LA's Walkability? (Pasadena, Highland, Beverly Hills: buy, school, live in)

[RaymondChandlerLives]

Originally Posted by hipcat

Of that list Miami. Miami is the most similar city to Los Angeles in urban form from that list.

It would take hours to walk from Santa Monica to Hollywood

Well yeah, they're 11 miles apart.

Might as well throw San Francisco in the Miami tier because it would take hours to walk from North Beach to the airport.

[GatsbyGatz]

This question depends entirely on where you are located and where you need to go.

LA has a nice subway system and an expansive bus system. I don't quite understand why people claim that LA is not a walkable city. With the exception of Manhattan, commuting in any American city will be just as frustrating and inconvenient as commuting in LA. You want to live in a high rise studio with a grocery store across the street, your favorite bar and cafe within the same block, and your work just a 10 minute bike ride away? Then you're going to pay top dollar for that, no matter where you live. But LA offers that experience along with nearly any other city. I'm sick with how many people abuse the term "walkable" around this forum. LA has one of the highest bus riderships in the nation. Just because LA is so huge that there are many auto-centric neighborhoods doesn't eliminate the fact that, number for number, LA arguably has equal walkable neighborhoods as Chicago/Boston/etc.

Boston is a tiny city and as you move away from its core, neighborhoods can become down right rural looking to where you'll struggle to find a bus; LA is much more urban and has a more organized public transit system. Both Philly and Chicago have mad sprawl as you move further from their core as well. I feel as though our biases are clouding the fact LA is incredibly urban and public transit really isn't any weaker than any of the cities listed above.

Originally Posted by hipcat

Of that list Miami. Miami is the most similar city to Los Angeles in urban form from that list.

It would take hours to walk from Santa Monica to Hollywood

That's a distance of 13.7 miles, genius. That distance would take a while to commute in NYC, about the same amount of time to traverse as LA. Guess that means NYC isn't walkable. Case and point of how posters on this forum brainlessly toss around that term.

[jm1982]

Another thing is that even if you live in a "walkable" area, there are lot's of areas of L.A to explore.

It's not realistic to expect all of L.A to be walkable just like Downtown Manhattan because it's a much bigger area.

Having lived in relatively walkable areas versus my current nonwalkable area , I do prefer walkable.

But even living in those areas I still wanted to try to other areas or had the need to drive to other areas.

Being able to work, live ,socialize, date all in one neighborhood sounds great...but do we really want that?

In areas where there is a central downtown and the rest is all basically residential, there's going to be an appeal to be near the downtown ..but L.A is not like that.

[hipcat]

Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz

That's a distance of 13.7 miles, genius. That distance would take a while to commute in NYC, about the same amount of time to traverse as LA. Guess that means NYC isn't walkable. Case and point of how posters on this forum brainlessl around that term.

Looks like a few people missed out on the joke. The point I was making is that LA's core is much larger than the other cities mentioned on the poll. The distances from point A to point B in LA is longer than in most cities. You can fit all of NYC boroughs inside of LAs core just to make a point.

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by hipcat

Looks like a few people missed out on the joke. The point I was making is that LA's core is much larger than the other cities mentioned on the poll. The distances from point A to point B in LA is longer than in most cities. You can fit all of NYC inside of LAs core just to make a point.

I don't think that this is true - NYC has pretty large boundaries. Do you mean Manhattan?

I will say this - I took the bus from Hollywood to Santa Monica one weekend. It was a pretty brutal ride, probably about an hour or an hour and a half. Nothing terrible but really highlights the need for LA to build faster transit options between the walkable nodes. Can't wait for the regional connector, will really make our LRT lines way more user friendly.

[Spikett]

Originally Posted by munchitup

I don't think that this is true - NYC has pretty large boundaries. Do you mean Manhattan?

I will say this - I took the bus from Hollywood to Santa Monica one weekend. It was a pretty brutal ride, probably about an hour or an hour and a half. Nothing terrible but really highlights the need for LA to build faster transit options between the walkable nodes. Can't wait for the regional connector, will really make our LRT lines way more user friendly.

According to Wiki, NYC, including all the boroughs, is 303 square miles (land only)

New York City - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The City of Los Angeles is 502.7 square miles (468.7 - land plus 34 of water).

Los Angeles County (Greater LA) has 4,083 square miles.

Los Angeles County, California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by Spikett

According to Wiki, NYC, including all the boroughs, is 303 square miles (land only)

New York City - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The City of Los Angeles is 502.7 square miles (468.7 - land plus 34 of water).

Los Angeles County (Greater LA) has 4,083 square miles.

Los Angeles County, California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah but I don't think LA's core is more than 303 square miles.

[jamills21]

how big is DTLA area wise compared with Manhattan?

Edit: What Downtown could you compare DTLA too?

[GatsbyGatz]

Remember that LA's land area includes those uninhabited (or scarcely inhabited) hills.

[The Illusive Man]

What the hell does walkable even really mean? I walk to stores and shops in my area all the time. Is LA not considered walkable because most apartment buildings I pass by don't have some sort of retail at the ground floor? or because not every building "activates the street" or whatever other nerdy term?

Is it really that easy to walk to every area of a city that's considered walkable?