daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 29th, 2016, 08:31 PM   #3301
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,342
Likes (Received): 3588

Quote:
Originally Posted by Munwon View Post
Never imagined LA was so dense
This is a pretty common misconception, since LA sprawls so far, and is predominantly lowrise, and due to the inclusion of relatively empty lands in density equations (the city is bisected by a huge mountain range with very little population). For example, Central LA, as defined by the LA Times Mapping LA project, has a density of 14,458 per square mile. But if you remove Griffith Park, the land around Dodger Stadium and the Hollywood Hills, you get a figure in the ballpark of ~17,450, which is denser than San Francisco.

Additionally, individual neighborhoods can get very dense -- according to Mapping LA, Koreatown is the densest neighborhood at 44,611 people per square mile, which is denser than all but 3 cities in America.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Towersla liked this post
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 29th, 2016, 09:00 PM   #3303
pesto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,361
Likes (Received): 3055

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
This is a pretty common misconception, since LA sprawls so far, and is predominantly lowrise, and due to the inclusion of relatively empty lands in density equations (the city is bisected by a huge mountain range with very little population). For example, Central LA, as defined by the LA Times Mapping LA project, has a density of 14,458 per square mile. But if you remove Griffith Park, the land around Dodger Stadium and the Hollywood Hills, you get a figure in the ballpark of ~17,450, which is denser than San Francisco.

Additionally, individual neighborhoods can get very dense -- according to Mapping LA, Koreatown is the densest neighborhood at 44,611 people per square mile, which is denser than all but 3 cities in America.

Interesting you mention Ktown. You notice a difference in density and traffic speed as you cross Western and then again at La Brea. To the west, moderate urban density; to the east all the way to DT the streets and sidewalks are narrower, older midrise is common and buildings are inhabited way beyond the levels originally intended. Lots more taco trucks, street vendors, people hanging on the streets, mini-markets, etc. Like in a poorer part of many older US cities. Only it's probably 25 square miles.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
pesto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 03:10 AM   #3304
NativeOrange
Registered User
 
NativeOrange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: The Orange Curtain
Posts: 51
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Interesting you mention Ktown. You notice a difference in density and traffic speed as you cross Western and then again at La Brea. To the west, moderate urban density; to the east all the way to DT the streets and sidewalks are narrower, older midrise is common and buildings are inhabited way beyond the levels originally intended. Lots more taco trucks, street vendors, people hanging on the streets, mini-markets, etc. Like in a poorer part of many older US cities. Only it's probably 25 square miles.
25 sq miles? Nope, more like 2.7 sq mi. that fits 125k people.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
NativeOrange no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 04:18 AM   #3305
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,342
Likes (Received): 3588

So comparing those last shots against the best crown render from AC Martin, I'd say that's about halfway to the full height of the crown (to the red dotted line), yes?

__________________
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 04:50 AM   #3306
Oasis-Bangkok
From Zero to Hero !!
 
Oasis-Bangkok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 15,702
Likes (Received): 50750



City of Angels by B Baloukas, on Flickr



There's the big new neighbor rising nearby by Matthew Nelson, on Flickr
__________________

Last edited by Oasis-Bangkok; June 30th, 2016 at 05:03 AM.
Oasis-Bangkok no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 05:57 AM   #3307
BWYuko
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 63

To give people a better understanding of why LA has always been able to build out (sprawl) and not up (highrise), one needs to realize the immense size of the LA Basin compared to other US metro areas.

Here's an overlay of all 5 boroughs of NYC atop the LA Basin:


This overlay shows the city limits of 7 other major American cities, plus Manhattan, all fitting handily within LA's city limits:


The only reason LA doesn't have more highrise clusters is because the topography itself has never necessitated it.
Given enough time, LA actually has the potential to become the most populated metro area in North America by all measurable criteria.
Cities that have already run out of space (San Francisco, New York City, etc.) are much closer to their respective population ceilings, whereas Los Angeles has countless lots to fill/refurbish before they'll ever need to commit seriously to building up.
__________________

Last edited by BWYuko; June 30th, 2016 at 06:07 AM.
BWYuko no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 06:58 AM   #3308
road2stamfordbridge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 27
Likes (Received): 61

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
So comparing those last shots against the best crown render from AC Martin, I'd say that's about halfway to the full height of the crown (to the red dotted line), yes?

