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.
No, not really, a lot of east coast pedestrians aggressive enough they'll try to cut off cars off and make them brake. More normally, what's the point of waiting till the light turns if the roads are clear or empty?
I felt in Seattle people didn't know how to cross a city street.
agreed I am fearful of cars in the city in most places, the NE in general is not one of them. I have far more faith a driver in the NE will slow for pedestrian moreso than they will in most other places.
My worst pedestrain experience was legally crossing a street in Houston years ago, a rude awakening in that the pedestrian was not king
LA is definitely more urban than most people think. Landing in LAX will give you a sense of how dense the LA urbanized area is.
But to compare LA to East Coast cities in density is pretty laughable, as LA from day one was built with the car in mind and was created as an antithesis to the denser East Coast cities, but got too overpopulated for its design and is now a dense sprawl for 85 miles from the Northeastern to Southeastern end of the immediate urban area.
You could live with a car in Los Angeles, but it would be more convieniant to get to certain places with a car in the LA area. The Metro Lines only go to a certain stop like Downtown or Hollywood, and you would have to take the bus if the destination is not in the block or so.
LA's urbanity overall is closer to sunbelt cities like Phoenix, Miami, Dallas, and Houston than anything in the Rust Belt or Northeast. I've been to all of those cities, and the main difference was the mountains in the distance in Los Angeles. But the overall urban landscape of those cities were similar. Even Seattle and Portland have a denser urban core than Los Angeles from Downtown.
Have you been to Seattle or Portland? Both of those cities have tighter central districts than LA as they.are the central points to their.cities. Downtown LA's making some gains , but its still.not the focal point of the.city like the DTs of Seattle and Portland.
Back to my point. LA is in the same league as Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, and Miami in terms of urban layout. The San Fernando Valley.makes.up almost half of.the city limits population, and its overwhelmingly suburban in layout.
Have you been to Seattle or Portland? Both of those cities have tighter central districts than LA as they.are the central points to their.cities. Downtown LA's making some gains , but its still.not the focal point of the.city like the DTs of Seattle and Portland.
Yeah okay that makes sense. They are certainly bigger focal points.
I can say from my visits to LA it was a lot less "suburban' than people said it was.
In fact quite a bit of the city reminded me of the NW Side of Chicago and older Chicago suburbs like Berwyn, Ciciero, Oak Park, Evanston.
The older part of downtown LA (below the "hill") reminded me of Chicago Loop street canyons, or downtown Cincinnati or Pittsburgh. A true dense downtown.
I can say from my visits to LA it was a lot less "suburban' than people said it was.
In fact quite a bit of the city reminded me of the NW Side of Chicago and older Chicago suburbs like Berwyn, Ciciero, Oak Park, Evanston.
The older part of downtown LA (below the "hill") reminded me of Chicago Loop street canyons, or downtown Cincinnati or Pittsburgh. A true dense downtown.
I agree. I found LA to be very urban, it was just that it was spread out and most of the architecture ugly.
LA I found to be a lot like Chicago's northwest side. LA too me was very similar to Berwyn and Cicero from what I saw.
I will say I was disappointed with LA, but I certainly think it's not a terrible city and a city that size with that many people, certainly has more than enough to do in regards to entertainment and culture. In a way I liked LA because it really is very different, and it sparks my curiousity. I just think there are a handful of cities in the U.S. that are more interesting than LA though (ie NYC, Chicago, SF, DC, Boston) in lieu of the fact that it is the country's second largest city. Then again look at Houston and Phoenix. They are larger than most cities in this country, yet there are about a dozen or so cities that offer more than those two cities (especially more than Phoenix).
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.
