|
12-19-2008, 01:14 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: So Cal
2,982 posts, read 2,255,486 times
Reputation: 581
|
|
|
long beach is both suburban and urban.
some cities, like hawaiian gardens, are fairly urban(or at least as urban as the urban parts of LA and LB).
palos verdes and rolling hills are both suburban and rural/semi-rural
|
|
12-19-2008, 04:35 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: CITY OF ANGELS AND CONSTANT DANGER
4,223 posts, read 1,909,369 times
Reputation: 1323
|
|
this is a good post, but once you get to the wiki defined communities it becomes the most mis leading post ever!!!
athens, florence, willowbrook, lennox. how did you figure those were rural? because they are unicorporated? they in actuality are pretty urban, in land scape and crime and density.
its better not to provide information if it is false or if you are unsure about it.
otherwise yes santa clarita, lancaster, palmdale are ex-urban. and a lot of those other areas like acton and pearlblossom are rural farming towns.
points for trying.
but florence is far from rural. its very urban.
live
from
florence
and
graham
Quote:
Originally Posted by the city
here are list of the largest communities in Los Angeles that are suburbs:
-Glendale (suburban-urban)
-Pomona
-Torrance (suburban-urban)
-Pasadena (suburban-urban)
-El Monte
-Inglewood
-Downey
-West Covina
-Norwalk
-Burbank (suburban-urban)
The ex-urban communities in LA county: Lancaster, Palmdale, Santa Clarita
and then there are the smaller communities that I need help identifying (gotten from wiki):
|
|
|
12-19-2008, 06:02 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Pasadena
502 posts, read 356,395 times
Reputation: 211
|
|
|
I'll wade back into this topic, although it seems as though we have had this conversation before. Your definitions of urban, suburban and rural are outdated and based upon concentric rings of development spreading out from a downtown or urban core of a city. They still teach this stuff in school, my 2nd grade daughter just finished a social studies unit on this topic and this is essentially how it is explained to the kids.
Part of the reason LA does not fit this mode is geography, the concentric rings begin to run into either the ocean or a mountain. Also the areas along the ocean are desirable so you get alot of development pushing up against the coast i.e. Santa Monica.
A more accurate definition for urban, suburban and rural takes into account density, both residential density and job density. Urban areas have both high job and residential density, suburban areas are medium or moderate density and rural is low density. There are only a few urban areas in Southern California, these include downtown Los Angeles, downtown Long Beach, parts of Santa Monica and parts of the westside along Wilshire Boulevard. You could put downtown Glendale and downtown Pasadena into these areas (and maybe some stetches of the Valley like along Ventura Blvd) but they don't have the job density that the other urban areas do. Most everything else in suburban. This includes areas like south LA that some people might put an "urban" label on but this is more of a social definition.
Ex-urban is a relatively new concept that is used to define far flung bedroom communities that don't have many rural characteristics (like agricultural production) but don't have the jobs or people that a suburban area has. Between the two suburban areas of the Santa Clarita Valley and the Antelope Valley (Palmdale and Lancaster) there are some of these areas like Agua Dulce and Acton. There is very little if any rural area in Los Angeles County, maybe in the mountains or out in the undeveloped parts of the desert.
To the OP, do yourself a favor and but a Thomas Bros map and take some chances to explore some of the areas you've been talking about. If you can't get out and actually see the neighborhood at least visit them virtually with a tool like google earth. It's amazing what you can tell about an area just looking at roof tops, roads and land usage.
Last edited by streetscenes; 12-19-2008 at 06:04 PM..
Reason: spelling
|
|
12-19-2008, 11:46 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Luis Obispo county
740 posts, read 796,150 times
Reputation: 54
|
|
List of United States cities by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Those 50 cities are the only cities in the USA I consider urban. An exception I would make to that are unincorporated or very small communites that are practically apart of the urban cities from being being very close-Athens, Florence, Willowbrook, etc...
Santa Monica, Scton Palmdale, Lancaster, Santa Clarita, and any others to be very urban, but not one of the 50 cities in that list I conisder ex-urban.
Los Angeles, Fresno, Sacramento, Long Beach, San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, and San Diego are the only urban cities in California.
Long Beach is a urban suburb of LA. Oakland is a urban suburb of San Francisco.
I guess the problem with the Los Angles is trying to determine rural to suburban with the rest of the communities. There is so much urban sprawl and everything is clustered geographically that the west coast has a different scale of urbanization identification compared to the normal urban-suburban-rural-exurban urbanization in the eastern parts of the nation
Going back to the rural and suburban classification issue.I guess alot of the inner suburbs can be "suburban" or "suburban w/ urban". The suburbs tend to be the bedroom communties and commuter towns. The other outer suburbs tend to be more of the other classification types: "semi-rural (rural-suburban)", "rural farming town", and "rural-urban fringe".
