This is great analysis, but has a few problems: 1. Rarely required services might have a small footprint, but that's because they service a very large area. Yo

This is great analysis, but has a few problems: 1. Rarely required services might have a small footprint, but that's because they service a very large area. You're not going to have hospitals after every mile. You're going to have one for a small city and a few for larger cities. This means that getting to the hospital for most residents is not going to be walkable. 2. Many businesses of a similar kind seem to cluster together. Eg lots of (competing) shops will be in the same location instead of being spread out. This means that you'll have disproportionate amounts of some businesses at the expense of other services in your area. 3. Jobs and specialization. If you've specialized in a field that is only hired in some specific places, then you're going to be doing a longer commute unless you can move close to your job. If it's a high paying job then chances are that this will be a very expensive area - some people will accept a longer trip to work to save the money. I think this kind of analysis is great. It would certainly help if cities were more walkable, but I don't think that we can go without driving infrastructure.