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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-27-2011, 12:58 PM
 
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,152 posts, read 965,263 times
Reputation: 432

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Where? The burden of proof is on you my friend.
He does not have to prove ANYTHING to you, hop off. And Boston is more urban than LA.

 
Old 10-27-2011, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,598 posts, read 53,251,958 times
Reputation: 14517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfieldian View Post
I lived in CA, I have been there dozens of times.
Then you should know better than to make these kinds of strange statements.

Philadelphia and SF and Boston and DC and the like, are all bite-sized morsels that would be wholly swallowed by the beast that is Los Angeles without even burping.

Urban is a term that is not owned by a single definition set in stone. It is defined by the times and having traveled the world, you probably notice how prominent the car is in most current planning schemes for nearly every major urban area in the world.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 12:59 PM
 
816 posts, read 1,535,865 times
Reputation: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Where? The burden of proof is on you my friend.
You are delusional. You guys are acting like this is the first time LA has been criticized for it's general lack of urbanity or urban planning.
What is going to satisfy you exactly? Do you want me to start scanning in pictures from the 90s? Do you want me to scan in my old cut up CA drivers license? Do you want my last ticket into LAX from last year?
Back off.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,709 posts, read 18,569,457 times
Reputation: 5427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gateway Region View Post
And Boston is more urban than LA.
I would agree with this for the most part, but that does not mean that LA is not urban and LA is a much larger urban area than Boston although Boston does beat LA at the street level.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:04 PM
 
525 posts, read 745,167 times
Reputation: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfieldian View Post
The problem is the dense areas there are not desirable and very very poor transportation options given it's size. The desirable areas for the most part are Beverly Hills, Venice, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Pasadena. None of which are even part of the City of Los Angeles.
There are many nice areas in s-cal not just the west side, or Pasadena ,have a monopoly on this. Besides the west side people have a very snotty attitude, why would you want to live around that. My 100,000 car is better than you 100,000 dollar car. Please get over yourself don't slow down the rats will run over you.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,387 posts, read 9,987,320 times
Reputation: 5230
LA is pretty dense compared to many other cities in the Western Half of the U.S. but the problem is that people try to compare its density and urbanity to cities in the Northeast. Its not really fair to compare LA with cities like New York and Philadelphia when its comes to density and urbanity because those cities are just on a completely different level in the department. When just comparing the west coast, one could argue that Los Angeles is #2 in density behind San Francisco and that's pretty impressive.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:05 PM
 
551 posts, read 963,912 times
Reputation: 455
The reason why people say LA is not a very dense city is because it doesn't have the feature that makes "dense" cities be what they should be like New York, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. LA doesn't have good walkability, except for a few small areas.

Los Angeles, California Neighborhoods on Walk Score

If you can see, LA's entire city only has a walkscore of 65. While it isn't as sprawling as many other suburbs outside LA, that isn't enough to support a car-free lifestyle. One can have a lot of density, but if it doesn't have good transit and walkability, it will be known as having the aspects of sprawl still even with relatively high densities.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:06 PM
 
816 posts, read 1,535,865 times
Reputation: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Then you should no better than to make these kinds of strange statements.

Philadelphia and SF and Boston and DC and the like, are all bite-sized morsels that would be wholly swallowed by the beast that is Los Angeles without even burping.

Urban is a term that is not owned by a single definition set in stone. It is defined by the times and having traveled the world, you probably notice how prominent the car is in most current planning schemes for nearly every major urban area in the world.
If the lines are so blurry, what is the point of comparing whatsoever? The fact is, the U.S. has several great urban cities. L.A. is the oddball out compared to Boston/SF/Chicago etc.
L.A. does NOT stack up and is not the same day to day as living in those cities. Again, LA can not stack up to SF in it's own state, much less the rest of the U.S. or North America.
Vancouver is a young city also, and on the same coast, and has to deal with mountain ranges, but look at the strides it has made. They figured out a way to do it and be modern, LA did not.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:06 PM
 
Location: So California
8,384 posts, read 8,474,224 times
Reputation: 4578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfieldian View Post
You are delusional. You guys are acting like this is the first time LA has been criticized for it's general lack of urbanity or urban planning.
What is going to satisfy you exactly? Do you want me to start scanning in pictures from the 90s? Do you want me to scan in my old cut up CA drivers license? Do you want my last ticket into LAX from last year?
Back off.
No big deal, what city did you live in?
My point is perspective on where its been and obviously where its heading.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 01:07 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,607,407 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
LA is pretty dense compared to many other cities in the Western Half of the U.S. but the problem is that people try to compare its density and urbanity to cities in the Northeast. Its not really fair to compare LA with cities like New York and Philadelphia when its comes to density and urbanity because those cities are just on a completely different level in the department. When just comparing the west coast, one could argue that Los Angeles is #2 in density behind San Francisco and that's pretty impressive.
This ^^^

I'm not trying to say LA is more urban than NY or Philly, or Chicago. That would make me delusional.

As someone who has lived in Boston and LA, each for years, I will argue that it is not more urban than LA.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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