When I spotted this new listing at 299 Panoramic Way in Berkeley, my jaw literally dropped. This is “the fairytale home”, the gorgeously sited, beautiful home I walk by on hikes deep into Claremont Canyon. And every time I walk pass this house, I pause to sigh and admire.
Little did I know it was legally a duplex, nor that its Walk Score is a mere 45/100 — but do I care? The photos show interiors that look every bit as charming as the exterior. The setting really is special — tucked into the hills and surrounded by greenery, it’s barely even on the street. I consider myself a confirmed urbanite, but I love the look of this house.
The listing describes the $1,150,000 home as “magical” and, for once, I’m willing to believe it.
I’m out of town this weekend and can’t visit it. So send your reports in pronto once you have seen it.
You (and most of your commenters) usually look down your nose at houses with low walk scores. But now that a house you love is on the market – suddenly walk scores don’t matter.
If you’re going to blow off walk scores that easily based on personal preference, don’t you think it’s somewhat irresponsible to report on walk scores at all? If you’re not going to stick to your guns on the importance of a walk score, it becomes a meaningless number.
Full disclosure: We’re trying to sell a house with a low(ish) walk score and people keep bringing it up as a reason not to buy the house. But when you ask them “So do you walk a lot of places where you are now?” you find they really NEVER walk anywhere and never have. But because they’ve been programmed to believe they need a high walk score by places like this blog, they won’t buy a house that would fit their actual lifestyle instead of their fantasy lifetstyle.
Irresponsible? It’s just a piece of data, like square footage or fireplaces (and really, how many fires do people *actually* have?). The ‘walk score’ is just a data point on how centrally located a house is – it’s not a moral ’stick to your guns’ kind of preference.
I don’t think people have been programmed to believe they need a high walk score, but there is a trend to be more centrally located. I think it’s a real preference for wanting to feel more a part of the City (and reap the benefits of living in an urban area) instead of perched up in the hills where the amenities are much more spread out. The walk score is not the problem people have with your house, it’s the location.
L. it could very well simply be the location that’s a problem. But what I’ve seen (not just in selling this house, but throughout the years) is that people don’t really think through why they want certain things. They’ve just been told repeatedly “Oh, you have to have X and Y.”
The Walk Score isn’t just a piece of data. It’s an inherent ranking that one house is better than another. And people always want “better”. But no one ever thinks WHY they want “better” or if they’ll even USE “better.”
Heck, I even see it with my wife. She insists on getting a house with a big bathtub. It makes no difference when I point out that after 4 years in our current house, she’s never once taken a bath.
Or people with an infant who won’t buy a house in an area with a poor high school ranking. No one thinks that in 15 years, when that child goes to high school, the rankings will probably have changed dramatically.
I don’t think many buyers think through any of that stuff. They just make snap judgements about houses based on what they think they SHOULD buy, not what really will be most useful for them. And Walk Score is one of the biggest culprits.
I agree with you completely that there are many items people put on their checklist that don’t make all that much sense from a ‘use’ perspective – from fireplaces to big bathtubs and everything in between. But I still think that the walkscore is no more an ‘inherent ranking’ than square footage, number of baths, or any other numerical piece of information one gets when house hunting.
My point is not that the walkscore should be of any particular importance to any particular person, but that, like any other item on the checklist, it’s just one factor that may or may not fall off the list depending on how many other boxes are checked. Your original post seems to be saying that if living in a walkable neighborhood is not an absolute, unconditional requirement, then the walkability/score should not be reported, ever. I disagree. I see it as just another piece of information, to be weighed along with all the other information about any given house.
Agreed with L. For you, the walk score may be trivial information. For me, it’s a deciding factor (and man, I wish they had existed when we were house hunting—we had to map it manually!) And yes, we *do* walk (and bike) places whenever we can, so it does matter a lot for daily life. Conversely, I didn’t much care if a house had, say, a full vs. 3/4 bath, or a garage, so I didn’t pay attention to that information, but for many people those might be dealbreakers and the walk score might be irrelevant. Having all of that information available helps, even if every fact doesn’t matter for every buyer.
Notably, though, a high walk score isn’t inherently good—if you’re looking for quiet country living, for instance, you probably want a *low* walk score since it would indicate that you’re decently far from commercial uses and probably other homes, as well. It’s only perceived as “good” right now because denser city living is making a comeback. So, like L said, it’s not the score—it’s the location. The score is just a proxy for that.
I have to agree with L. and Anon. We purchased our home because it had most of what we wanted and is within a mile of BART and the shops, libraries, restaurants and services that enrich our lives. In fact we did see homes that had more of what we wanted, whether it was a garage or wood floors with inlay or whatever, in less walkable places, and we passed on them. We choose to walk everywhere, and we’re not alone. We simply couldn’t stomach a home that forced us into our cars for life’s basics.
Walkscore?, maybe what you need (and should take the time to build?) is a website called Viewscore. Walkability is one quality that some of us desire. A killer view is another quality that many desire. You seem to want some way of quantifying the upside you get out of the downside of your home’s (lack of) walkability. If your home grabbed you and made you buy it, then it will have the same effect on another buyer who values what you value.
You don’t need to question blog authors or estate agents for offering walk scores. Clearly Tracey has an opinion that walkability is a good thing, and she’s free to express it (and to drool over homes that don’t tick that particular box – we are all human, after all). As others point out, walkability is just a data point, like craftsman style (which you don’t hear the mid-mod fans slamming because their homes can’t play in that sandbox). What you should consider doing is highlighting the positives about your home (like extolling the views when walkscore comes up), and being realistic about the negatives (which every home has).