributed along a broad continuum rather than a simple distinction between walkable and unwalkable places. Most neighborhoods fall within the middle categories, indicating that they provide moderate support for walking while still relying on automobiles for many daily trips. Relatively few neighborhoods achieve the highest walkability classifications, reflecting the rarity of environments that simultaneously combine dense street networks, extensive transit service, diverse employment opportunities, and balanced residential development.

Across the United States, the strongest walkability consistently occurs in compact urban neighborhoods where transportation systems and land-use patterns reinforce one another. Historic downtowns, mixed-use districts, university neighborhoods, and transit-oriented centers continue to demonstrate the highest levels of accessibility because destinations, employment, housing, and transportation options are concentrated within relatively short distances.

Conversely, lower levels of walkability are generally associated with dispersed suburban development, separated land uses, lower street connectivity, and limited transit availability. These patterns are consistent with decades of planning research indicating that urban form strongly influences travel behavior and accessibility.

Perhaps the most important finding is that walkability is primarily a neighborhood characteristic rather than simply a municipal characteristic. Significant differences frequently exist between neighborhoods located within the same city, emphasizing the importance of neighborhood-scale analysis for planning decisions. Evaluating walkability at this level allows planners to identify where investments in connectivity, transit, mixed-use development, and pedestrian infrastructure are likely to have the greatest impact while recognizing that some low-scoring areas reflect specialized land uses rather than deficiencies in the built environment.

Together, these findings reinforce the National Walkability Index as a valuable planning tool for understanding how neighborhood design influences accessibility, transportation choice, and the overall functionality of the built environment. When combined with field observations and community input, neighborhood-level analysis provides a strong foundation for creating more connected, accessible, and walkable communities.