U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,675,073 times
Reputation: 6288

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Besides, munchitup, we already established in the urban planning forum that you're more willing to walk long distances than the average person. It's one thing to tell someone to walk three miles from Harlem to Midtown where there's an uninterrupted chain of storefronts, bars, coffeeshops, and places of interest along the way. It's another thing to tell someone to walk three miles in Los Angeles past the occasional warehouse, block long apartment building with no retail, or In-and-Out Burger with a parking lot.
Loads of just residential blocks in Harlem and the UES. Might have to Weave around a bit to get nonstop amenities.

 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,675,073 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Buckhead and DT Atlanta are 10 minutes apart via subway. That doesn't make Atlanta walkable.
Atlanta and Los Angeles are two different cities.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:43 PM
 
Location: NYC
2,312 posts, read 2,583,766 times
Reputation: 1648
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
It's hard to understand because you're saying L.A. neighborhoods are undense and unwalkable while at the same time acting like Miami Beach (12k psm) is the pinnacle of urban living.

You contradict yourself like no one's business.

The fact that DTLA and Hollywood are 15 minutes apart via subway seems to be lost on you.

Not hard to understand at all. Just need to apply a little bit of common sense. Just a tiny bit.

1. I have stated that LA has pockets of walkability.

2. Walkability is not determined solely by residential density but by the amount of "stuff" that is there. Vegas Strip probably has low density of population. So does the City of London (the Square Mile). Does that mean they are not walkable?

Miami Beach is indeed very walkable regardless of its density of population. Miami as a WHOLE is not.

3. If the entire universe of LA's attractions consisted of DTLA and Hollywood, and there was nothing else to see, then it could possibly be considered walkable. Then again, far fewer people would ever come to visit LA because those two are hardly enough of a draw.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,264 posts, read 26,231,676 times
Reputation: 11721
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
Atlanta and Los Angeles are two different cities.
The point is that you could theoretically walk in any city including Atlanta. I don't see why someone would not be able to walk, in theory, in Houston, Jacksonville, Memphis, El Paso, Charlotte, or Birmingham. As Fitzrovian said, you could walk from New York to L.A. if you wanted to. But most people would not consider such a walk reasonable. Likewise, most people don't consider walking in Los Angeles to be reasonable. That's why you can Google "Will I need a car in LA?" and find that nearly every post says you'll need a car.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:47 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,107,696 times
Reputation: 3979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian View Post
Key point. KEY. That's where my constant references to continuous density and concentration come in.

When I am in London I will happily walk for 2 hours... because the density of points of interest is stupendous. LA different story.
The District of Hollywood just passed a revised community plan that emphasizes building for density and pedestrian oriented development.

It is actually quite controversial because it allows for skyscrapers to be built along the Red Line's path. Overall I like it and it has important updates to the city plan but I'm not sure I would be a fan of highrises all over Hollywood.

TOD, mixed use or multifamily housing has been the trend for the vast number of projects from all over the city limits for the last few years. Strip malls are being torn down and reconverted to street facing retail.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,264 posts, read 26,231,676 times
Reputation: 11721
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
Loads of just residential blocks in Harlem and the UES. Might have to Weave around a bit to get nonstop amenities.
Loads of just residential blocks with suburban-style SFHs in Los Angeles. Might have to get in a car and drive around for 15 minutes to see a pedestrian.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:54 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,107,696 times
Reputation: 3979
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
The point is that you could theoretically walk in any city including Atlanta. I don't see why someone would not be able to walk, in theory, in Houston, Jacksonville, Memphis, El Paso, Charlotte, or Birmingham. As Fitzrovian said, you could walk from New York to L.A. if you wanted to. But most people would not consider such a walk reasonable. Likewise, most people don't consider walking in Los Angeles to be reasonable. That's why you can Google "Will I need a car in LA?" and find that nearly every post says you'll need a car.
I agree with this logic that you can walk in any city. But I have been to a lot of those cities and there is a significant difference between their development and the development of Los Angeles. There are certain parts of LA (especially the valley but I'm not arguing that the Valley is walkable) that look like parts of those cities, I'm not denying that. But LA is way more built up and has significantly more amenities than those areas.

The simplest answer is that despite what is commonly believed, Central Los Angeles was not built up by cars but by streetcars. This led to much of the 'bones' of the central city being pedestrian oriented. Some of that was ruined by planning in the 70s-90s, but most of it still remains the same.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:56 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,675,073 times
Reputation: 6288
Same old stupid, debunked "L.A. is not walkable" drivel from EC boosters. No ****, the whole city of L.A. isn't walkable. It's 470 sq miles. it's definitely has a lot more than just pockets of walkability, unless by pockets you mean several sq miles.

Ftr, you can hit Hollywood, North Hollywood, Koreatown, Long Beach, and Pasadena via heavy/light from DTLA. In a few months you'll be able to add DT Culver City to the mix. All highly walkable areas.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,107,696 times
Reputation: 3979
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Loads of just residential blocks with suburban-style SFHs in Los Angeles. Might have to get in a car and drive around for 15 minutes to see a pedestrian.
I think 'loads' of residential blocks of SFH in the area I am talking about is an exaggeration.

If you mean the entire city, yeah there are loads of them, especially in South LA and the Valley. But there still is a surprising amount of pedestrian traffic, you might be underrating it a bit. It's no Brooklyn or Queens, but at the same time it's not Houston with a bunch of empty lots either.
 
Old 01-25-2012, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,264 posts, read 26,231,676 times
Reputation: 11721
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
Same old stupid, debunked "L.A. is not walkable" drivel from EC boosters. No ****, the whole city of L.A. isn't walkable. It's 470 sq miles. it's definitely has a lot more than just pockets of walkability, unless by pockets you mean several sq miles.

Ftr, you can hit Hollywood, North Hollywood, Koreatown, Long Beach, and Pasadena via heavy/light from DTLA. In a few months you'll be able to add DT Culver City to the mix. All highly walkable areas.
Didn't we already go over this in another thread? Koreatown is supposed to be an example of LA's supreme walkability, but you can clearly see from Google maps that it's not all that walkable. It's about as walkable as Far Rockaway, Queens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top