Thanks for the maps, those are awesome.  Does any of that change with the OC?  I assume some of those properties are chopped up or no longer city owned.

 

I don't mean to say that new development can't work here or even disagree with your assertion that marketing to non-Clevelanders is likely the best strategy because they don't know the history of the neighborhood.  I think I mainly just disagree with the idea that the dangers of the area are perception only ("burned into our memories").  (Maybe you weren't even saying that.)  If new housing can get people to move in and that changes, then that'd be great.

Thanks. The blue colors I assigned to the map for the state-owned properties are mainly due to them being purchased by ODOT for the OC. Surprisingly few have been added to ODOT's inventory since I made those maps late last year.

https://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/2018/05/cleveland_is_nations_27th_most.html   It would have been awesome to experience the density of the 1940's and 50's in Cleveland.

^LA has a density of 8,534?  That's pretty interesting. Feels much less dense than CLE.  A useful column in that table would have been densities in 2010 or of a few years ago to show recent trends.

32 minutes ago, Pugu said:

^LA has a density of 8,534?  That's pretty interesting. Feels much less dense than CLE.  A useful column in that table would have been densities in 2010 or of a few years ago to show recent trends.

 

You think LA feels less dense than Cleveland!? LA’s density numbers would be substantially higher if it didn’t have a mountain range running through the middle of it. Nowhere outside of NYC, Chicago, SF (mayyybe Philly) have density like LA does in neighborhoods like Koreatown. Perhaps you haven’t spent much time in LA. 

On 5/27/2019 at 9:43 PM, jam40jeff said:

That one small area, which is mostly rail lines, is shown to have low crime.  But it is completely surrounded by high crime areas, including just west of where the E. 79th station is.

 

I'm not saying redevelopment wouldn't help or couldn't be done, but that area certainly still has a lot of crime.

 

It would be grossly counterproductive to try to lure foreign nationals to an area with even moderately high crime.  We encountered this at CWRU during the early 80s.   Foreign students were unofficially steered southside, which was perceived as safer and probably was.

 

Kinsman didn't get its reputation for no reason.   But a few high profile crimes involving un-streetwise foreign nationals, and it won't be the street with a bad rep, it will be the city.

On 5/28/2019 at 9:21 AM, KJP said:

 

And here's the area north of the East 105th-Quincy RTA station where Knez is buying up land to build houses and the Fairfax CDC is timidly planning a four-story apartment just north of the station. A major lab/research complex is planned on the east side of East 105th by Hemingway Development...

 

East 105th-Quincy TOD-1 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

If something like this can work anywhere in town, it's 105th near the clinic.  But the political will to ensure safety is an essential ingredient.

26 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

It would be grossly counterproductive to try to lure foreign nationals to an area with even moderately high crime.  We encountered this at CWRU during the early 80s.   Foreign students were unofficially steered southside, which was perceived as safer and probably was.

 

Kinsman didn't get its reputation for no reason.   But a few high profile crimes involving un-streetwise foreign nationals, and it won't be the street with a bad rep, it will be the city.

 

Lure? So much fear. So sad. Gee, and now the areas around the north side of CWRU has been growing for years. How did that happen? Things change. Neighborhoods constantly change. Our perceptions change. So, how would you repopulate this area and change a neighborhood's stars? It must be repopulated and it will be. What would you do, aside from throwing up your hands and saying the neighborhood is f*cked and always will be.

52 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Lure? So much fear. So sad. Gee, and now the areas around the north side of CWRU has been growing for years. How did that happen? Things change. Neighborhoods constantly change. Our perceptions change. So, how would you repopulate this area and change a neighborhood's stars? It must be repopulated and it will be. What would you do, aside from throwing up your hands and saying the neighborhood is f*cked and always will be.

 

The best chances to develop successful neighborhoods are adjacent to ones that already exist.    Block by block if need be.   105th and Quincy has the advantage of having the Clinic next door, as northside did the campus.    Kinsman does not, yet.

 

Not every neighborhood is salvageable, at least short term.   There are no "musts" when you are dealing with people who have options.

 

When did "lure" get negative connotations?

When did "lure" get negative connotations? OK, so you can't think of any instances where "lure" has a negative connotation?

