What your Urban Index scores mean

Urban Index turns any Australian address into four scores (0–100 each), a live map of what's around you, and a report you can share — in a few seconds, in plain English.

Each score answers a different slice of the same question: how well does this location support daily life with less reliance on a car?

Try an address · Sample report · Full methodology

What you get

1. Enter an address — any confirmed Australian address.
2. Four scores — 0–100, measuring different dimensions of liveability, each with a short breakdown.
3. A map — nearby points of interest, with distance weighted by how far things actually feel — adjusted for hills where elevation data is available.
4. A comparison — put two addresses side by side and compare scores directly.
5. A report — downloadable PDF when you need something to share or file away.

Walk Score

What it measures: how many useful destinations — groceries, cafés, parks, schools, pharmacies, GPs, gyms, libraries, finance — are within walking distance, weighted by how close they are and how useful the street network is to reach them.

Closer matters more. A café 200 m away counts more than one 800 m away. But the same 800 m on a grid (multiple routes, short blocks) registers differently to 800 m through a cul-de-sac estate. Hills shift the curve too — a steep 400 m feels longer than a flat 400 m, and the score reflects that.

A high Walk Score means the everyday things most people need are genuinely accessible on foot. A low one means a car does a lot of work.

A note on what it isn't: Walk Score is about access to nearby amenities. It doesn't measure how safe, green, or pleasant the streets feel. Open the breakdown to see which categories are driving the number.

See methodology for distance decay, terrain correction, and the quality-weighting applied to selected categories.

Public transport score

What it measures: how dependable public transport is from this address — not just whether a stop exists, but how often services actually run.

Where timetable data is available, we weight service frequency and proximity together, with separate treatment for trains, ferries, trams, and buses. A stop with one bus every two hours scores very differently to one with a bus every ten minutes. The scale is anchored against a known dense public transport reference point so scores are comparable across cities.

Where timetable data isn't available for a region, the score falls back to proximity-only and an on-page note says so. We don't fill in gaps with guesses.

A note on what it isn't: this is not a journey planner for a specific trip — timetables change and the score reflects a general service level, not your exact commute tomorrow.

See methodology for the frequency model and calibration approach.

Cycling Score

What it measures: whether cycling is practical from this address — not only whether infrastructure exists, but how close it is, how much of it is usable, what type it is, and whether terrain makes it reasonable.

Protected lanes and off-road paths score better than painted lines on a fast road. A connected network of infrastructure scores better than a single isolated lane. Flat areas score better than steep ones for the same infrastructure, because hills change whether people actually ride.

A note on what it isn't: this is not a safety audit of specific intersections. Use the map to see what infrastructure is nearby; on-the-ground judgment still matters.

See methodology for infrastructure weighting and terrain adjustment.

Street Connectivity

What it measures: how the street network itself is shaped — whether you can move through it freely in multiple directions, or whether dead ends and long detours mean the map distance and the walking distance are very different things.

We look at intersection patterns, block length, and dead-end density within roughly 1.2 km of the address. Dense grids score higher; cul-de-sac estates score lower. Waterfront addresses are treated fairly — ocean in the catchment doesn't drag the score down.

This score complements Walk Score. A place can have many amenities nearby but an awkward street layout to reach them, or a clean grid with not much in it. They measure different things.

Typical ranges: dense CBDs 70–85 · established inner suburbs 50–70 · greenfield estates 25–40.

See methodology for calibration anchors and the intersection-weighting formula.

Livability Index

What it measures: an overall read on how well a location supports daily life, blending active transport, public transport access, green space, healthcare access, education access, and flood safety where data exists.

Use it as the headline, then look at the individual scores to understand what's driving it. A strong Livability Index with a low public transport score means public transport is the weak point — walking and cycling may still score well. The breakdown tells you more than the number alone.

Flood Safety is currently available for Brisbane addresses only, sourced from Brisbane City Council flood awareness data. The report states clearly when a factor is or isn't available — it's never silently excluded.

See methodology for weights and research anchors.

Accuracy and limits

Urban Index is a data tool for comparison and decision support. Scores are based on automated data from Google Places, OpenStreetMap, official GTFS timetables, and government sources — updated on a rolling basis, not real-time.

Numbers are indicative. They help you compare locations consistently and explain why one place feels different to another. They are not a substitute for professional property, planning, legal, financial, or insurance advice. Verify anything that matters for a binding decision with official sources and your own advisers.

Frequently asked

What's the difference between Walk Score and the Livability Index? Walk Score measures one thing: pedestrian access to nearby amenities. The Livability Index blends multiple dimensions — including Walk Score, but also public transport, cycling, green space, healthcare, education, and flood safety. A suburb can score well on Walk Score and poorly on Livability if flood risk or public transport is a drag. Use Walk Score to assess walkability specifically; use Livability as the overall read.

Can scores change over time? Yes. Scores update when the underlying data changes — new shops open, bus routes are adjusted, OpenStreetMap is updated, or the methodology improves. If you're using a score for a decision with a long horizon, re-run it closer to that decision.

What if I'm outside QLD, NSW, or VIC? Walk Score, Cycling Score, and Livability Index work nationally where Google Places and OSM data exist. Public transport score falls back to proximity-only outside our three GTFS coverage states, and the report notes this. Street Connectivity is available for Greater Brisbane, Ipswich, Logan, Gold Coast, Sydney, and Melbourne.

Why might Walk Score be high but Street Connectivity look lower in some CBDs? They measure different things. Walk Score is driven by how many destinations are nearby. Connectivity is about how the street network is shaped. A CBD can be packed with amenities while its local grid is clipped by a river, a motorway, or large superblocks — the amenities are there, but the network to reach them isn't as permeable as a traditional suburb.

What does a score of 50 actually mean? About average for an Australian urban address — not poor, not exceptional. Scores below 30 suggest heavy car dependence for that dimension; scores above 75 suggest genuine car-light viability. The breakdown behind each score tells you specifically what's contributing.

Next step

Analyse an address →

Questions about formulas and research citations: Methodology →