I think you're spot on. I've been trying to figure it out for a while... thanks for this!
__________________
road2stamfordbridge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 10:01 AM   #3309
Mojeda101
IG: UrbanLosAngeles
 
Mojeda101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 802
Likes (Received): 1283

Took some photos from Skyspace at around noon today. Enjoy!

Untitled by mojeda101, on Flickr

Untitled by mojeda101, on Flickr
__________________
Any and all photos of my Los Angeles updates can be found at my Flickr
Any extras can be found on my Instagram
Mojeda101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 05:14 PM   #3310
Amecurty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 278
Likes (Received): 241

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWYuko View Post
To give people a better understanding of why LA has always been able to build out (sprawl) and not up (highrise), one needs to realize the immense size of the LA Basin compared to other US metro areas.

Here's an overlay of all 5 boroughs of NYC atop the LA Basin:

This overlay shows the city limits of 7 other major American cities, plus Manhattan, all fitting handily within LA's city limits:
Wow!! Never thought about that.. and realizing, just now, the difference in size, is honestly mind blowing..
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Towersla, Zaz965 liked this post
Amecurty no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 06:19 PM   #3311
rlw777
Registered User
 
rlw777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 300
Likes (Received): 469

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWYuko View Post
To give people a better understanding of why LA has always been able to build out (sprawl) and not up (highrise), one needs to realize the immense size of the LA Basin compared to other US metro areas.

Here's an overlay of all 5 boroughs of NYC atop the LA Basin:

This overlay shows the city limits of 7 other major American cities, plus Manhattan, all fitting handily within LA's city limits:

The only reason LA doesn't have more highrise clusters is because the topography itself has never necessitated it.
Given enough time, LA actually has the potential to become the most populated metro area in North America by all measurable criteria.
Cities that have already run out of space (San Francisco, New York City, etc.) are much closer to their respective population ceilings, whereas Los Angeles has countless lots to fill/refurbish before they'll ever need to commit seriously to building up.
I don't think so. The topography of Chicago has never necessitated highrises it sits on the great plains where it could have sprawled as far as it wished but it has many more tall buildings than LA. I think it's far more likely that having fewer tall buildings in LA has more to do with earthquakes and engineering costs than the size of the LA basin. And there are no population ceilings for cities because cities can grow geographically by annexing suburbs.
__________________
rlw777 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2016, 07:47 PM   #3312
BWYuko
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 63

I just got back from a trip to Chicago, and being born/raised an Angeleno, it's a mild culture shock of sorts to see all of the old, wonderful brick and mason structures there, none of which are built to earthquake code. So many daring engineering moves: stacked highways, atypical cores... the spires! Save for Wilshire Grand, LA is otherwise full of box-shaped, helipad-capped cages, adobe/deco low-rises, and the like. As we drove through downtown Chicago to Lake Shore, I kept pointing out to my girlfriend everything that would collapse if they encountered a mid-range LA seismic event.

The fact is, we're both correct. Chicago has lots of sprawl of its own. Chicago also (along with many, many other cities) builds tall towers chiefly because it can. And while city centers can annex suburbs, the eventual result of gross annexation is a megalopolis, those of which already exist in America and abroad still retain well defined city centers, boroughs, and suburbs of their own. In the end, how we define these things is a semantic matter.
__________________
BWYuko no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2016, 06:33 AM   #3313
NativeOrange
Registered User
 
NativeOrange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: The Orange Curtain
Posts: 51
Likes (Received): 47

You're both a little incorrect as far as Chicago goes. That or you just aren't looking at the bigger picture.

The main reason for LA's sprawl is the fact that it had a major, long lasting boom in the midst of the automobile era, when being able to live further and further away from job centers was much easier to do. Hence why there was a massive investment in auto-oriented infrastructure such as LA's sprawling freeways, and coupled with white flight to suburban areas this gave way to heavy suburban development in the form of sprawly SFH tracts. High rise urban living was not considered desirable from the middle of the century until about the 80's, except for the uber rich.

