U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-22-2015, 12:51 PM
 
9,701 posts, read 7,254,190 times
Reputation: 9846

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Back to this fallacy again huh? It's been proven time and time again that overcrowding has little to do with the very high densities reached in LA's core areas (30-90k ppsm).
That's definitely not true. LA has both higher household sizes, and smaller unit sizes, than most (perhaps all?) major U.S. metros. So household size plays a major role in the surprisingly high density in LA.

That's how the central neighborhoods in LA can achieve the same rough density as the central areas of SF, despite having a semi-suburban, more auto-oriented feel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-22-2015, 12:57 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,990 posts, read 41,989,613 times
Reputation: 14810
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
That's definitely not true. LA has both higher household sizes, and smaller unit sizes, than most (perhaps all?) major U.S. metros. So household size plays a major role in the surprisingly high density in LA.
Higher, but not that much higher. I made this graph of weighted housing density, Los Angeles is no longer quite as high as its density numbers suggests, but it's still roughly tied with Philadelphia and San Francisco.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 01:00 PM
 
9,701 posts, read 7,254,190 times
Reputation: 9846
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Higher, but not that much higher. I made this graph of weighted housing density, Los Angeles is no longer quite as high as its density numbers suggests, but it's still roughly tied with Philadelphia and San Francisco.
Doesn't that graph show a different stat? I'm reading it as weighted density of households not weighted size of households and definitely not anything to do with size of units.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 01:09 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,990 posts, read 41,989,613 times
Reputation: 14810
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
Doesn't that graph show a different stat? I'm reading it as weighted density of households not weighted size of households and definitely not anything to do with size of units.
Yes it's weighted density of households. In the graph, households with single people and households with a married couple and kids would all count equally. So it removes any effect of household size on density, though it doesn't show household size.

As for Los Angeles having a smaller unit size, I'd surprised if housing units in LA are smaller than NYC though maybe not for the metro overall. See figures C and D on page 17 for NYC housing unit size and people per housing unit.

http://furmancenter.org/files/sotc/N...14_HighRes.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,115,862 times
Reputation: 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
And the Bronx, and Queens, and a huge proportion of NJ.

The vast majority of people living in high density in the NYC area do not live in Manhattan. Manhattan is only a small part of the high density core.

Brooklyn, BTW, has the same population as Chicago but in less than 1/3 the land area. Brooklyn is basically three times as dense as Chicago. And the Bronx is even denser than Brooklyn. Most of the Bronx is essentially an extension of Manhattan, at least in terms of built-form.
Yeah LA is suburban compared to NYC. Not sure what this proves, considering every North American city is suburban compared to NYC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,679,999 times
Reputation: 6288
Still using the household size argument? They're a bit higher in LA, but it does not play a MAJOR role in explaining its density.

Los Angeles: 2.83 pph
New York: 2.64
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 03:34 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,486,196 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
Still using the household size argument? They're a bit higher in LA, but it does not play a MAJOR role in explaining its density.

Los Angeles: 2.83 pph
New York: 2.64

11%, almost negligible, in fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 04:49 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,679,999 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
11%, almost negligible, in fact.
Not to mention:

Brooklyn: 2.73
Bronx: 2.85
Queens: 2.86

Has anyone ever docked those boroughs points for slightly above average household sizes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 07:37 PM
 
Location: worldwide
696 posts, read 881,409 times
Reputation: 481
The difference? Los Angeles is comprised of garden style apartments and single family houses vs TRUE urban = buildings
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2015, 08:41 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,679,999 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityKing View Post
The difference? Los Angeles is comprised of garden style apartments and single family houses vs TRUE urban = buildings
That type of housing stock is even more prominent in Miami, yet you think that city is super urban.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cityKing View Post
Hey Everybody looks at how DENSE and URBAN Los Angeles is :



Just like New York! Except we are including all metros as our urban areas too.

?????????
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.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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