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.
I didn't say LA = Orlando, I was saying the urban design elements are similar, and they are. BTW the places I posted were 85 and 82 on walkscore for Orlando. My old building in Chicago had a gym, grocery, dry cleaner, coffee shop, and a family doctor's office that I could just take an elevator downstairs and basically never leave if I didn't want to, is that walkable? Other buildings have way more stuff like restaurants, boat docks, tennis courts, concierge, salons, spas, private buses, etc Does that make them walkable?
Orlando has a walk score of 39, even Irvine CA scores higher. It has three neighborhoods (not addresses, neighborhoods) with a score over 80, and only 6,000 people live in them. That sounds accurate.
Face it, the problem isn't Orlando's numbers, it's LA's. Be honest.
Orlando has a walk score of 39, even Irvine CA scores higher. It has three neighborhoods (not addresses, neighborhoods) with a score over 80, and only 6,000 people live in them. That sounds accurate.
Face it, the problem isn't Orlando's numbers, it's LA's. Be honest.
I never said otherwise. But those particular areas are like LA, LA is just 50-100x larger. I picked them out b/c of their urban design elements...To make a point while walkscore can be high, the area is still hostile to pedestrians. I do not condiser walkscore reliable. It's particularly terrible for say Chicago or NYC. I live in a 100 walkscore area, and there are probably 100 better walkable areas in NYC. So obviously walkscore is not working for very urban cities. Their ceiling for getting a high score is too low. I've never lived in a walkscore under 90, yet I can certainly notice considerable differences in the spots over 90. I just looked at my old apartment locations, the farthest away from downtown, least walkable and least urban place actually has the highest score...All it takes to get a near 100 walk score is live next to a retail strip w/ a variety of businesses, nothing else. You could walk across an 8 lane highway with a broken cross walk through a parking lot, but if you are within an 1/8 of a mile, 100 walk score!
I think walkscore, on the whole, gets things about right. The cities that are generally considered the most urban and walkable have the highest scores (Miami is the only one I would quibble with).
But you have to look at the total score and not cherrypick. Some people over here who are not happy with their city's score manipulate the statistics... "we have gazillion people living in walkscores of 90+"... Well what about all the people you have living in walkscores of 70-? Should they be ignored? You gotta take the good with the bad.
Are you even reading what I'm saying? Or just blindly posting. Wow. One picture was telling though, the guy riding the bike on the sidewalk kind of shows how bikeable LA is. You would get a ticket for that in NY, Chicago or SF. The other pic with guy and skateboards highlights all the dollar stores and big lots downtown. Prime retail. Anyway, here is a more clear shot. of that same corner. https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0454...UNbOgCLuQQ!2e0
Gee that makes a lot of sense. Using that logic Detroit > NYC, Hong Kong, Shanghai, London and Paris, because Detroit has a 73-floor hotel and none of these other cities have such a thing.
And that development you're referring to is heavily subsidized, and would never happen without taxpayer dollars. The Westside would never allow such development, but if it were possible, developers would cover LA's Westside in giant towers, with no subsidies attached.
Office rents, residential prices, and hotel room prices are all much, much higher on the Westside. Nothing happens downtown/Eastside without subsidies.
The other pic with guy and skateboards highlights all the dollar stores and big lots downtown. Prime retail.
What are you, some kind of priss? If you want nothing but squeaky clean chain stores, go to a mall. DTLA is an combination of high end, middle, and low end as every city should be. It will be a sad day if DTLA ever gets as gentrified as Manhattan has this past decade. Goddamn you sound like a boring individual.
Yes, I'm comparing it to cities that are sprawled yet urban and dense too but not in the traditional sense like NYC, just heavily developed. Really the city it reminded the most internationally was Mexico City. Santa Monica kinda reminded me of the south of France, Cannes. It was very Mediterranean.
I thought the Wilshire Boulevard + Manhattan comment was crazy, but I think you just topped it.
Santa Monica = Cannes, because of the Mediterranean climate! Yeah, that's it.
Cannes, BTW, is nothing like SM. It's a harbor city on a bay, not a beach city on the ocean. It sits right on the bay, and not on bluffs like SM. It's 2000 years old, just a tad older than SM.
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.
