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.
google maps are way more credible than walkscores, what is wrong with google maps? Sure it's not the best at judging foot traffic or if new shops just opened, but the design elements can easily be seen. I hated walking in some of those "heavy" walkscore areas that have a lot of retail in Chicago like Clybourn, Roosevelt or parts of North Ave. They weren't good walking environments at all. To me the walking and/or experience itself is as important if not more so than having whatever store in your area. It's my primary mode of transit. In order of preference it is walk > bike > subway > lightrail > bus.
DT LA is woefully underrated though especially in urban design and architecturally, it's beautiful actually. Still a work in progress though and needs way more gentrification.
Yeah of course there are parts of Orlando that look like LA.
I have to disagree with your statement about the outer parts of Los Angeles being able to be developed into walkable areas - in fact what Los Angeles is known for is disparate walkable nodes all over the basin. Los Angeles' big strength is that it has areas of moderate to high walkability in areas all over the metro. SFHs right off of a walkable strip in no way makes a place less walkable - this is the case not only in Los Angeles but other cities lauded for walkability like Seattle, Portland, Boston, Chicago, etc. In fact I think it makes those neighborhoods quite charming, not the most urban but certainly walkable and convenient.
Either way, this thread topic is not LA's strong suit - those who accuse us of being unreasonable boosters should go back a few pages and see that we almost all agree that LA is further down on the list around 7-10. Central LA is very patchy and has too many holes in the urban fabric - this is changing fairly quickly but there is so much work to be done in inner LA that it will be years before LA could get down in the top 5 (plus would have to bump someone else, which doesn't seem likely).
google maps are way more credible than walkscores, what is wrong with google maps? Sure it's not the best at judging foot traffic or if new shops just opened, but the design elements can easily be seen. I hated walking in some of those "heavy" walkscore areas that have a lot of retail in Chicago like Clybourn, Roosevelt or parts of North Ave. They weren't good walking environments at all. To me the walking and/or experience itself is as important if not more so than having whatever store in your area. It's my primary mode of transit. In order of preference it is walk > bike > subway > lightrail > bus.
The thing I hate about Google Maps streetviews is that you can focus the view directly on an eyesore or bright spot, depending on your motive. Of course people can tool around the view if they have time, but a lot of people just click on the link, take a look and close the window. People don't walk around with blinders on, only able to see a few dozen yards in either direction. So yes a helpful tool but really abused on this site as proof of how walkable an area is or how busy an area is.
Yeah of course there are parts of Orlando that look like LA.
I have to disagree with your statement about the outer parts of Los Angeles being able to be developed into walkable areas - in fact what Los Angeles is known for is disparate walkable nodes all over the basin. Los Angeles' big strength is that it has areas of moderate to high walkability in areas all over the metro. [b]SFHs right off of a walkable strip in no way makes a place less walkable - this is the case not only in Los Angeles but other cities lauded for walkability like Seattle, Portland, Boston, Chicago, etc. In fact I think it makes those neighborhoods quite charming, not the most urban but certainly walkable and convenient.[/B
^ This. LA's single family homes for the most part aren't big McMansions in unwalkable cul-du-sac filled neighborhoods. They are 1930's era craftsman and spanish style bungalows tightly packed on gridded streets with wide sidewalks. Its the most urban suburbia I've ever seen. The homes have a lot of character, and scratch the same itch for me that rowhomes did when I lived in DC.
Echo Park was deemed "Neighborhood of the Year" by the American Planning Association a few years back despite the fact that its mostly single family homes and courtyard bungalows. And its not like the APA is fond of burbs.
The thing I hate about Google Maps streetviews is that you can focus the view directly on an eyesore or bright spot, depending on your motive. Of course people can tool around the view if they have time, but a lot of people just click on the link, take a look and close the window. People don't walk around with blinders on, only able to see a few dozen yards in either direction. So yes a helpful tool but really abused on this site as proof of how walkable an area is or how busy an area is.