 

Of course every neighborhood is salvageable. The short term only matters to quitters and scapegoats.

On 5/30/2019 at 1:10 PM, E Rocc said:

 

It would be grossly counterproductive to try to lure foreign nationals to an area with even moderately high crime.  We encountered this at CWRU during the early 80s.   Foreign students were unofficially steered southside, which was perceived as safer and probably was.

 

Kinsman didn't get its reputation for no reason.   But a few high profile crimes involving un-streetwise foreign nationals, and it won't be the street with a bad rep, it will be the city.

How exactly would you know what foreign nationals think about Cleveland neighborhoods?  This is a perfect example of bias.

 

In addition, how would you know what living conditions said foreigners come from or have grownup/lived in?  They could have been raised in a neighborhood worse than Fairfax.  They may see the area is nice when compared to their current living conditions.

Edited June 1, 20196 yr by MyTwoSense

Here's a fun anecdote I know @KJP will appreciate...

 

We had a get together at my house on Saturday. All in attendance were age 25- 31 and live in our neighborhood. In total, 18 people came by, they were from:

 

- Greater Cleveland --> 6

- Buffalo / WNY --> 3

- Greater Detroit --> 2

- Greater Chicago --> 2

- Memphis --> 1

-  Hartford --> 1

- Orange County --> 1

- Cincinnati --> 1

- Pittsburgh --> 1

Did you take a poll @YABO713??

On 6/1/2019 at 1:37 PM, MyTwoSense said:

How exactly would you know what foreign nationals think about Cleveland neighborhoods?  This is a perfect example of bias.

 

In addition, how would you know what living conditions said foreigners come from or have grownup/lived in?  They could have been raised in a neighborhood worse than Fairfax.  They may see the area is nice when compared to their current living conditions.

 

Five years at Case might give me some idea.   It sounds like we're talking about college graduates here, at the very least.   Graduates of American colleges, primarily.   Thoset  particular foreign nationals didn't come from the poor parts of their nations, unless things have changed radically in thirty years.  I don't know of any evidence suggesting they have.  There was a considerable sense, back then, that the southside dorms were built how and where they were for a reason.   When bad things happened, they tended to happen northside.   I do know that foreign students were encouraged to live southside.

My point was that they don't really distinguish between neighborhoods unless and until they have lived here a few years.

 

1 hour ago, YABO713 said:

Here's a fun anecdote I know @KJP will appreciate...

 

We had a get together at my house on Saturday. All in attendance were age 25- 31 and live in our neighborhood. In total, 18 people came by, they were from:

 

- Greater Cleveland --> 6

- Buffalo / WNY --> 3

- Greater Detroit --> 2

- Greater Chicago --> 2

- Memphis --> 1

-  Hartford --> 1

- Orange County --> 1

- Cincinnati --> 1

- Pittsburgh --> 1

 

That's great data, thanks. What neighborhood do you live in?

 

49 minutes ago, Pugu said:

 

That's great data, thanks. What neighborhood do you live in?

 

We’re in Ohio City’s most western frontier! 

Ohio City’s Western Reserve?

On 6/3/2019 at 11:19 AM, E Rocc said:

 

Five years at Case might give me some idea.   It sounds like we're talking about college graduates here, at the very least.   Graduates of American colleges, primarily.   Thoset  particular foreign nationals didn't come from the poor parts of their nations, unless things have changed radically in thirty years.  I don't know of any evidence suggesting they have.  There was a considerable sense, back then, that the southside dorms were built how and where they were for a reason.   When bad things happened, they tended to happen northside.   I do know that foreign students were encouraged to live southside.

My point was that they don't really distinguish between neighborhoods unless and until they have lived here a few years.

 

 

That not a point.  You are using implicit bias to frame a narrative that is not based on fact.  

35 minutes ago, Terdolph said:

That is why I would like to see a factory in this space. Doesn't matter if it is efficient.  Give it to them for free.

 

Thanks for coming.

 

 

 

Edited June 4, 20196 yr by KJP

To continue the conversation about developing the urban prairies near rail stations.....

