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.
"Very urban" is quite the stretch. Very urban is somewhere like Manhattan or The Bronx, not a place like Compton or East LA made up of ranch homes where everyone drives. I truly think that people conflate "non white" or "blighted" with urban.
"Very urban" is quite the stretch. Very urban is somewhere like Manhattan or The Bronx, not a place like Compton or East LA made up of ranch homes where everyone drives. I truly think that people conflate "non white" or "blighted" with urban.
But in this country there only like 10-20 municipalities even remotely like the Bronx or Manhattan. East LA and Compton have the public transit, the corner stores, the events/shows, social dynamic, the culture and the density of a prototypically urban area. The only difference is the architecture.
But in this country there only like 10-20 municipalities even remotely like the Bronx or Manhattan. East LA and Compton have the public transit, the corner stores, the events/shows, social dynamic, the culture and the density of a prototypically urban area. The only difference is the architecture.
I'm not saying it has to be like the Bronx or Manhattan to be urban. But could be like Baltimore, DC, Cincinatti, any of the North Jersey cities, Boston, etc.
Social dynamic and culture? That's completely arbitrary.
Suffolk County, NY isn't urban at all, and it has plenty of corner stores.
I'm not saying it has to be like the Bronx or Manhattan to be urban. But could be like Baltimore, DC, Cincinatti, any of the North Jersey cities, Boston, etc.
Social dynamic and culture? That's completely arbitrary.
Suffolk County, NY isn't urban at all, and it has plenty of corner stores.
Baltimore is significantly less dense than LA, at just over 6kppsm- IMO, the architecture is weighing heavily on folks definition of ‘urban’
I'm not saying it has to be like the Bronx or Manhattan to be urban. But could be like Baltimore, DC, Cincinatti, any of the North Jersey cities, Boston, etc.
Social dynamic and culture? That's completely arbitrary.
Suffolk County, NY isn't urban at all, and it has plenty of corner stores.
Man, you're persistent, even if wrong lol. I spent part of my adolescence between the city of Los Angeles (near USC) and metro DC (briefly Southwest, then Northern Virginia). Once upon a time I knew DC very, very well. It's been over two years since I've been up that way now, but you can take my word for it, DC is NOT more urban than Los Angeles. Not at all, not even close...
I got a chance to experience Boston for the first time last year. Another city that is NOT more urban than Los Angeles...
Just as a small illustration, you can fit the entire city of Philadelphia, or the combo of the cities of Boston + DC, withinthe confines of inner city LA (Central + South), and literally the only thing more urban about those East Coast cities is that they have more established, more robust rail infrastructure. That's literally it...
This website is an LOL Show. LA, DC, Boston, SF, Philly, these cities are all on the same tier/plane of urbanity. The only US city more urban than LA is NY, which incidentally, is more urban than all of these other cities as well. I'll say Chicago may also be, though I have hesitation there, but those are the only two cities in the conversation, NY being the only undisputed one...
LA also isn't really "more" urban than DC/Bos/Philly, etc, by any measurable degree. They are all the same degree of urban, but you have to actually experience Los Angeles without a preface of East Coast bias to understand this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
But in this country there only like 10-20 municipalities even remotely like the Bronx or Manhattan. East LA and Compton have the public transit, the corner stores, the events/shows, social dynamic, the culture and the density of a prototypically urban area. The only difference is the architecture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
Baltimore is significantly less dense than LA, at just over 6kppsm- IMO, the architecture is weighing heavily on folks definition of ‘urban’
Bro that's all that it is. You see it, everybody knows what this is about. This board has always been East Coast centric, as if every urban place in the world has the architecture and build of the US East Coast major cities...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foamposite
I have a lot of reasons why I don't think Compton is urban. "Streetcar suburb" is probably a better descriptor.
Let's get some of those reasons then, this should be hilarious from someone who has never been to Compton and clearly doesn't know Los Angeles...
Man, you're persistent, even if wrong lol. I spent part of my adolescence between the city of Los Angeles (near USC) and metro DC (briefly Southwest, then Northern Virginia). Once upon a time I knew DC very, very well. It's been over two years since I've been up that way now, but you can take my word for it, DC is NOT more urban than Los Angeles. Not at all, not even close...
I got a chance to experience Boston for the first time last year. Another city that is NOT more urban than Los Angeles...
Just as a small illustration, you can fit the entire city of Philadelphia, or the combo of the cities of Boston + DC, withinthe confines of inner city LA (Central + South), and literally the only thing more urban about those East Coast cities is that they have more established, more robust rail infrastructure. That's literally it...
This website is an LOL Show. LA, DC, Boston, SF, Philly, these cities are all on the same tier/plane of urbanity. The only US city more urban than LA is NY, which incidentally, is more urban than all of these other cities as well. I'll say Chicago may also be, though I have hesitation there, but those are the only two cities in the conversation, NY being the only undisputed one...
LA also isn't really "more" urban than DC/Bos/Philly, etc, by any measurable degree. They are all the same degree of urban, but you have to actually experience Los Angeles without a preface of East Coast bias to understand this...
Honestly it's hard for me to put LA in the same category as the East Coast cities in terms of urbanism because they are so different. I tend to put LA in its own category here. It's not because of the density (which is rather high), but because the built form is so different. And it's understandable that urbanism is judged by East Coast standards because the most urban cities are those that developed before the rise of the automobile, so they set the de facto standard. Also LA isn't the model for post-automobile big cities, again because it's so different. The PNW cities (Seattle and Portland) seem to be the models more than any others.
Honestly it's hard for me to put LA in the same category as the East Coast cities in terms of urbanism because they are so different. I tend to put LA in its own category here. It's not because of the density (which is rather high), but because the built form is so different. And it's understandable that urbanism is judged by East Coast standards because the most urban cities are those that developed before the rise of the automobile, so they set the de facto standard. Also LA isn't the model for post-automobile big cities, again because it's so different. The PNW cities (Seattle and Portland) seem to be the models more than any others.
I know you've been to LA, so the only thing I can say is you have to think outside of the box. Again, all of don't have a predilection that East Coast cities set the standard for urbanity. If that's how you and others feel, at least preface your opinion by saying that (as you did)...
The East Coast doesn't set the standard for me for anything, and I love and have spent most of my life on this side. I also have the knowledge that there are urban cities on every continent that are architecturally and geographically vastly different from the East Coast...
It's easy for me to say LA is on the same plane of urbanity as these other places because the key hallmarks of urbanity exist there is overwhelming degree. The major difference is the architecture and physical layout, but if someone can find a way to think beyond that, and actually experience LA as more than a casual visitor, I don't think you come away with any other opinion....it looks different because it is different, but it's no less urban than these other cities...
Honestly it's hard for me to put LA in the same category as the East Coast cities in terms of urbanism because they are so different. I tend to put LA in its own category here. It's not because of the density (which is rather high), but because the built form is so different. And it's understandable that urbanism is judged by East Coast standards because the most urban cities are those that developed before the rise of the automobile, so they set the de facto standard. Also LA isn't the model for post-automobile big cities, again because it's so different. The PNW cities (Seattle and Portland) seem to be the models more than any others.
What does that factor in? People bring this many times as if everybody wasn't in carriages nationwide.
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.
