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.
I think munchitup is focusing on how much there is to walk to rather urban design or pedestrian volume. The North End has pedestrian friendly design, but lacks a supermarket in walking distance, so for day to day living on foot, there's some issues.
What issues would those be unless you only stay in your own neighborhood? I go to places in my neighborhood for groceries and stuff less often than other places and that has always been the case. Though, I am somewhat of a picky shopper and don't mind going to different stores all the time and riding with a few items on the subway or throwing them in my backpack and walking, or putting them on my bike. I am not a stock up on groceries type and really try to live a pedestrian/public transit lifestyle and pick up a few things every other day/every day and/or hit up farmer's market and produce street vendors when possible. To me it is definitely more about pedestrian friendliness rather than being able to go to Ralph's for a gallon of milk. I think you have different ways of looking at these. There are those that don't want the food deserts, then those that want compact walkable areas that are safe, pedestrian, active communities and bike friendly. I fall more in the latter. North End is a dream neighborhood. It's also why a city, say Portland is more appealing. While I prefer a bigger metro, their design is very good. I would certainly take it over cities like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Miami and probably flip a coin on LA.
I'd be happier with one good bar and one good always open coffee shop where I can meet my neighbors than a dozen random shopping stores and groceries.
I also like being able to run relatively decent distances, anywhere from 5-20 miles, as well as commute on bike w/o having to see so many breaks in the urban landscape.
Another thing is, I don't like driving, EVER. Unless it is to leave town. We do have 4 bikes between us though. My gf and I share a car but if we did not do out of town trips, it might as well be on cinder blocks, it's never used. I would do rental but, I calculated costs and it's still cheaper to keep a paid off car with basic insurance than it is to rent.
With Freshdirect, Seamless, and other at-home services, relative proximity to a supermarket is less important these days. I think the overall quality of the pedestrian realm is more important than whether it's technically possible to navigate one's way by foot to a neighborhood amenity.
I think, too, that the Walkscore methodology might lead to some absurd results if applied globally. Supermarkets are quite rare in Venice (Italy) as people tend to buy from specialized purveyers, right on the street. In contrast, some random suburb in Orange County (CA) will be packed with supermarkets on every major commercial arterial. I could see some absurd result where Garden Grove, CA is "more walkable" than Venice, Italy.
I think you have different ways of looking at these. There are those that don't want the food deserts, then those that want compact walkable areas that are safe, pedestrian, active communities and bike friendly. I fall more in the latter. North End is a dream neighborhood. It's also why a city, say Portland is more appealing.
I think this is true. A lot of urban neighborhoods are highly sought out for reasons beyond being able to walk from Point A to B. Some urban designs lead to a more active pedestrian life than others despite not having a ton of amenities. You see a lot of people even if they are simply sitting on their stoop while talking to neighborbors or enjoying a smoke.
Here is one of my favorite streets to walk down during the summer.
On a warm summer night, every stoop is packed. Even if you have a car, you're still forced to interact with the street since there's no off-street parking. The street is literally at the bottom of your stairs. And people are also forced to interact with the street along commerical corridors because there's no off-street parking there either. It's difficult to create this same sense of "people everywhere" with building setbacks and off-street parking.
Another thing is, I don't like driving, EVER. Unless it is to leave town. We do have 4 bikes between us though.
You should come to a CicLAvia sometime. 100,000 people on bikes, skateboards, other non-motorized vehicles or just on foot enjoying LA's boulevards without a car in site. They're the largest ciclovÃa-style events in the country by far.
I think munchitup is focusing on how much there is to walk to rather urban design or pedestrian volume. The North End has pedestrian friendly design, but lacks a supermarket in walking distance, so for day to day living on foot, there's some issues.
The only person I knew that lived in the North End had a car, by the way (she is a native Bostonian). It's a great neighborhood to live in and walk to fun things like restaurants, boutique markets and bars - but for practical purposes it is the kind of neighborhood you need to get on the T or drive to other neighborhoods.
The people I know that live in Beacon Hill own a car too, in fact. Really in Boston anyone I knew that could afford a car had one (which was about 1/2 of the people in my strange mix of a social circle).
I think this is true. A lot of urban neighborhoods are highly sought out for reasons beyond being able to walk from Point A to B. Some urban designs lead to a more active pedestrian life than others despite not having a ton of amenities. You see a lot of people even if they are simply sitting on their stoop while talking to neighborbors or enjoying a smoke.
Here is one of my favorite streets to walk down during the summer.
On a warm summer night, every stoop is packed. Even if you have a car, you're still forced to interact with the street since there's no off-street parking. The street is literally at the bottom of your stairs. And people are also forced to interact with the street along commerical corridors because there's no off-street parking there either. It's difficult to create this same sense of "people everywhere" with building setbacks and off-street parking.
This type of urbanity in LA is rare. The closest I can think of is parts Venice and the strand along beach cities that have this, but not as dense as anything you'd see in NYC. What you have in LA is walkable nodes near residential. Many residential areas in the basin have nearby amenities that you can walk or bike to without having to get in a car.
With Freshdirect, Seamless, and other at-home services, relative proximity to a supermarket is less important these days. I think the overall quality of the pedestrian realm is more important than whether it's technically possible to navigate one's way by foot to a neighborhood amenity.
I think, too, that the Walkscore methodology might lead to some absurd results if applied globally. Supermarkets are quite rare in Venice (Italy) as people tend to buy from specialized purveyers, right on the street. In contrast, some random suburb in Orange County (CA) will be packed with supermarkets on every major commercial arterial. I could see some absurd result where Garden Grove, CA is "more walkable" than Venice, Italy.
Yeah that is BS - that would never happen. See my North End comment - that area lacks a true supermarket and other practical amenities, yet has an excellent walk score (98).
I think there is a difference between owning a car and using a car though. Lots of people own cars but just don't use them often. The biggest movement is often moving the car to the other side of the street for street cleaning, but others have off street or garaged parking.
This type of urbanity in LA is rare. The closest I can think of is parts Venice and the strand along beach cities that have this, but not as dense as anything you'd see in NYC. What you have in LA is walkable nodes near residential. Many residential areas in the basin have nearby amenities that you can walk or bike to without having to get in a car.
I agree that there is nothing really like that in LA - however you'll notice that area is also purely residential and probably has retail a block or two over. This is the general model for all of the LA basin - residential on side streets, commercial on the main arteries. Of course in NYC the commercial street is most likely mixed-use while in LA that is very much a mixed bag, mostly single-use though.
I think there is a difference between owning a car and using a car though. Lots of people own cars but just don't use them often. The biggest movement is often moving the car to the other side of the street for street cleaning, but others have off street or garaged parking.
Yeah we own a car - haven't used it in a week. That girl in the North End used it every day for commuting.
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.
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.
