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.
A substantial percentage of people in big cities don't have cars, and they're a fertile clientele for buildings without parking. Rents can be quite a bit lower. My area builds many of these.
Often these are micro buildings or designated affordable buildings. Or they're simply small sites where parking would be geometrically or financially unviable. They're more likely to be rentals.
Larger sites usually have at least some parking, since the development cost per space is often more reasonable. But there are exceptions there too.
This is exactly what I said, and the one poster seemed to get offended by it. I completely agree with you. NYC, Philly, and Boston are older cities and are built differently than LA. Thus they will have different characteristics of "urban."
I wasn't offended by what you said. The reason for my statement was that Most cities not named Philly have very wide avenues, like Manhattan for example. It doesn't take away from its urbanity. LA, too, has wide avenues with classic architecture throughout. https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0452...4!8i8192?hl=en
Lower Manhattan, New York (the New York Stock Exchange is on the left, with the large American flag across its portico; Federal Hall, the national capital from 1785 to 1790, is dead ahead)
The difference between these two cities and Philadelphia is that the streets in Philadelphia are as narrow outside the downtown as they are within it, with some exceptions. (Also: the east-west non-thoroughfare cross streets in the rest of Manhattan are also narrow, even though the avenues are wide.)
I wasn't offended by what you said. The reason for my statement was that Most cities not named Philly have very wide avenues, like Manhattan for example. It doesn't take away from its urbanity. LA, too, has wide avenues with classic architecture throughout. https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0452...4!8i8192?hl=en
I wasn’t referring to you. I was referring to Lofrisco. I was just pointing out that because East coast cities are older, they are built differently and certain metrics like “tight/narrow streets” (and other “urban” features like row homes) aren’t applicable to newer cities like LA. That’s why I said it’s an “apples to oranges” comparison but both are still just as urban, just in different ways.
I don't know who here is claiming DTLA isn't urban. It most definitely is by any yardstick one can use.
I didn’t say anyone isn’t claiming DTLA isn’t urban. I’ve been claiming it is very urban in all of my posts. I just pointed out that it may be different than what is considered “urban” in terms of east coast characteristics. But DTLA is definitely urban.
I don’t think anyone is claiming DT LA is not urban but, it like many newer cities is going to inherently feel different on the ground compared to old historic city like Philly, Boston or hell even Baltimore. Objectively DT LA is always going to lack the physically intimacy of CC no matter how many skyscrapers it throws up because CC is simply more densely built.
It’s an apples to oranges comparison if you ask me
DTLA has some different characteristics in terms of street widths from Center City and layout (as well as downtown Boston, downtown Brooklyn, Manhattan below 14th Street, downtown Baltimore, etc.), but it's not that radically different or not so radically different as Center City is from some of its commonly acknowledged contemporaries.
I think there's a pathway that's not completely unreasonable for DTLA to feel pretty "physically intimate" in the sense of the streets being very engaged and it's not skyscrapers per se. I think it's 1) essentially cutting down traffic and parking lanes for more sidewalk space and streetside dining and sitting and 2) filling up the ground floors with something--just about any kind of store or service. Los Angeles has some pretty spectacular year-round weather and so the outdoor space can serve a very active function really easily, but it needs to have the space to do so and the ground floors need to have the attractions to make it pleasant. Oh, and maybe something with homelessness and housing and that sort of stuff.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 12-31-2021 at 08:35 AM..
Didn't DTLA require two parking spaces for most new housing units, at least until recently? The idea that parking is (or was) required is bizarre to begin with. And two per unit?! (This update is much better, and seems to be the basis for new neighborhood plans going forward)
In traditional urban cores, it's common for multifamily to go up with a fraction of that, or none at all. I don't know Philly's rules (being lazy!) but suspect it's like that. My city is too.
Same with offices.
That sounds about right, and the reason why DTLA ended up being able to come up somewhat urban despite that is:
- the historic buildings were more or less exempted and there was still a decent number of historic buildings in existence and these were often quite tall--this exemption wasn't technically always there but doing so meant that there was pretty rapid conversion of the upper floors of these buildings into residences when most of them had formerly been unused or used as storage
- real estate value in DTLA became high enough that even the massive burden of either building deep underground parking garages or into a podium structure was worth it *enough* that these buildings were built densely anyways
I really hope for the latter that there's a reasonably viable conversion plan to turn such spaces into better active use functions.
DTLA has some different characteristics in terms of street widths from Center City and layout, but it's not that radically different and I think there's a pathway that's not completely unreasonable for DTLA to feel pretty "physically intimate" in the sense of the streets being very engaged and it's not skyscrapers per se. I think it's 1) essentially cutting down traffic and parking lanes for more sidewalk space and streetside dining and sitting and 2) filling up the ground floors with something--just about any kind of store or service. Los Angeles has some pretty spectacular year-round weather and so the outdoor space can serve a very active function really easily, but it needs to have the space to do so and the ground floors need to have the attractions to make it pleasant. Oh, and maybe something with homelessness and housing and that sort of stuff.
I’m not saying DTLA can’t or isn’t improving in this area, but there are inherent functional pedestrian benefits when a cities streets aren’t wide and car centric.
But yes I do agree the rapid implementation of all of those things have helped contribute to DTLA feeling a lot less like a glorified thruway but an actual destination you’d want to hang out in.
Philly already has a great urban infrastructural advantage over most western and southern citieshttp://www.septa.org/maps/system/ due to its vast rail network. SEPTA | Clickable Regional Rail & Rail Transit Map
I’m not saying DTLA can’t or isn’t improving in this area, but there are inherent functional pedestrian benefits when a cities streets aren’t wide and car centric.
But yes I do agree the rapid implementation of all of those things have helped contribute to DTLA feeling a lot less like a glorified thruway but an actual destination you’d want to hang out in.
I think there are large parts of DTLA that are actual destinations I'd want to hang out in right now, and there are certainly visitors to the area that seem to make that case as well.
I understand what you're saying about inherent functional pedestrian benefits from narrower, I also think there are also potential trade-offs and benefits from having wider streets provided they are more given over to active local usage like outdoor extensions of stores, micro public gathering spaces, and just overall pleasant to walk which also works particularly well with LA's climate.
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.
