Location and Fitness: What's the correlation?

Colorado Springs was rated America's Fittest City by Men's Fitness magazine. This is based on obesity rates, number of open spaces, and many other factors (Randomly, I was quoted in the article. You can read my gems of wisdom here). The city also just earned a Silver Level Bicycle Friendly Community from the League of American Bicyclists.
So we do well in general fitness and in cycling. It would be hard not to with... three hundred days of sunshine a year, Pike's Peak in our collective backyards, and the Olympic Training Center in town. But what about walking? The older a city is, the more it is designed with walking in mind. Makes sense; A town created before cars were common has better infrastructure for pedestrians. So I went to Walk Score and entered my address. I live on the west side of Colorado Springs, in an older neighborhood, about a mile from downtown, with a major grocery store less than a mile away, and many amenities (gas, school, clothing stores, restaurants) even closer. Pikes Peak puts a hard stop to sprawl on the west side, meaning everything is on a smaller scale. So what was the score? 63 on a scale of 100, or somewhat walkable according to the website scale. Personally, I think my location is even better: my street is a designated bicycle route, and a few blocks' ride puts me into both the huge mountain biking and commuting trail networks. Also, I'm within a dozen blocks of two libraries and two farmer's markets. But it is a bit of an uphill hike to the grocery store.
Anyways, in a fit of curiosity I entered a random address from the suburban sprawl up on the northeast side of town. No mountain exists on the east side to keep the McMansions to a minimum. The score? 14 of 100, "car-dependent". Ouch.