 

American cities that are growing are growing mostly because of immigration. Greater Cleveland's population is spread too thinly to make transit useful to reaching suburban jobs. But the suburbs aren't going away. Nor are they going to be as immigrant friendly, because they are often unwalkable and their housing and transportation costs are higher because they are more car-dependent. Cleveland has urban doughnut holes we have to fill. Many of those doughnut holes are next to high-capacity transit lines, namely the rail lines, where land is polluted and hundreds of small properties (many with difficult liens) have to be amassed. Developing these areas will make Cleveland more of a destination for immigrants.

 

But we will have to tell our story. If I were mayor of Cleveland, I'd put "Come to Cleveland" kiosks outside of the customs screening areas at a half-dozen major airports, offer them bus/train tickets to Cleveland, and directions to immigrant/refugee housing. There is a precedence for this. A century ago, many of our large industrial employers put representatives on the docks in New York and other coastal cities to hire workers on the spot and put them on trains to Pittsburgh, Youngstown, Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit, Gary, etc. and then into company housing. 

25 minutes ago, KJP said:

To continue the conversation about developing the urban prairies near rail stations.....

 

American cities that are growing are growing mostly because of immigration. Greater Cleveland's population is spread too thinly to make transit useful to reaching suburban jobs. But the suburbs aren't going away. Nor are they going to be as immigrant friendly, because they are often unwalkable and their housing and transportation costs are higher because they are more car-dependent. Cleveland has urban doughnut holes we have to fill. Many of those doughnut holes are next to high-capacity transit lines, namely the rail lines, where land is polluted and hundreds of small properties (many with difficult liens) have to be amassed. Developing these areas will make Cleveland more of a destination for immigrants.

 

But we will have to tell our story. If I were mayor of Cleveland, I'd put "Come to Cleveland" kiosks outside of the customs screening areas at a half-dozen major airports, offer them bus/train tickets to Cleveland, and directions to immigrant/refugee housing. There is a precedence for this. A century ago, many of our large industrial employers put representatives on the docks in New York and other coastal cities to hire workers on the spot and put them on trains to Pittsburgh, Youngstown, Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit, Gary, etc. and then into company housing. 

Toronto is the quintessential modern city that went all in on welcoming immigrants. Now they're the fastest growing city in North America, and the most diverse in the world. 

^ I think Toronto's immigration hub status is more of a result of national policy than anything the city actually did. 

We've had over half a century of decline citywide and citywide we are still in decline mode--or critical at best. There is absolutely no case for eliminating any part of a program that is showing to be working.

1 hour ago, edale said:

^ I think Toronto's immigration hub status is more of a result of national policy than anything the city actually did. 

 

I don't think there's any one factor that can explain Toronto's growth, but I've said this before and I'll say it again: you cannot compare Toronto to any other American city of similar size or geographic location (i.e. Great Lakes cities). Toronto is like Canada's version of New York and L.A. combined in terms of importance and prestige. It's the financial and cultural capital of the country. Of course it's going to attract lots of people from diverse backgrounds, especially now that the world's economy is more "global" than ever. It's useless to try and apply the policies that have shaped Toronto's booming growth in recent decades to Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit or even Chicago, much less to have the same kind of grand expectations as a result. 

One major exogenous factor that caused Toronto's growth spurt was the threat of Quebec separatism - it caused the migration of many corporate HQs from Montreal to Toronto.

On 5/29/2019 at 9:15 PM, edale said:

 

You think LA feels less dense than Cleveland!? LA’s density numbers would be substantially higher if it didn’t have a mountain range running through the middle of it. Nowhere outside of NYC, Chicago, SF (mayyybe Philly) have density like LA does in neighborhoods like Koreatown. Perhaps you haven’t spent much time in LA. 

Not a maybe on Philly, it’s as dense as Chicago and way more dense than Los Angeles. Of course any city can have very dense neighborhoods, but the issue is cities and not neighborhoods.

Edited June 5, 20196 yr by Oxford19

On 6/5/2019 at 1:44 PM, edale said:

^ I think Toronto's immigration hub status is more of a result of national policy than anything the city actually did. 

Partially agree but it is also Canada's NYC as well. I love Toronto and would move there if it was in this country and if I could afford it. Not sure what cost of living is there.

