U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-17-2014, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
2,099 posts, read 2,992,834 times
Reputation: 984

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
LA doesn't need more density per se, it needs better transit to get to-and-from these nodes and it also needs to improve the pedestrian experience of the areas between these walkable nodes. East Hollywood, north and south K-Town, south Echo Park / Historic Filipinotown, south Hollywood - these areas are all very dense (by US standards) yet are not very pleasant to walk through.
Except Hi-Fi and Echo Park won't be getting metro stations until the 2030s!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-17-2014, 05:32 PM
 
7,067 posts, read 7,030,305 times
Reputation: 6538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fontucky View Post
I like it the way it is. You want Manhattan, go there.
Amen....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 05:58 PM
 
367 posts, read 552,260 times
Reputation: 404
More density will provide more ridership will which will hopefully net us more Fed $$ for transit improvements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 06:36 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,643,572 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Karl View Post
facts are facts.
The only fact you've demonstrated is your inability to conquer the right-click button.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 09:53 AM
 
Location: NY/LA
3,750 posts, read 3,084,181 times
Reputation: 2894
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
LA doesn't need more density per se, it needs better transit to get to-and-from these nodes and it also needs to improve the pedestrian experience of the areas between these walkable nodes. East Hollywood, north and south K-Town, south Echo Park / Historic Filipinotown, south Hollywood - these areas are all very dense (by US standards) yet are not very pleasant to walk through.
I was just thinking the same thing recently. Even in fairly dense business corridors (like Sepulveda in the South Bay) even walking just two or three blocks isn't that appealing, since you're just walking past parking lots, with very little shade on the sidewalks. I'm not an urban planner or an architect, but I'm sure there has to be some way to improve the pedestrian experience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 12:19 PM
 
Location: West Hollywood
3,190 posts, read 2,615,774 times
Reputation: 5262
One easy and sensible thing the city could do is put some of those bicycle rental stations(like they have in NYC and Portland) near the transit hubs, metro stations, major bus stops, etc. The city is becoming incrementally more bicycle friendly so it makes sense to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 12:25 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,535,786 times
Reputation: 3999
Quote:
Originally Posted by MordinSolus View Post
One easy and sensible thing the city could do is put some of those bicycle rental stations(like they have in NYC and Portland) near the transit hubs, metro stations, major bus stops, etc. The city is becoming incrementally more bicycle friendly so it makes sense to do it.
I believe there is bike share in the works from Metro. There was supposed to be this private company that was going to run one, but predictably the funding mechanism was a pipe-dream.

From what I know, there is going to be stations in Santa Monica, Downtown LA, Pasadena and Long Beach. I think if it is successful it moves to other parts of the city. I have no idea when it would actually begin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 09:18 PM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,801 posts, read 5,635,482 times
Reputation: 3119
The one-percenters who are moving into the new developments in DTLA are just happy to be able to afford to live there to (perhaps) be closer to their jobs if they still work in DTLA.

Population growth has slowed dramatically in recent years so LA is in no danger of becoming Manhattanized given the ever-worsening housing shortage, and especially affordable housing, neither of which has any prospects of being rectified as long as the city and the developers who run it continue to be fixated on building apartments and multi-family housing which families have no interest in inhabiting.

Given the low-income level (under $20K/year according to the MTA's own stats) of the typical public transit riders in LA, improved bus service is really the only option, since any increase in rail service will inevitably result in reductions in bus service given the prohibitively expensive cost of building and maintaining rail lines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2014, 12:08 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles (Native)
25,306 posts, read 16,445,196 times
Reputation: 12186
Where are they building where people don't want to live?

I don't see many empty buildings around and rents seem to be going up too .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2014, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,535,786 times
Reputation: 3999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marv101 View Post
The one-percenters who are moving into the new developments in DTLA are just happy to be able to afford to live there to (perhaps) be closer to their jobs if they still work in DTLA.

Population growth has slowed dramatically in recent years so LA is in no danger of becoming Manhattanized given the ever-worsening housing shortage, and especially affordable housing, neither of which has any prospects of being rectified as long as the city and the developers who run it continue to be fixated on building apartments and multi-family housing which families have no interest in inhabiting.

Given the low-income level (under $20K/year according to the MTA's own stats) of the typical public transit riders in LA, improved bus service is really the only option, since any increase in rail service will inevitably result in reductions in bus service given the prohibitively expensive cost of building and maintaining rail lines.
Okay... so where is all that plentiful land for single family homes to keep sprawling out to? Barstow?

And you are wrong anyways, I live in Pasadena in a multi-family building and the vast majority of tenants are middle-class families. The entire neighborhood's this way, not just our building.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top