Last edited by the city; 12-19-2008 at 11:56 PM..
|
|
12-19-2008, 11:53 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Luis Obispo county
740 posts, read 796,150 times
Reputation: 54
|
|
|
|
12-20-2008, 12:31 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: So Cal
2,982 posts, read 2,255,486 times
Reputation: 581
|
|
|
again with the trying to call something a suburb of something else.
long beach is not a suburb of los angeles. it was created completely on its own and its growth was from to means not tied with the city of los angeles(such as the port, rail, oil, and as a resort).
|
|
12-20-2008, 01:38 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
516 posts, read 280,739 times
Reputation: 252
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by the city
List of United States cities by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Those 50 cities are the only cities in the USA I consider urban. An exception I would make to that are unincorporated or very small communites that are practically apart of the urban cities from being being very close-Athens, Florence, Willowbrook, etc...
Santa Monica, Scton Palmdale, Lancaster, Santa Clarita, and any others to be very urban, but not one of the 50 cities in that list I conisder ex-urban.
Los Angeles, Fresno, Sacramento, Long Beach, San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, and San Diego are the only urban cities in California.
Long Beach is a urban suburb of LA. Oakland is a urban suburb of San Francisco.
I guess the problem with the Los Angles is trying to determine rural to suburban with the rest of the communities. There is so much urban sprawl and everything is clustered geographically that the west coast has a different scale of urbanization identification compared to the normal urban-suburban-rural-exurban urbanization in the eastern parts of the nation
Going back to the rural and suburban classification issue.I guess alot of the inner suburbs can be "suburban" or "suburban w/ urban". The suburbs tend to be the bedroom communties and commuter towns. The other outer suburbs tend to be more of the other classification types: "semi-rural (rural-suburban)", "rural farming town", and "rural-urban fringe".
|
This classification system is so dumb even you can't keep track of how you are classifying cities. Is Oakland an urban city or suburb of SF?
Sacramento is less dense the Long Beach, but Sacramento is urban and Long Beach is a suburb of LA.
This classification system that you are imposing really doesn't clarify matters it just obfuscates them.
|
|
12-20-2008, 03:05 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Southern California
2,149 posts, read 1,090,510 times
Reputation: 1009
|
|
I think what might be of substantial assistance is to resort to the 'official' definitions. Example from the US Census Bureau at:
Census 2000 Urban and Rural Classification
Quote:
Urban and Rural Classification
For Census 2000, the Census Bureau classifies as "urban" all territory, population, and housing units located within an urbanized area (UA) or an urban cluster (UC). It delineates UA and UC boundaries to encompass densely settled territory, which consists of:
- core census block groups or blocks that have a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile and
- surrounding census blocks that have an overall density of at least 500 people per square mile
In addition, under certain conditions, less densely settled territory may be part of each UA or UC.
The Census Bureau's classification of "rural" consists of all territory, population, and housing units located outside of UAs and UCs. The rural component contains both place and nonplace territory. Geographic entities, such as census tracts, counties, metropolitan areas, and the territory outside metropolitan areas, often are "split" between urban and rural territory, and the population and housing units they contain often are partly classified as urban and partly classified as rural.
|
|
|
12-20-2008, 08:00 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Pasadena
502 posts, read 356,395 times
Reputation: 211
|
|
Like I said earlier. Get a map, drive around, fly over with google earth, look up some census data. You are off on quite a few of these. Using your definitions....
Quote:
Originally Posted by the city
|
Last edited by streetscenes; 12-20-2008 at 08:03 AM..
Reason: spelling
|
|
12-20-2008, 09:16 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Luis Obispo county
740 posts, read 796,150 times
Reputation: 54
|
|
|
YOU ARE NOT GETTING MY POINT ON OAKLAND AND LONG BEACH. I think originally they were suburbs, and a city can still be a suburb of some place and be urban. Being a suburb of a city, and a city being suburban are two different things. So you are saying Long Beach and Oakland were never suburbs? So you say being a suburb of a city instantly makes it suburban? my town is a suburb of san luis obispo, and even though we have suburban traits, the town is very rural. long beach and oakland are urban, but they were suburbs originally i think. oakland used to be a suburb of san francisco and long beach used to be a suburb of los angeles. i am not for sure though. can some one clarity this?
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 700,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads. 
Linear Mode