 

I have a question. It's a fact most of the Midwest is suffering with the exception of Indianapolis, Columbus and Minneapolis. Minneapolis is colder than Cleveland and in my opinion more liberal than Cleveland. Columbus and Indianapolis are slightly warmer and moderate politically. What are these three cities doing different than the rest. Yes I know St. louis, Detroit, Pittsburgh Cleveland and Cincinnati are rustier but why are they having such a hard time adapting to change and been declining for decades or just stable in population? It's not like only factories are allowed to come to town. I can't figure it out.

Edited June 15, 20195 yr by Mildtraumatic

On 6/5/2019 at 4:13 PM, Oxford19 said:

Not a maybe on Philly, it’s as dense as Chicago and way more dense than Los Angeles. Of course any city can have very dense neighborhoods, but the issue is cities and not neighborhoods.

 

LA has way more density than people tend to realize. Most of Central LA looks a lot like this:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0666409,-118.2992479,3a,75y,168.87h,83.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snqJmK5WLWEHSw0x6mdRLwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0933388,-118.3644474,3a,75y,194.78h,72.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s19HXVhsL_h2BsYvZR_ATTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0627084,-118.4327411,3a,75y,208.45h,110.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HOnkJYJkEMlip-sVQ3y5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0485981,-118.4331009,3a,75y,54.72h,93.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8FRUE4m6wKVFn6PAIxDvZA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Philly and Chicago might be significantly visually denser, but a lot of their housing stock is still a lot of single-family homes (which, of course, LA also has in spades). Still, Southern California has a lot of multifamily apartments, especially in the form of dingbats.

^ not to mention, about the only thing being built around los angeles these days are high density apt buildings. i'll some of it from april when i am able to get some threads pulled together.

^Yeah, it's getting more and more common to see headlines like "50-unit apartment replaces two single-family homes". LA is the yuppiebox capital of America right now and is slowly-but-surely creating some very dense nodes throughout the city. It was all streetcar suburbs in the first place, anyway, so it's TOD without the T (and even that's getting better). 

On 6/15/2019 at 1:04 PM, BigDipper 80 said:

 

LA has way more density than people tend to realize. Most of Central LA looks a lot like this:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0666409,-118.2992479,3a,75y,168.87h,83.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snqJmK5WLWEHSw0x6mdRLwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0933388,-118.3644474,3a,75y,194.78h,72.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s19HXVhsL_h2BsYvZR_ATTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0627084,-118.4327411,3a,75y,208.45h,110.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HOnkJYJkEMlip-sVQ3y5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0485981,-118.4331009,3a,75y,54.72h,93.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8FRUE4m6wKVFn6PAIxDvZA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Philly and Chicago might be significantly visually denser, but a lot of their housing stock is still a lot of single-family homes (which, of course, LA also has in spades). Still, Southern California has a lot of multifamily apartments, especially in the form of dingbats.

 

A lot of those streetview places aren't actually all that dense because so much land is given up to right-of-ways. South Philly is one of the densest places in the entire country and has no high-rise buildings. Here is what central Philly looks like:

https://goo.gl/maps/MZyhKkhv7DMJxhwdA

 

https://goo.gl/maps/Nd6uN49Hr7rEuQZc8

 

https://goo.gl/maps/jtVXiRpy79q3hyhw7

 

https://goo.gl/maps/421yhyR9k1v5M2Ky5

 

https://goo.gl/maps/2FhaRQQ7sLXfkqi37

 

EDIT: I'm not saying Central LA isn't dense, just that places like South Philly are denser because streets take up so much less space. 

Edited June 17, 20195 yr by DEPACincy

^Right. I'm just making the point that LA is much denser than people think it is. But even then, there's not that huge of a difference in their densities (or at least not as big as you'd expect given LA's common perception):

 

 

Edited June 17, 20195 yr by BigDipper 80

57 minutes ago, BigDipper 80 said:

^Right. I'm just making the point that LA is much denser than people think it is. But even then, there's not that huge of a difference in their densities (or at least not as big as you'd expect given LA's common perception):

 

 

 

For sure. That's why I made the edit. I didn't want people to think I was trying to disprove you haha. 

 

That graphic is cool. Where did it come from? I will say it does miss out on some pretty dense areas to the south and east in Delco and Camden County, while it includes relatively low density areas in Northeast Philly and Buck County. But the point is still taken. 

