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: Its in the thread title
Koreatown 31 63.27%
Columbia Heights 18 36.73%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-22-2015, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,793,924 times
Reputation: 11185

Advertisements

So here's data for the nine densest Census tracts in Koreatown (they are mostly contiguous). I don't feel like listing them out individually so I'll just give the basic, aggregate stats. I might spell it out in more detail when I have more time.

Koreatown, Los Angeles, CA (0.53 square miles)

Transit/walk/bike - 5,329 (37.22%)
Car - 8,036 (56.20%)
Carfree HH - 3,756 (32.33%)

Columbia Heights, Washington, DC (0.40 square miles)

Transit/walk/bike - 7,614 (68.92%)
Car -2,679 (24.25%)
Carfree HH - 3,674 (50.15%)

I'll focus on density later though I'm sure Koreatown is denser than Columbia Heights. I just wanted to get mode share stuff down first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2015, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,793,924 times
Reputation: 11185
Here's the density for the selected tracts.

Koreatown, Los Angeles, CA

Population: 27,776
Land Area: 0.53 square miles
Density: 52,407 ppsm

Columbia Heights, Washington, DC

Population: 18,302
Land Area: 0.40 square miles
Density: 45,785 ppsm

So I guess it comes down to how you balance sheer density versus transit use and built environment. Koreatown has the edge on density though not it's not a huge difference. Columbia Heights has more total people commuting by non-auto shares within a smaller footprint. I would have to give the edge to Columbia Heights when it comes to built form though many would say that's subjective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,561,310 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
Koreatown is certainly dense, but doesn't "feel" all that walkable. At least from my experiences there, and admittedly, I was a driver, not a transit user/walker, but parking was abundant and cheap and some of the commercial roads didn't look ped-friendly (Wilshire for one). Not a lot of people visibly walking around, either, except to get from parking to nearby attraction (there are many).
There is quite a bit of paid parking in the Koreatown area, and while it is relatively cheap it's not free. Here are some of the daily rates for the neighborhood:

Koreatown Parking Finder | BestParking

Parking for residents is extremely difficult, and because many of the buildings are from the early 20th century, there is not much off-street parking. My cousin lived in the neighborhood for a year or two, and while there is plenty of parking at some destinations (like those grocery stores at 3rd/Vermont [technically E. Hollywood]) parking your car when you get home will be an adventure, and the distance from where you park to your apartment may end up being negligibly shorter than the distance it would have taken to just walk there and back.

I'm not sure if this site just doesn't have much info on Columbia Heights parking or if there is really this few options - because the parking that is available is inexpensive in CH too:

Columbia Heights Parking Finder | BestParking

It seems to me that one big difference between Columbia Heights and Koreatown is the number of commercial streets in each neighborhood.

Correct me if I am wrong, but other than 14th Street in Columbia Heights, there does not seem to be another main drag, though 11th Street seems to have some retail as well. There are stores and restaurants mixed into the urban environment but not in a very heavy concentration. Again, I could just be missing something and not seeing another commercial or mixed use street.

Koreatown has Wilshire, 3rd, 6th, 8th, Vermont, Western and Normandie forming a commercial grid through the neighborhood. There is also Olympic but it is not pedestrian friendly in the least. I have to disagree with anonelitist that Wilshire doesn't look pedestrian-friendly - other than being a pretty wide road there isn't much that makes it an uncomfortable pedestrian experience - lots of trees, few curb cuts, wide sidewalks, shade from the high-rises.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 10:03 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,793,924 times
Reputation: 11185
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
It seems to me that one big difference between Columbia Heights and Koreatown is the number of commercial streets in each neighborhood.

Correct me if I am wrong, but other than 14th Street in Columbia Heights, there does not seem to be another main drag, though 11th Street seems to have some retail as well. There are stores and restaurants mixed into the urban environment but not in a very heavy concentration. Again, I could just be missing something and not seeing another commercial or mixed use street.
That's right. But Columbia Heights is a tiny neighborhood. Koreatown is really more similar to Harlem or Bed-Stuy where you have neighborhoods within something that's really more akin to a "district" (Hamilton Heights, Sugar Hill, Weeksville, etc.). If you were to break Harlem down into its individual neighborhoods, each one would only have one commercial thoroughfare.

Though I will say that DC in general doesn't seem to have tons of long streets lined exclusively with commercial (14th, 17th and 18th Street, Mt. Pleasant, Georgia, U Street, H Street, etc). You tend to get more Chicago-like blocks with apartment buildings or rowhouses but little in the way of retail. The plus for DC, I suppose, is that its commercial corridors tend to have housing on top of the businesses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,793,924 times
Reputation: 11185
As you can see here, the neighborhood is not that cozy and intimate (I would use those adjectives to describe Capitol Hill). There tends to be a good amount of pedestrian traffic on side streets during rush hour, which the ACS data suggests would be the case as nearly 70% of commutes are non-auto.

