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 think article below says a lot about DC and NYC when it comes to urbanity. It would be very interesting to see a map like this for LA in comparison. Density in NE cities tends to be around rail transit while area's without it tend to be lower density. Housing should be focused around rail transit only to allow for smart development without the need for cars.
Did you notice that the study cites mostly the 2000 Census as well as the 2006 ACS? Koreatown does have poor people in crowded conditions still, but they are joined by a lot of other people.
The average size of Non-Hispanic White households in Koreatown is 1.74. The average Hispanic household size is 3.68.
One possible byproduct of gentrification is lower residential population densities. More affluent people tend to live in larger units (which means two units are often converted into one single unit) and they have smaller household sizes.
I think article below says a lot about DC and NYC when it comes to urbanity. It would be very interesting to see a map like this for LA in comparison. Density in NE cities tends to be around rail transit while area's without it tend to be lower density. Housing should be focused around rail transit only to allow for smart development without the need for cars.
if the thershold was raised to maybe 60% or so for NYC, you'd get a map that would closely show the tracts with a subway station nearby. I could do one for LA, might be more work than I'd like at the moment. Los Angeles is so oddly shaped, it would make more sense to do it for the entire county
The average size of Non-Hispanic White households in Koreatown is 1.74. The average Hispanic household size is 3.68.
One possible byproduct of gentrification is lower residential population densities. More affluent people tend to live in larger units (which means two units are often converted into one single unit) and they have smaller household sizes.
Yes, that is a possible byproduct. I remember coming across that in an article about some of Chicago's more desirable north side neighborhoods.
For Koreatown, it might come at some point as average rent is increasing, but it'll probably be some time. A lot of that is because the flight to suburbia starting in the mid 20th century and the 92 riots which hit Koreatown harder than any other neighborhood had resulted in a good number of empty lots which were either left empty, converted to parking, or set with a quick and cheap low-rise construction. Ktown in the mid 90s was truly at its nadir.
What's happened over the last decade and a half, with a notable dip during the recession, has been a lot of construction on those empty or underutilized lots which is continuing today. It's mostly these constructions along with conversion of commercial real estate that is driving the large influx of new people though some displacement is happening especially in some of the larger historic buildings. So yea, the population density can be expected to continue rising in the near future even as the average household size decreases because a lot of the larger families are still sticking around and the smaller households (many singles and couples) are taking many of the new construction and conversions.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 07-29-2016 at 05:10 PM..
And that surfeit of stuff in proximity makes Koreatown a very walkable neighborhood.
Yea, there are poor Central American migrants lacking vehicles in both neighborhoods, but especially Westlake. For Koreatown, there's that contingent and a lot more. There are multiple people crammed into old apartments and there are people paying 3k a month for a one bedroom. There's a large socioeconomic range in Koreatown.
Did you notice that the study cites mostly the 2000 Census as well as the 2006 ACS? Koreatown does have poor people in crowded conditions still, but they are joined by a lot of other people.
I've seen and heard it from plenty of legitimate sources, but since I can't track it down right now, let's use Trip Advisor's index as a proxy - according to Trip Advisor Tokyo has 81K+ restaurants, while NYC has 10K+ restaurants. Even assuming a huge margin of error, Tokyo demolishes NYC in terms of number of restaurants.
Also, that wasn't a minor side street. Shinjuku and much of Tokyo is a network of very commercially-dense narrow streets. To me, that's more urban. For example, I think the first link is more urban than the second: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6941...7i13312!8i6656
And, yes Tokyo does have a some wide arterials, but what you showed was essentially a highway. This is what the typical Tokyo arterial looks like (just to clarify, the typical major arterial, not the typical street): https://www.google.com/maps/place/To...917064!6m1!1e1
And the latest estimates for the special wards are 9.3 million. I said 9.5 - it's called rounding to the nearest .5. Finally, I think you're understating just how impressive a population density of 40K ppsm with 9.3 million people is. As a point of comparison, Barcelona has 1.6 million and is at 41K ppsm. San Francisco - the second densest city in North America - has 850K and a ppsm of 18k.
Also, I just noticed you referred to my initial Shinjuku streetview as a "back alley". More proof you've never been to and have no clue what you're talking about when it comes to Tokyo. The majority of streets in Tokyo are that narrow width, which is why it has a higher structural density than NYC, including in the core. Most of the buildings may be ugly and post-war, but in terms of pedestrian-orientation, density of eating and drinking establishments, and bustling hubs, Tokyo's core makes a stronger case than NYC's.
I think article below says a lot about DC and NYC when it comes to urbanity. It would be very interesting to see a map like this for LA in comparison. Density in NE cities tends to be around rail transit while area's without it tend to be lower density. Housing should be focused around rail transit only to allow for smart development without the need for cars.
So you wouldn't support denser development in DC in the other 80% of the land?
To me this just shows how DC has some really low density areas because the high density areas aren't especially dense. For example if DC added another 300,000 people within the city limits it would essentially be similar to SF. That statistic would likely no longer be true, but would that be so wrong?
Whoever that guy was should be given a gold star for setting the conversation straight.
If you want to find an urban, walkable context in the U.S., one of the best clues is older midrises. That means the neighborhood was high density before autotopia, which almost guarantees the neighborhood is urban and walkable today.
That's not always true, and in the case for Long Beach NY, it isn't. There's no mixed use at all with those all those midrises.
Midrises and highrises dont mean walkable and urban.
I'm sure South Florida has tons of that kind of development in neighborhoods that arent really walkable areas.
When comparing density across metros, you're comparing the more urban parts, not the least urban parts. Otherwise, what's the point? I could argue that Detroit is denser than Hong Kong; the least dense parts of HK are large stretches of uninhabited rainforest, there are no completely empty areas of Detroit over similar geographies.
What a weird thing to say.
Why would anyone compare uninhabitable parts of Hong Kong to another city inthe first place?
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.