Shall we get back to Cleveland Population Trends?

I found it here: https://www.phillyvoice.com/maps-how-does-phillys-population-density-compare-other-cities/

 

I don't think it's just comparing sizes, saying that if Philly was the same density as LA, this is the area that it would fill, ignoring whatever is currently built on that chunk of land.

 

Anyway, we're a long way away from talking about Cleveland's population trends at this point!

On 6/15/2019 at 12:28 PM, Mildtraumatic said:

Partially agree but it is also Canada's NYC as well. I love Toronto and would move there if it was in this country and if I could afford it. Not sure what cost of living is there.

 

I have a question. It's a fact most of the Midwest is suffering with the exception of Indianapolis, Columbus and Minneapolis. Minneapolis is colder than Cleveland and in my opinion more liberal than Cleveland. Columbus and Indianapolis are slightly warmer and moderate politically. What are these three cities doing different than the rest. Yes I know St. louis, Detroit, Pittsburgh Cleveland and Cincinnati are rustier but why are they having such a hard time adapting to change and been declining for decades or just stable in population? It's not like only factories are allowed to come to town. I can't figure it out.

 

Not to disagree (typical way to start an internet post), but I guess my question would be are you talking about the city proper or the metro regions?  And how are you measuring "suffering"?  From a population growth standpoint, the Cincinnati metro has been continuously gaining population for the past decades, and now the core city is as well.  I haven't looked closely at the metro population numbers, but I do recall that certainly Detroit, Pittsburgh and I think Cleveland (I am sure someone in the thread will correct me if I am wrong!) were not only losing population in the core cities, but in the metro area as well.  IMO the biggest common thread between those three places is the high level of industrialization that used to exist.  I know it now seems long gone, but when such a large number of the metro area's jobs are in traditional manufacturing and that goes away, it is going to take decades to pivot, and it will not be done without hiccups.  It may just be the case that Cleveland is still in that stage of fully making the transition.   I think that Cincinnati traditionally had less manufacturing than those places, making the transition a little easier for it.  

 

Minneapolis, Indy, and C-Bus have a lot in common.  State capitals (or just next door in Minny); large research institutions; large health care institutions; not places that were steel or auto hubs in the past.  I think it also helps that they are "newer" cities, with growth that wasn't realized in a previous environment.  All of these are positives for them, but it also may just mean that they are earlier in the life cycle of mid-size metro regions.  They may face some of the same issues that Cincy or Cleveland faced 50 to 100 years ago.  I think that weather and political climate actually have very little to do with it--or at least they aren't direct causes.    

On 6/17/2019 at 8:03 AM, DEPACincy said:

 

A lot of those streetview places aren't actually all that dense because so much land is given up to right-of-ways. South Philly is one of the densest places in the entire country and has no high-rise buildings. Here is what central Philly looks like:

https://goo.gl/maps/MZyhKkhv7DMJxhwdA

 

https://goo.gl/maps/Nd6uN49Hr7rEuQZc8

 

https://goo.gl/maps/jtVXiRpy79q3hyhw7

 

https://goo.gl/maps/421yhyR9k1v5M2Ky5

 

https://goo.gl/maps/2FhaRQQ7sLXfkqi37

 

EDIT: I'm not saying Central LA isn't dense, just that places like South Philly are denser because streets take up so much less space. 

 

This gets at the disconnect between spatial (visual) density and actual population density. Outside of the downtown example, the Philly examples show impressive built density with very narrow streets. It is certainly easy to see why someone might think these areas are denser than LA, with its front and side setbacks and wide streets. However, the buildings in LA are usually built to or very close to the rear lot line, and they contain buildings that have many times the number of housing units that could be housed in those Philly row houses.

 

The aerial images of the first links that you and @BigDipper 80 shared tell a more complete story, I think.

 

LA: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0677974,-118.2994003,152a,35y,166.83h,44.98t/data=!3m1!1e3

 

Philly: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9310733,-75.1570952,127a,35y,98.59h,45t/data=!3m1!1e3

 

One of those apartment buildings in K-Town probably house as many people as one side of the whole block in Philly. I think most would agree that the Philly neighborhood is more walkable, though, which goes to show that population density isn't the sole determinant of walkability. 