This is a Saturday afternoon in October 2012.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBDwGrFKFtY

Last edited by BajanYankee; 04-22-2015 at 11:02 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 10:32 AM
 
1,353 posts, read 1,135,440 times
Reputation: 790
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
There is quite a bit of paid parking in the Koreatown area, and while it is relatively cheap it's not free. Here are some of the daily rates for the neighborhood:

Koreatown Parking Finder | BestParking

Parking for residents is extremely difficult, and because many of the buildings are from the early 20th century, there is not much off-street parking. My cousin lived in the neighborhood for a year or two, and while there is plenty of parking at some destinations (like those grocery stores at 3rd/Vermont [technically E. Hollywood]) parking your car when you get home will be an adventure, and the distance from where you park to your apartment may end up being negligibly shorter than the distance it would have taken to just walk there and back.

Clearly, though, transit/walk/bike share is much higher (significantly/material higher) in CH than in Koreatown, while Koreatown density is a little higher.

On the parking front, I remember seeing this building under construction a couple years ago, complete now:

https://www.google.com/search?q=the+...w=1366&bih=631

The Vermont, 464 luxury rentals in two towers atop a parking pedestal with 910 parking spots. This is at Wilshire and Vermont a little closer in to downtown but right there in the area we are talking about, above a metro stop.

I get what you're saying that most of the buildings are prewar and don't include parking, and so residents must find on-street or off-street parking, however, from what I could gauge, all the newer stuff as SUPER abundant parking available to rent (like the Vermont, which has 2 spaces per unit) and the streets are fairly wide and there is street parking lining both sides.

I know finding parking there is probably far more difficult than finding parking in St. Louis, however, I bet it's a lot easier than finding parking in LA's neighbor to the north, or other similar cities like Boston, Philadelphia, etc etc All the commercial and institutional uses come with their own parking, so there's no competition between residential and commercial, which is a HUGE difference to DC, SF, Boston, Philly, NYC, etc

In terms of parking rates, that's not the important metric. Sure LA may be "as expensive" as DC, SF, Boston, etc, but it's also the way to get around. Someone going to the museums there in LA will likely drive and park. This is not the case in these other cities where people are probably more likely to take transit in for something like a museum trip. So supply and demand equalize in these areas about the same (also, most big city regulations on parking fees are similar, even up to New York - it's not like average daily public rates in NYC are $100 even if they probably could be in certain areas).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,561,310 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
I know finding parking there is probably far more difficult than finding parking in St. Louis, however, I bet it's a lot easier than finding parking in LA's neighbor to the north, or other similar cities like Boston, Philadelphia, etc etc All the commercial and institutional uses come with their own parking, so there's no competition between residential and commercial, which is a HUGE difference to DC, SF, Boston, Philly, NYC, etc
Well no, not all the commercial uses. Probably not even half.

And yes, LA has egregious parking requirements. That 900 space garage is never going to be full, so wasteful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,793,924 times
Reputation: 11185
One would think there would be more carfree households in Koreatown due to lower household incomes. The median HHIs in the 90005 and 90006 zip codes are $31,893 and $30,961, respectively. As a general principle, car ownership rises as household income increases (and decreases as HHI approaches poverty levels). This trend, or so I believe, begins to flatline at a certain point. For example, NoLita is obviously far wealthier than Harlem but car ownership is lower (the difference between the two on this metric is rather negligible, however). The spatial environment in both is such that it's highly impractical to own a vehicle. Where wealthier people may own a car in Brooklyn, they're effectively barred from doing so in Manhattan (in the sense that car ownership brings MAJOR cost and inconvenience).

Last edited by BajanYankee; 04-22-2015 at 11:28 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,561,310 times
Reputation: 3941
Let's be fair though, it seems as though all of the new development in Colunbia Heights includes parking garages. Perhaps less ridiculous parking ratios though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 11:46 AM
 
1,353 posts, read 1,135,440 times
Reputation: 790
^^^I would like to see LA both implement a lower ratio where possible (since they are making big strides in expanding transit access and this area is already transit rich) AND start concealing parking structures that are built, where possible. LA is still stuck in either the massive podium + tower thing or the wrapped garage thing (and this includes downtown where both styles are constructed). One would think with relatively cheaper land (at least relative to neighbor to north) and still high rents that a developer could pencil out a smaller, automated subterranean garage (or one that doesn't even have to be automated, but at least below grade and concealed).

This is why I have a hard time a) comparing LA and SF (or any other smaller urban city...see [b]), and b) calling LA "urban" in the traditional sense. Its development style mimics sunbelt (or suburban DC), and I'd like to see it make a shift.
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