But then you have people posting photos saying, "This is a photo I took at the such and such festival last weekend" and nobody really has a problem with that. I prefer streetview because I can at least walk around to see what can't be seen in a photo.
I was going to say the same thing DistrictDirt said. Most of LAs residential areas are small older homes on small lots. Many of the neighborhoods are also a combo of sfh/apts. Less walkable? Not at all.
google maps are way more credible than walkscores, what is wrong with google maps? Sure it's not the best at judging foot traffic or if new shops just opened, but the design elements can easily be seen. I hated walking in some of those "heavy" walkscore areas that have a lot of retail in Chicago like Clybourn, Roosevelt or parts of North Ave. They weren't good walking environments at all. To me the walking and/or experience itself is as important if not more so than having whatever store in your area. It's my primary mode of transit. In order of preference it is walk > bike > subway > lightrail > bus.
Hence why I bumped Chicago down for this particular thread.
My guess is that those streets have roughly the same number of pedestrians on an average day as they do in those streetviews (which is few). Places that don't look like they were designed for pedestrians, well, tend to not have many pedestrians.
I agree about walking being the preferred mode of transport. If I'm visiting a city, I want to be able to walk out of my hotel room and continue walking for miles without setting foot on a bus or subway.
Yeah of course there are parts of Orlando that look like LA.
I have to disagree with your statement about the outer parts of Los Angeles being able to be developed into walkable areas - in fact what Los Angeles is known for is disparate walkable nodes all over the basin. Los Angeles' big strength is that it has areas of moderate to high walkability in areas all over the metro. SFHs right off of a walkable strip in no way makes a place less walkable - this is the case not only in Los Angeles but other cities lauded for walkability like Seattle, Portland, Boston, Chicago, etc. In fact I think it makes those neighborhoods quite charming, not the most urban but certainly walkable and convenient.
Either way, this thread topic is not LA's strong suit - those who accuse us of being unreasonable boosters should go back a few pages and see that we almost all agree that LA is further down on the list around 7-10. Central LA is very patchy and has too many holes in the urban fabric - this is changing fairly quickly but there is so much work to be done in inner LA that it will be years before LA could get down in the top 5 (plus would have to bump someone else, which doesn't seem likely).
There is only one person I have argued with in this thread and that is radiolibre. I put LA at #7 myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup
The thing I hate about Google Maps streetviews is that you can focus the view directly on an eyesore or bright spot, depending on your motive. Of course people can tool around the view if they have time, but a lot of people just click on the link, take a look and close the window. People don't walk around with blinders on, only able to see a few dozen yards in either direction. So yes a helpful tool but really abused on this site as proof of how walkable an area is or how busy an area is.
Well yes, but when I post them, it is usually to walk around a few blocks in the vicinity. That is why it's better than a picture. Did those holes used to be holes? I.E. was it originally an older building and never a parking lot, or was it just nothing, and became a parking lot?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
My guess is that those streets have roughly the same number of pedestrians on an average day as they do in those streetviews (which is few). Places that don't look like they were designed for pedestrians, well, tend to not have many pedestrians.
I agree about walking being the preferred mode of transport. If I'm visiting a city, I want to be able to walk out of my hotel room and continue walking for miles without setting foot on a bus or subway.
None of those areas are heavy pedestrian, correct. W/ exception of maybe North/Clybourn area. Or if it's the a street fair like Maxwell street market (on canal street) on the weekend.
I didn't say LA = Orlando, I was saying the urban design elements are similar, and they are. BTW the places I posted were 85 and 82 on walkscore for Orlando. My old building in Chicago had a gym, grocery, dry cleaner, coffee shop, and a family doctor's office that I could just take an elevator downstairs and basically never leave if I didn't want to, is that walkable? Other buildings have way more stuff like restaurants, boat docks, tennis courts, concierge, salons, spas, private buses, etc Does that make them walkable?
Last edited by grapico; 02-26-2014 at 03:34 PM..
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.
