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.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
I think it's likely that Central LA on those quantifiable/measurable metrics are overall on roughly the same tier as Boston and the like as for where LA has sometimes wider streets, it makes up for that in having more expanses of mid and high-rise buildings and/or building to the full expanse of lots in more areas of Central LA.
Remember, Central LA is roughly in the Boston/San Francisco/DC range when it comes to physical area and encompasses at least three very densely built-up areas of downtown LA, Hollywood, and Koreatown which all have substantial amounts of mid-rises and high-rises. This partly accounts for why Central LA likely has a higher population / population density for a SF-sized area compared to those three, though part of that is also from overcrowding in parts. Also, both SF and DC have a lot of wide streets.
Let me start by saying LA is dense overall, and a large urban center. More broadly urban than those three in scale.
However it's an entirely different makeup of how that urbanity is perceived/quantified.
Even on DC's "widest" streets there's a consistent urban street wall stretching for blocks and blocks and blocks without dropping. And you still feel like you're in the middle of an urban center when looking down the side streets.
I had this ready for posting in another thread... I then just decided to
change some words and post it here... when I see LA keeps getting lessened....
Old downtown LA is still there.. sadly not all, but plenty to go up against
some other cities. From a still historic American Urban from to losses and
finally some renewal and preservation coming. Clearly empty lots show losses
did occur and removed. It also show land to add too and is NOT BUILT OUT
IN ITS CORE. Sadly even Skid Row is near. Still future land to redo......
Some street-views of old downtown LA that exist yet. Awesome
architecture that few think of LA for whatsoever. Could be NYC. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Even from a alley and parking lot you see the old glory buildings
many getting rehabbed and re-purposed finally.
So a even LA is basically a Legacy City of will be added as it should.... It does still have its downtown with buildings even old theaters as if lost in time..... much may have been lost. Still much remains. Even the number of old theaters other cities loooooong lost. you see still there in ole downtown LA..... So Hopefully in the coming years. More gets restored and re-purposed to be perhaps the most vibrant part of the core again. Most streetviews show it far from dead and signs it clearly is being reclaimed.
I see not reason some parking lots need to be promoted as PROOF a Old city scene is less urban.... it was the result of decay and every major legacy city has them.... maybe Manhattan least and old DC? still I forgive it cause THESES LOTS WILL PROVE A FUTURE OF INFILL OTHER CITIES MIGHT NOT HAVE TO GROW.
Even on DC's "widest" streets there's a consistent urban street wall stretching for blocks and blocks and blocks without dropping. And you still feel like you're in the middle of an urban center when looking down the side streets.
I would agree, but this seems like an apples to oranges comparison. You are showing a wide street area in "Korea Town/Central LA" compared to wide street in "downtown DC." If you look at wide streets in "downtown LA" to make the comparison even, I'm not sure that they are that different in terms of urbanity:
I would agree, but this seems like an apples to oranges comparison. You are showing a wide street area in "Korea Town/Central LA" compared to wide street in "downtown DC." If you look at wide streets in "downtown LA" to make the comparison even, I'm not sure that they are that different in terms of urbanity:
Even on DC's "widest" streets there's a consistent urban street wall stretching for blocks and blocks and blocks without dropping. And you still feel like you're in the middle of an urban center when looking down the side streets.
First, let me just say for the record that I'm not arguing that LA should be in the top 5 or even top 10 for urbanity. And I'm certainly not arguing that DTLA doesn't have lots of room for improvement. In 10 years, DTLA has built over maybe 2/3 of the large parking lots and maybe 1/4 of the smaller ones. That still leaves lots of parking lots left.
My beef is only in the the way that the urban scores are tallied. I'll explain more in another post.
In the meantime, can I ask why you compared a street in the middle of downtown DC with an LA street that's nearly 2 miles outside of downtown? Why not compare a wide DC street that's 1.3 miles from downtown like below? Fairly similar, no?
There is barely one street level storefront in this image...there is a parking garage...this is the opposite of urban
I literally just picked a random street point in downtown LA. If you want storefronts and activity in downtown LA, you can easily find that. The point is, you have to compare downtown to downtown. And at the core of downtown LA, it can get pretty dense, so you aren't likely to find that many "wide streets."
As the poster above showed. This is typical of what you will see in downtown LA (at its core):
There is barely one street level storefront in this image...there is a parking garage...this is the opposite of urban
To be fair, that's a very odd and out of the way street. That area of DTLA has elevated and lower street levels and that particular street is difficult to get to both walking and driving. It's not a through street and turns and ends on the next block. Hope Street then picks up again from a dead end a couple blocks south.
But who says that's not urban? Midtown Manhattan has LOTS of skyscrapers with no street retail. Where you have to go inside to find all of the stores. That's what this is and we're looking at the "backside". This has parking and the ones in midtown don't, but who decided that cars aren't urban? It seems a little silly to me. I get that cars are characteristic of suburban living and it might make sense to define urban characteristics as those characteristics that don't exist in the suburbs, except we know that cars in actuality exist in every setting.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Easy
First, let me just say for the record that I'm not arguing that LA should be in the top 5 or even top 10 for urbanity. And I'm certainly not arguing that DTLA doesn't have lots of room for improvement. In 10 years, DTLA has built over maybe 2/3 of the large parking lots and maybe 1/4 of the smaller ones. That still leaves lots of parking lots left.
My beef is only in the the way that the urban scores are tallied. I'll explain more in another post.
In the meantime, can I ask why you compared a street in the middle of downtown DC with an LA street that's nearly 2 miles outside of downtown? Why not compare a wide DC street that's 1.3 miles from downtown like below? Fairly similar, no?
I posted two locations, one was in DTLA on S Spring St close to 9th. The other was closer to Koreatown in Central LA, which is what the post I replied to was about. The comparison was made by OyCrumbler about street widths, building heights, and density being similar in LA, to DC or SF. I just pointed out the differences at least to DC.
To be fair, that's a very odd and out of the way street. That area of DTLA has elevated and lower street levels and that particular street is difficult to get to both walking and driving. It's not a through street and turns and ends on the next block. Hope Street then picks up again from a dead end a couple blocks south.
But who says that's not urban? Midtown Manhattan has LOTS of skyscrapers with no street retail. Where you have to go inside to find all of the stores. That's what this is and we're looking at the "backside". This has parking and the ones in midtown don't, but who decided that cars aren't urban? It seems a little silly to me. I get that cars are characteristic of suburban living and it might make sense to define urban characteristics as those characteristics that don't exist in the suburbs, except we know that cars in actuality exist in every setting.
Nah! That LA street scene is typically what you see on the East Coast in business districts that are in the suburbs. That looks similar to Tyson's Corner but more urban. In NYC, the focus is always on the pedestrian and not cars. That's why you don't see these enormous parking garages/podiums all over Manhattan.
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.
