Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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 08-23-2012, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
32,101 posts, read 34,720,210 times
Reputation: 15093

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
Blah blah blah. Urbanity can take on many forms and Los Angeles happens to have the most unique urban form in the country, possibly the world. It's not the city's fault you can't think outside the box. Once you reach a certain density point, and L.A. has densities that are really surpassed by only one city in this country (there goes the Dallas comparisons), IT CAN LOOK ANY DAMN WAY IT WANTS. The hubris it must take to position Washington DC, a city with half of the density of L.A. over a 5-10 mile radius, as the more "urban, big city" is incalculable.
Look dude, you can call L.A. anything you want. If you want to call it "urban," fine. If you want to call it "pistachio," that's fine, too. But at the end of the day Los Angeles functions more like Dallas or Phoenix than it does NYC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-23-2012, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,078 posts, read 15,858,119 times
Reputation: 4049
Quote:
Originally Posted by -.- View Post
LA's built environment is like Northern Virginia's, endless sprawl of high rises, apartment complexes, strip malls, single family homes, etc....
I truly do not see this comparison at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 04:48 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,417,405 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Look dude, you can call L.A. anything you want. If you want to call it "urban," fine. If you want to call it, "pistachio," that's fine, too. But at the end of the day Los Angeles functions more like Dallas or Phoenix than it does NYC.
So L.A. doesn't function like NYC, big deal. Meaningless argument, really.

You're only showing (once again) your inability to think outside the box.

"It has to approximate NYC look as faithfully as possible, or it's not urban. It's not a city."

Please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
32,101 posts, read 34,720,210 times
Reputation: 15093
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
So L.A. doesn't function like NYC, big deal. Meaningless argument, really.
Well, if "urban" means car culture, lack of transit, and lack of an active pedestrian life over a large area, you can keep it.

You win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 04:55 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,078 posts, read 15,858,119 times
Reputation: 4049
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Look dude, you can call L.A. anything you want. If you want to call it "urban," fine. If you want to call it, "pistachio," that's fine, too. But at the end of the day Los Angeles functions more like Dallas or Phoenix than it does NYC.
Perhaps it does, but could either of those cities come close to pulling near 9k weekday riders per mile on their (hypothetical) subways?

Metro predicts the Purple Line extension will push ridership per mile up to 12k. I really don't think any Sun Belt city could have 25 miles of subway track with 12k ridership per mile. (We all know how well MARTA and Miami's rail do).

Keep in mind this is without the 65 miles (and 170k riders) of LRT in LA.

Which is another problem with assuming LA functions like Dallas... Dallas has 72 track miles of LRT yet gets only 71k daily riders for a per mile rate of 940. Los Angeles has 61.7 and gets around 167k daily riders for a per mile rate of 2700k riders per mile (pretty sure this is not counting the Expo Line either, which has about 16k daily riders and about 8 miles of track).

So while it definitely does not function like NYC, I'm not sure you can say it functions like Dallas or Phoenix either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
32,101 posts, read 34,720,210 times
Reputation: 15093
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
So while it definitely does not function like NYC, I'm not sure you can say it functions like Dallas or Phoenix either.
I said that it "functions more like Phoenix or Dallas than NYC." And that's absolutely true. The city has a car-dominated culture. There's no denying that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:04 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
32,101 posts, read 34,720,210 times
Reputation: 15093
There's a bit of cognitive dissonance here. You can't say "Who cares that we're an auto-centric city. That means nothing! That's not indicative of urbanity!" and then turn around and say, "Look at our transit numbers!" (which are still lackluster).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,417,405 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Well, if "urban" means car culture, lack of transit, and lack of an active pedestrian life over a large area, you can keep it.

You win.
There are many versions of urban. Here's DC's: "Small moderately dense urban footprint surrounded by leafy suburbs, with a subway and a few hoagie shops here and there; this version of "urban" causes dementia; it somehow convinces a few delusional souls that live there that they're in a bigger "city" than a much larger, denser city to the West, the 5th largest city in the industrialized world."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:06 PM
 
Location: London, U.K.
886 posts, read 1,564,207 times
Reputation: 828
Chandler,

Your incessant refusal of wanting LA to be more like NYC is out of spite. Why would you not want a core area where all the energy is? Barcelona, Madrid, Milan, Amsterdam, Prague, you name it, they all got it and they have it in the core. Tell me how your tourists feel when they barely know how to drive and have to rent a car to go where they want?

Please, don't give me that rubbish about your bus system. Buses are an inferior transportation system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:06 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
32,101 posts, read 34,720,210 times
Reputation: 15093
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
There are many versions of urban. Here's DC's: "Small moderately dense urban footprint surrounded by leafy suburbs, with a subway and a few hoagie shops here and there; this version of "urban" causes dementia; it somehow convinces a few delusional souls that they're in a bigger "city" than a much larger, denser city to the West, the 5th largest city in the industrialized world.
Los Angeles is the densest urbanized area in the United States.

Feel better now?
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:


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 > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top