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.
Good to hear about SM... The difference in urban form from SM to SJ is exponential, and then from SJ to LA is also exponential. Huge differences between the three, but a few common threads as all are CA cities and have some historical commonalities.
I lived in Northridge and Oxnard before, and I prefer Santa Maria.
Los Angeles was the original "transit-oriented" city--there was no urban Los Angeles before the railroads arrived. When Central Pacific came to the little ranching town of Los Angeles in the 1870s, about 6000 people lived there. There was no port, just a new railroad to a newly established port far to the south. By the end of the 1870s new railroad lines went east and west, and midwestern farmers started flocking in. Los Angeles was always decentralized, by railroads and electric interurbans, which made it a perfect place for the automobile, which relies on space for the roads they require.
Trying to describe Los Angeles or other western cities with eastern ideas of "urbanity" is doomed to failure. Those who find fault in western cities for failing to follow eastern precedent are misunderstanding their urban realities. They are as mistaken as they would be for faulting these cities because the sun sets into the ocean instead of rising from the ocean as it does on the east coast.
I'm of the opinion Cisco Kid drove over the 405, saw Century City and decided that was downtown.
are you a Hollywood movie producer by any chance?
this idea you keep pushing that downtown LA is some sort of urban pedestrian paradise is the stuff Hollywood dreams and fantasies are made of. its quite ridiculous. I wonder if you have even been to LA.
No I'm not. Neither my wife nor I work in the entertainment industry - far from it in fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid
this idea you keep pushing that downtown LA is some sort of urban pedestrian paradise is the stuff Hollywood dreams and fantasies are made of. its quite ridiculous. I wonder if you have even been to LA.
Same to you my friend. Judging by most of the other posts from people on this board, you are the odd one out. I don't think I ever said DTLA is an urban pedestrian paradise, but it is far from the hyperbolic ghost-town your posts make it out to be...
Why does everything have to be black vs. white, urban vs. suburban. A place is either urban or suburban, but can never be in between? Downtown LA is certainly further down on the "urban" scale than "suburban". Hollywood, closer to "suburban" but still far on the "urban" side of the scale. Warner Center? Much closer to the "suburban" side of things but still retains some "urban" touches (like high-rises and multi-family housing). Just because a place isn't to the level of Manhattan does not make it instantly a suburban area.
And finally... I live in LA, what do you mean I've never been to LA?
Los Angeles has a higher population density than Cleveland, Detroit, Minneapolis, Baltimore and Pittsburgh.
It's also the 13th most walkable city in the country, with a score of 65.9.
LA may not be as structurally urban as NYC or Chicago (mostly because it had its population boom after the automobile become a prominent mode of transportation), but it's not nearly as suburban as people make it out to be either.
walkscore is entirely subjective. it is someone's opinion of how walkable an area is. and hence practically meaningless. but even so, 65.9 out of a 100 would be considered a failing grade in any accredited school in the country. so in that sense it appears accurate.
If anything, Hollywood (the industry) pushes the "suburban" image of LA more than the "urban" image.
I've read some interesting articles about how Hollywood (the industry) almost always puts a stigma on those that do not own a car as either being bums or mentally retarded. (See: 40 Year Old Virgin).
It is pretty well-know that if you want to try to make it in Hollywood (the industry), you have to own a car because these same casting directors / executives, etc look down on those that do not own vehicles. Missing the bus for an audition isn't going to get you much sympathy.
Interestingly enough, it is well-documented that the actor that plays Pete Campbell (Vincent Kartheiser) lives car-free and his apartment is somewhere near mine in Hollywood. He takes the Red Line to the main shooting location in downtown LA (once again DTLA stands in for Manhattan) and takes the buses to on-site locations.
Walkscore is actually the opposite of "entirely subjective"--it is based on nearby amenities mapped onto a street grid, nobody's opinion is asked at all.
It's also pretty much meaningless when applied to a city of 400 square miles--it is physically impossible for any city of that size to be "walkable" simply because it's impossible for a person to easily walk across any area that large, no matter how good the sidewalk or how many cafes there are! Unless you have a pair of seven-league boots handy, walkability is always based at the neighborhood level. Los Angeles as an entire city is no less walkable than trying to gauge New York City's walkability taken as an agglomeration of the whole Five Boroughs.
Within that context, Los Angeles has many individual walkable neighborhoods--and some very unwalkable ones. Most of the walkable ones tend to not be high-rise tower areas like Century City, they tend to be neighborhoods of low to mid rise buildings like West Hollywood (admittedly not part of the city of Los Angeles, but completely surrounded by it) or Koreatown, based on street grid, transit access, mixed use and a mid-range of density. The overall WalkScore for a city is, at best, a measure of how many walkable neighborhoods are contained within it. The only true "walkable cities" where their walkability as a whole can be measured are those physically small enough for a person to walk across easily--maybe 4-5 square miles. Cities like West Hollywood would certainly qualify by that metric!
Los Angeles is the prototype for postmodern urbanity--it is inherently centerless. Downtown Los Angeles is just one of many walkable neighborhoods (made more so by transit improvements in the past few years and adaptive reuse ordinances that prioritize housing over parking) within the greater web of Los Angeles.
Los Angeles is the prototype for postmodern urbanity--it is inherently centerless. Downtown Los Angeles is just one of many walkable neighborhoods (made more so by transit improvements in the past few years and adaptive reuse ordinances that prioritize housing over parking) within the greater web of Los Angeles.
within the last ten years, I've been to the Staples Center twice. a friend of mine worked a few minutes away from Staples and had tickets to see the Lakers. I was also at the LA convention center with a friend a couple years ago to attend her US citizenship swearing-in ceremony where it was being held. unless I'm mistaken both places are located in downtown LA. in addition I've visited LA and the LA area at least 10 other times because I grew up in nearby Orange County. so personally I just have a really hard time associating any part of LA with the word walkable.
downtown LA was one of the least walkable places I've ever been to in my life. at the Laker basketball game I'd estimate at least 90% of people there drove to see the game. there are massive parking facilities in the vicinity that can accommodate tens of thousands of cars. same with the LA convention center. so based on my experience I have a hard time with the idea that LA or even downtown LA is even remotely walkable. the only time I see crowds of people walking around there is when they are walking to and from the parking lot. which would be the case shortly before a Laker game starts and the fans are arriving en masse. and at the end of the game when you see large crowds of people exiting the arena.
within the last ten years, I've been to the Staples Center twice. a friend of mine worked a few minutes away from Staples and had tickets to see the Lakers. I was also at the LA convention center with a friend a couple years ago to attend her US citizenship swearing-in ceremony where it was being held. unless I'm mistaken both places are located in downtown LA. in addition I've visited LA and the LA area at least 10 other times because I grew up in nearby Orange County. so personally I just have a really hard time associating any part of LA with the word walkable.
downtown LA was one of the least walkable places I've ever been to in my life.
Hyperbole alert!!!
I don't find the Staples Center area to be all that walkable either. It is in downtown LA but is a pretty weak representation of the rest of the neighborhood. It's like going to Time Square and assuming the rest of Manhattan is Disney-in-the-city.
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.
