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.
People on this site rely way to much on statistics.
LOL how typical when the going gets tough the mouth starts running. Stats killed my mom, stats raped my dog, stats scared my sister for life <-- that's what you come off as when you say things like this.
Why so scared lil guy? Stats not in your favor? They shouldn't be because stats show reality, LA is shown as dense because LA is dense. LA is walkable over a footprint of 500 miles, tell me another city in the US that fares that well over such a large area and no NNJ cant be combined with NYC.
Quote:
personal experience would tell/prove to almost any rationale person that LA is "more spread out" than older cites back east.
Well it's my personal experience that LA feels twice as large as Chicago. I've always been amazed at how maxed out LA feels in comparison to Chicago which feels like it has breathing room for more development, in LA it's tract after tract of density. Midrise density over a large footprint > highrises over a small area. You should take a peek at Queens and Brooklyn the US's largest bedroom communities to see how they achieved their high densities. LOL
I see 3 New Yorkers that don't know when to quit their charades. LOL so what else is new?
FAR, LA has a larger core population and density than Chicago. That's what you wanted right? More dense core and all signals point to LA and yes the LA area is larger than the Paris area or do we have to go over that too? LOL
BajanMets, I see you're still on your tirade to make towns like DC appear more useful in their urbanity than they are. LA is twice the core density of DC and change. The city of LA has 4M in 320 miles and the sprawling community of DC has 5.5M in over 2k miles.
Blaxtor, LOL you're the epitome of an NYC booster. You hold these east coast standards over the rest of the country like anyone cares. LA's achieved an urban layout that's unique compared to any city of the world so what's it to you that it reached the finish line at the same time as Chicago but did it in a different manner?
btw, NYC's core is more impressive than Mexico City's but after you get out of the core NYC feels like a small town compare to MC IMO.
I love the tough guy talk on an Internet forum about cities. I am literally superior to you in every way possible, go back to band camp.
No it doesn't make any sense Bubbles. It's the stupidest thing I've ever read in my life by anyone that thinks they're well off educated. Wtf does "drivers own the intersection" even mean? You're aware that streets in Chicago are just as wide as LA's but Chicago again gets a free pass while LA doesn't?
Well it's my personal experience that LA feels twice as large as Chicago. I've always been amazed at how maxed out LA feels in comparison to Chicago which feels like it has breathing room for more development, in LA it's tract after tract of density. Midrise density over a large footprint > highrises over a small area. You should take a peek at Queens and Brooklyn the US's largest bedroom communities to see how they achieved their high densities. LOL
Your personal opinion could be the sky is green, doesn't mean anything.
Maywood 28k density LA
Cudahy 21k density LA
Huntington Park 20k density LA
W. Hollywood 19k density LA
Bell Gardens 17k LA
Lawndale 16k LA
Hawaiian Gardens 15k LA
Stone Park 15k Chicago
Why are you so ardent about density? Its really not the only component to an urban environment. Miami is dense, does its urban environment compare to Boston's?
By that same token Istanbul has effectively surpassed London on urban environment. Or Mexico City compared to NYC. Good luck finding support for that. Chicago's urban environment is more jack of all trades, pedestrian scale, automobile scale, and transit scale it surpasses LA on at least two of those.
Boston has a significantly denser core region than Miami, so there goes that analogy.
I say LA because it's convenient. LA is the city and OC is the burb. Actually OC is hell on a beach, for the longest time it was the reason why I hated LA so much.
As for the rest of your post, I would defend LA for anything other than its urban environment. You and everyone else that thinks LA is a model example for an urban environment are smoking one.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that. All I am trying to say is that Los Angeles is a very urban city.
Weren't you the one who said people rely too much on stats? He offers his personal opinion, now it means nothing?
LOL cha ching! +1
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.