Chicago, OTOH, had already established a dense central core earlier than LA and had a high population to necessitate building its core out to its current size. Transit was not an option like it is today, you either walked or took rail and those were the only options. LA has its share of older, densely built areas such as downtown and areas north and west (Ktown, Hollywood, Westlake, etc.), but not as in depth or concentrated as Chicago or other legacy urban cities like Boston, Philly, NYC.

I've always agreed with the sentiment that LA has the potential to become the most populated metro in the US, though. All that land area to densify, whereas NYC's only option would be to annex more land, unless they want all of Manhattan to be one long skyline of 50 story buildings from downtown to midtown. Either way, NYC will probably be top for a very very long time.

Back on topic, to clarify for another poster, you are correct in that the frame for the sail is about halfway up.
__________________
NativeOrange no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2016, 08:46 AM   #3314
PinkFloyd
R.I.P. Chris Cornell
 
PinkFloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Fontana, California
Posts: 881
Likes (Received): 3454



https://www.instagram.com/p/BHTkteQBWN6/
__________________
PinkFloyd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2016, 06:55 AM   #3315
kcimos
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 21
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
The main reason for LA's sprawl is the fact that it had a major, long lasting boom in the midst of the automobile era, when being able to live further and further away from job centers was much easier to do. Hence why there was a massive investment in auto-oriented infrastructure such as LA's sprawling freeways
Nothing in that statement is false; however, the spread out nature of the area's development began long before the automobile took over.

The region was spread out from the start of European settlement, when it was all mostly very large ranches. Trains were sort of a big thing in the area back in like the 1880s through 1920s very roughly. As people poured into the region the train service made it easy for small towns to pop up all over. Which then evolved into what we have today.

In his book, 'Los Angeles: The Architecture of Four Ecologies', Reyner Banham gives a good history of the region. I highly recommend it, and I have no affiliation with it or him.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
kcimos no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2016, 07:12 AM   #3316
Xicano
Registered User
 
Xicano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 195
Likes (Received): 125

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWYuko View Post
To give people a better understanding of why LA has always been able to build out (sprawl) and not up (highrise), one needs to realize the immense size of the LA Basin compared to other US metro areas.

Here's an overlay of all 5 boroughs of NYC atop the LA Basin:


This overlay shows the city limits of 7 other major American cities, plus Manhattan, all fitting handily within LA's city limits:


The only reason LA doesn't have more highrise clusters is because the topography itself has never necessitated it.
Given enough time, LA actually has the potential to become the most populated metro area in North America by all measurable criteria.
Cities that have already run out of space (San Francisco, New York City, etc.) are much closer to their respective population ceilings, whereas Los Angeles has countless lots to fill/refurbish before they'll ever need to commit seriously to building up.
Great post I had a buddy from NYC come and visit me I took him for a sight seeing tour down sunset to santa monica half way through he starting freaking out asking why we were driving so far? lol Typical Manhatten kids
__________________
Xicano no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2016, 07:38 AM   #3317
Oasis-Bangkok
From Zero to Hero !!
 
Oasis-Bangkok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 15,702
Likes (Received): 50750



Downtown View by Danny Valdez, on Flickr



Downtown View by Danny Valdez, on Flickr
__________________
Oasis-Bangkok no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2016, 10:45 PM   #3319
LadyAmanita
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 236

I just got done looking at some of Mojeda101's pics..Poor Paul Hastings tower, WTF did they do to her crown? It just sticks out like a sore thumb :_( :cry
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
LadyAmanita no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 3rd, 2016, 07:00 AM   #3320
PinPeat
Registered User
 
PinPeat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 40,644
Likes (Received): 184478

Friday July 1, 2016

Los Angeles by Edgar Flores, on Flickr
__________________
PinPeat no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
dtla, korean air group, los angeles, south figueroa street, wilshire boulevard, wilshire grand center, wilshire grand tower

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu