More urban LA, SF, DC, Philly, and Boston? (live, state, better)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Excuse #2: It counts, and it counts against Los Angeles, though SFH are also to be found within city boundaries of places like Philadelphia. The important part is that those are mostly in small lots and the massive number of apartment/condo/midrise/highrise residencies that offset those SFHs.
You guys aren't going to get away with mixing up two different things. I already acknowledged up-thread that all cities, even New York City, have houses on large lots with yards. That's not the issue. The issue is that Los Angeles has neighborhoods like this in what LA boosters have defined as its core. Try finding blocks of SFHs, yards and driveways in the cores of NYC, Boston, DC or Philadelphia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Excuse #3: Yes, and you'll find people in the LA forum who aren't on the city-data forum who will say the opposite--that LA can and is very urban in parts. How does that happen? Because Los Angeles is huge and both the suburban and urban parts are Los Angeles. You can live in Los Angeles, and depending on where your live and work, walk away with absolutely different perceptions of the city and still say you live in Los Angeles.
Again missing the point. The walkability of DC, Boston or New York is beyond question. The fact that so many people think that Los Angeles is not doable without a car (it seems to be the majority actually) calls into question the urbanity of the city. Just like threads titled "Is DC Really in the Northeast?" call into question its status as a northeastern city (it's not). Try going to the NYC forum and starting a thread called, "Can I Live in NYC Without a Car?" and gauge the reactions you get. I might start the thread just for kicks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Excuse #4: LA has poor public transit for the city overall. It's actually comparable to the others in the topic--though DC does have a decidedly better mass transit system than any of the others mentioned here. I saw earlier that you were doing ridership to population, but you neglected to mention (1) that much of the ridership (and the transit system itself) is in the urban core area and has little to do with the significant population within the city of Los Angeles that is outside of the ruban core and (2) the ridership/population ratio gets skewed positively for smaller cities when their lines service areas outside of the city proper.
You're completely ignoring the elephant in the room. Part of what makes DC more urban than Los Angeles is that it's more centralized. Instead of having people drive from one burb to another (which does happen to some extent in the DC metro), you have hundreds of thousands of people being jammed into a compact area, which gives the city a daytime intensity that LA doesn't come close to matching. The design of Metro is a reflection of DC's urban layout. Similarly, LA's PT is a function of the city's design. The city doesn't have the same need for the same type of system because you don't have the same concentration in such a small space. And it's this heavy concentration of so much activity that makes DC unequivocally more urban than Los Angeles.
And btw, no one has provided any evidence that people living in the "core" use PT more than anyone else. I suspect a fair number do, but we've already seen posts in the L.A. forum where people have called it "poor people transit." I also suspect that a very large number of bus riders in Los Angeles are the very poor who can't afford a car.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 02-02-2012 at 01:03 PM..
You're completely ignoring the elephant in the room. Part of what makes DC more urban than Los Angeles is that it's more centralized. Instead of having people drive from one burb to another (which does happen to some extent in the DC metro), you have hundreds of thousands of people being jammed into a compact area, which gives the city a daytime intensity that LA doesn't come close to matching. The design of Metro is a reflection of DC's urban layout. Similarly, LA doesn't have the same need for the same type of system because you don't have the same concentration in such a small space. And it's this heavy concentration of so much activity that makes DC unequivocally more urban than Los Angeles.
That is just your opinion. Plenty of people prefer a multi nodal urban city.
NOT COMPARING LA TO TOKYO
Would you say DC is more urban than Tokyo because it is centralized?
I'm calling BS on the "poor people transit". When I take the bus it is a spread mix of demographics.
If anything that shows the quality of the LA forum posters you are quoting. Racist, car-loving idiots.
I don't recall agreeing to only looking at certain areas within each city. Try again. I'm not interested in 22 blocks of fun, I'm looking at the whole picture. D.C. doesnt even feel bigger in its core (being less populated has something to do with that) so you're basically down to the CBD. That's whats going to win an urbanity debate over the L.A. megapolis? Just no.
L.A. can't be that urban when you have to actively seek out a car free lifestyle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup
Living car free in LA is totally doable, but unlike Boston, NY, Chicago, etc. you have to actually seek out the lifestyle, it doesn't come to you as easily (if that makes any sense at all )
I don't recall agreeing to only looking at certain areas within each city. Try again. I'm not interested in 22 blocks of fun, I'm looking at the whole picture. D.C. doesnt even feel bigger in its core (being less populated has something to do with that) so you're basically down to the CBD. That's whats going to win an urbanity debate over the L.A. megapolis? Just no.
DT DC definitely feels bigger and busier than DT LA. DC's daytime population swells to over a million. Half of those people DT in a 2 mile area. Almost 900,000 people on the trains on any given day.
You guys aren't going to get away with mixing up two different things. I already acknowledged up-thread that all cities, even New York City, have houses on large lots with yards. That's not the issue. The issue is that Los Angeles has neighborhoods like this in what LA boosters have defined as its core. Try finding blocks of SFHs, yards and driveways in the cores of NYC, Boston, DC or Philadelphia.
I think this is exactly the issue. Can someone point to any spot in LA that does not have SFH streets within a 3 mile radius? Or even a 2 mile radius?
DT DC definitely feels bigger and busier than DT LA. DC's daytime population swells to over a million. Half of those people DT in a 2 mile area. Almost 900,000 people on the trains on any given day.
He's not interested in 22 blocks of fun. But he's definitely interested in the several blocks in LA's CORE with houses on single lots with yards. They just scream "URBAN!"
I think this is exactly the issue. Can someone point to any spot in LA that does not have SFH streets within a 3 mile radius? Or even a 2 mile radius?
No, can you do the same for DC?
Honestly I don't mind the SFH, most are tucked away on side streets I don't walk down, and actually provide a nice respite from the hub-bub of streets like Hollywood Blvd or Santa Monica Blvd. I don't find them less urban than the many double-deckers and triple-deckers in Boston. Many of the SFH in the Hollywood area are historic and prime examples of 20s-50s architecture in the US.
Why don't you just hang it up? We already know that you have to "actively seek out" a car-free lifestyle in Los Angeles.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NOT COMPARING LA TO TOKYO 
)
