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.
American cities generally make every other city of equal (population) look small. One thing that is a factor is the fact that Americans are way more likely to live a house than an apartment and the streets are so much wider. Houston is bigger (geographical size) than most cities the size of LA in population, European cities like Paris and London are dense and Asian, African and South American cities are even denser. In Istanbul you could be 20-70 miles from the Bosporus and the sprawl you will see is Apartments not sprawl of houses, same with Ankara, it seem like the "suburbs" are Apartment buildings located on the outskirts of the city, same with Paris also of course their are houses but they seem closer to 50-50 percent of cities and large cities more like 70-30 percent in the metro area live in apartments. It is just as hard to find houses in a few of the burbs as it is to find house on the outskirts of the center city. Also their are rural areas in some countries that are almost as dense as the metro areas for some of our cities.
Most of the people that bash Los Angeles have never even been to the city,Their just on here trying to fit in with the bash L.A crowd.
I don't think people know just how massive L.A is,It can 5 u.s cities it in & still have room left,Manhattan would be smaller than some neighborhoods in Los Angeles, And just because it's a car city doesn't mean the transportation sucks,The buses & trains run damn near 24/7 in certain parts of the city,Wait till another few years when the subway & high speed rail is complete.
Koreatown, Hollywood, Pico Union, Chinatown Little Tokyo, Los Feliz, Franklin Village, etc. All these spots seem to be skipped by folks who always have that train of thought.
Also, the "Suburbs" within city limits don't feel suburban. Always pictured suburbs as a none grid system with cul-de-sacs linked by a main road with an island of big box stores nearby. LA is not like that. YOu got neighborhoods with cornerstores and shops, even with trains going through them, and some apartment buildings with old brick facades and fire escapes dotting various spots.
Yes, there are those types of suburbs you mentioned, there is also dense sprawl that Los Angeles has that people also consider suburban. The only difference is that Los Angeles just doesn't have the room as most suburbs do due to overpopulation so it is more dense but it's still one giant suburb. As far as other neighborhoods are concerned that's great, but guess what you still need to sit in traffic in order to enjoy each one, whereas in NYC or true urban cities you can easily navigate within a nearby radius without a car. Los Angeles is basically suburbia on steroids it is dense enough to be mixed up with urban however, no that's where people get confused, it's just dense suburban America and not true urban America. That's not to say Los Angeles areas doesn't have true urban areas ex: Downtown, Santa Monica, even downtown Long Beach it's just not on the same caliber as other larger cities.
Do you live near Wilshire? Do you walk to your work on Wilshire from home? If so, along your walk is there a wide variety of shops and restaurants? Do you ever hang out on Wilshire for fun or just to go to work?
Dude what are you talking about? Of course there are, for nearly the entire 20 mile length of the street. I am seriously starting to question whether you've actually ever been on Wilshire Blvd. Except for a small stretch in Hancock Park (aka Park Mile) between Wilton and the Miracle Mile area, some patchiness in the under-invested Westlake area, and some emptiness around the VA in West LA, the entire street is retail/office/residential and built like any other major urban street.
On another thread Wilshire was described as an example of "ribbon development".
Yep, and it's a great descriptor. It's like a single, linear version of DTLA that stretches across the basin. If you go a few blocks north or south, it is still urban but not in a "downtown" sort of way.
American cities generally make every other city of equal (population) look small. One thing that is a factor is the fact that Americans are way more likely to live a house than an apartment and the streets are so much wider. Houston is bigger (geographical size) than most cities the size of LA in population, European cities like Paris and London are dense and Asian, African and South American cities are even denser. In Istanbul you could be 20-70 miles from the Bosporus and the sprawl you will see is Apartments not sprawl of houses, same with Ankara, it seem like the "suburbs" are Apartment buildings located on the outskirts of the city, same with Paris also of course their are houses but they seem closer to 50-50 percent of cities and large cities more like 70-30 percent in the metro area live in apartments. It is just as hard to find houses in a few of the burbs as it is to find house on the outskirts of the center city. Also their are rural areas in some countries that are almost as dense as the metro areas for some of our cities.
There is a nearly identical thread in the LA forum, and I said this there:
Most people do not realize it, but the majority of Los Angeles residents live in apartments. At this point, a great deal of the sprawl contained within Los Angeles is multifamily structures. The idea that people in LA can live in a SFH and still be within reach of the city's amenities is a myth at this point. Unless you have about a million dollars to spend on a home, you are going to be looking at neighborhoods like South LA, East LA or even the Inland Empire or far San Gabriel/San Fernando Valleys.
Quote:
Approximately 52 percent of the metro’s households are renters compared to 35 percent nationally.
That is for the entire metro. I believe for the city of Los Angeles it is closer to 70 percent.
Yep, and it's a great descriptor. It's like a single, linear version of DTLA that stretches across the basin. If you go a few blocks north or south, it is still urban but not in a "downtown" sort of way.
Perhaps this part of the reason some people find it hard to think of LA as urban? That they are thinking in terms of a block of land, instead of a linear form?
Perhaps this part of the reason some people find it hard to think of LA as urban? That they are thinking in terms of a block of land, instead of a linear form?
Even if that were spelled correctly it'd make no sense.
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.
