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)
View Poll Results: More urban shopping district?
Beverly Hills (Golden Triangle) 84 78.50%
Atlanta (Buckhead) 23 21.50%
Voters: 107. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:21 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,086 posts, read 12,904,162 times
Reputation: 2908

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuggah View Post
Again I ask how is the golden triangle more auto oriented? BTW those renderings look mediocre at best and duplicated in cities like Houston, Dallas, Tysons Corner, etc. Really if that's what you guys are hoping will propel buckhead in to Beverly Hills status you guys are sorely mistaken lol
Beverly Hills is not even as nice as some other world famous shopping destinations.Its nice but architecturally its also nothing to write home about.

Buckhead IS like a city within itself.Right now is more like a suburban edge city but with this development it give it a core.

Before the development ,it still had a core it was just more of a hodge podge of shops.
Along with the renovations of nearby Charlie Loudermilk Park and other nearby developments being built,trust me you will be changing your tune a year from now.

.
This development is more cohesive.I have seen this development in person and its actually very nice.
Once the brick streets and such are finished it will look beautiful.

Remember pictures don't always show reality as it really is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,086 posts, read 12,904,162 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd_96 View Post
But most of Beverly Hills is also single family homes.
EXACTLY!I amazed that some people are acting like Beverly Hills is so dense and urban.!
I read that in the Buckhead Triangle the density is well over 7500 people per sq mi.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
5,262 posts, read 12,603,925 times
Reputation: 5111
Quote:
Originally Posted by afonega1 View Post
EXACTLY!I amazed that some people are acting like Beverly Hills is so dense and urban.!
No one ever said its the model for urbanity and density but comparing it to Buckhead it wins. And again most people in Beverly Hills live in multi-unit bldgs. Besides the stars homes and Rodeo Dr have any of you actually walked the streets of Beverly Hills?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:45 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,622,764 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
Actually only 36% of homes in BH are detached single family homes. The majority of people (63%) live in multi-unit buildings.

American FactFinder - Results *
And not only that, they are on very small parcels (other than up in the hills, which are the stereotyped BH mansions). Buckhead looks like most of the residential is on twisty, winding roads with enormous plots of land.

Not all SFHs are the same. Small patches of closely spaced SFH can actually be quite urban and lend to a walkable environment (provided retail is nearby, which it is for nearly all of Beverly Hills).

Buckhead: http://goo.gl/maps/9gkQE
Beverly Hills: http://goo.gl/maps/rmQ6l
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:48 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,404 posts, read 24,483,184 times
Reputation: 8775
Quote:
Originally Posted by afonega1 View Post
EXACTLY!I amazed that some people are acting like Beverly Hills is so dense and urban.!
I read that in the Buckhead Triangle the density is well over 7500 people per sq mi.
That appears to be Buckhead’s densest census tract. In comparison Beverly Hills has several that are over 9,000 ppsqm including one that is over 17K and another over 15K ppsqm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,086 posts, read 12,904,162 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwright1 View Post
No one ever said its the model for urbanity and density but comparing it to Buckhead it wins. And again most people in Beverly Hills live in multi-unit bldgs. Besides the stars homes and Rodeo Dr have any of you actually walked the streets of Beverly Hills?
Yes. Althugh its been years.No one has said Buckhead wins anything in this contest but its not like a night and day comparison either..

I posted picture of Buckhead skyline to show that is not what "semi rural" looks like.
its called sub-URBAN.

The Buckhead development will make it more urban.No not NYC but you don't have to be big to be urban.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,622,764 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by afonega1 View Post
EXACTLY!I amazed that some people are acting like Beverly Hills is so dense and urban.!
I read that in the Buckhead Triangle the density is well over 7500 people per sq mi.
Please show us any and all posts that people are acting like BH is super-dense and urban....

And are you really bragging about 7500 ppsm? I think it's not that people think BH is all that urban, just that Buckhead is so not urban. It looks like a clusterf*ck version of Century City.

Besides, aren't we only comparing the shopping districts? I mean, Beverly Hills still wins in that aspect too but the whole SFH thing is moot considering we are talking about the commercial areas and not residential.

Doheny - Santa Monica - Wilshire triangle has 9500 PPSM. The tract next to it (214901) is 25k ppsm. South of that (700802) is 15k ppsm. East of that (214902) is 13k ppsm. 700902 has a ppsm of 17k. 216402 has 29k (are there any tracts in Atlanta with a density of 29K?). I could keep going because there are a handful of other tracts in the 10-20 range and even more in the 9-10k range. In fact I don't think there is a tract in BH under 9k ppsm other than the part of the city north of Santa Monica Blvd (which is the part of the city much of BH's popular lore is developed from) Now do you see why people think the comparison is absurd?

I can't wait for some poster to tell me those numbers are a result of a bunch of Mexicans crammed into a SFH....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,667 posts, read 24,938,620 times
Reputation: 11236
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwright1 View Post
As I'm walking around Bevery Hills right now I see quite a few people standing a the bus stops. About an hour ago there were a lot of folks at bus stops especially Wilshire at La Cienaga and Wilshire and Beverly. Lots of people to work and commute to Beverly Hills like anywhere else.
Well, we know that 3.4% of Beverly Hills residents commute to work using public transit. It's a bit tougher to find out how many people get to work in BH using transit. My guess is that it can't be that high.

To answer the OP, BH is more urban than Buckhead. It's more walkable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,622,764 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Well, we know that 3.4% of Beverly Hills residents commute to work using public transit. It's a bit tougher to find out how many people get to work in BH using transit. My guess is that it can't be that high.

To answer the OP, BH is more urban than Buckhead. It's more walkable.
I haven't spent much time in Beverly Hills but I always assumed most people got there by driving. I bet there is a higher share of people taking transit into Beverly Hills but it probably is not all that high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2014, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
2,436 posts, read 1,990,602 times
Reputation: 2256
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
I haven't spent much time in Beverly Hills but I always assumed most people got there by driving. I bet there is a higher share of people taking transit into Beverly Hills but it probably is not all that high.
You're right, most people do get there by ways of cars. Public transportation to BH is very limited.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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