Could it be the more union centric cities suffer in getting job creation and population?

Edited June 20, 20195 yr by Mildtraumatic

On 6/17/2019 at 11:08 AM, X said:

Shall we get back to Cleveland Population Trends?

 

Comparing housing units 2015 to 2018, the Census Bureau estimates Cuyahoga has less in 2018 than in 2015. Is this accurate?  Cleveland Metro overall though, is up.

 

Geography                           2015                  2018     Change 2015-2018

Cuyahoga                           619,310         617,889                 -0.2%

Cleveland 7-Counties    1,273,720      1,278,967                  0.4%

 

 

43 minutes ago, Mildtraumatic said:

Could it be the more union centric cities suffer in getting job creation and population?

 

Could it be the cities with a stronger union culture generally have higher standards of living than those with more jobs yet plundered by the corporatists?

 

And yes, this is about population. Sure, we can submit ourselves at will to the gilded class and get many more jobs and a fast-growing population. But I would prefer we address our sprawl problems, which cause older areas to pay more taxes than they should and create a spatial disconnect between jobs and job-seekers that isolates much of the region's labor -- again creating a public sector cost that the region must tax itself to avoid addressing root causes. Then we can be more competitive among younger metro areas who are, for the time being, veritable tax havens.

Edited June 20, 20195 yr by KJP

56 minutes ago, Mildtraumatic said:

Could it be the more union centric cities suffer in getting job creation and population?

 

Among the 10 largest metros, LA has the second largest percentage of union membership. NYC is first. 

 

So, no. 

19 minutes ago, Pugu said:

Comparing housing units 2015 to 2018, the Census Bureau estimates Cuyahoga has less in 2018 than in 2015. Is this accurate?  Cleveland Metro overall though, is up.

 

Geography                           2015                  2018     Change 2015-2018

Cuyahoga                           619,310         617,889                 -0.2%

Cleveland 7-Counties    1,273,720      1,278,967                  0.4%

 

 

 

Makes sense to me. Lots of vacant housing units torn down in disadvantaged areas. 

2 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Among the 10 largest metros, LA has the second largest percentage of union membership. NYC is first. 

 

So, no. 

Also depends on what type of union. I know blue collar has a history of corruption. I'm sure most of LA's union membership is for actors and pole dancers. JK. Plus you just added the 10 largest metro's so..

 

Edit look at 11 to 50 largest metro's. Chicago, NYC and LA are not a fair example. Look at population increase of Midwest cities and union concentration outside of Chicago. 

Edited June 20, 20195 yr by Mildtraumatic

Being the state capital is a huge factor in an otherwise slower growing region.  State government and attendant entities like consulting and law firms are mostly self-perpetuating beasts that enjoy a protected revenue stream drawn from the entire state. Those cities are recession proof and their core industry can't be lured away to another place. Add in that state capitals are often the site of a state-funded university - with a medical school and hospital - and you have a good basis for growth, or at least stability.

On 6/18/2019 at 1:29 PM, edale said:

 

This gets at the disconnect between spatial (visual) density and actual population density. Outside of the downtown example, the Philly examples show impressive built density with very narrow streets. It is certainly easy to see why someone might think these areas are denser than LA, with its front and side setbacks and wide streets. However, the buildings in LA are usually built to or very close to the rear lot line, and they contain buildings that have many times the number of housing units that could be housed in those Philly row houses.

 

The aerial images of the first links that you and @BigDipper 80 shared tell a more complete story, I think.

 

LA: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0677974,-118.2994003,152a,35y,166.83h,44.98t/data=!3m1!1e3

 

Philly: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9310733,-75.1570952,127a,35y,98.59h,45t/data=!3m1!1e3

 

One of those apartment buildings in K-Town probably house as many people as one side of the whole block in Philly. I think most would agree that the Philly neighborhood is more walkable, though, which goes to show that population density isn't the sole determinant of walkability. 

 

 

 

yes, los angeles is a horror for walkability in general.

 

however, there are plenty of, and more and more 'nodes' of walkability.

 

like where you can easily take public transit (which btw was fine) or drive,  park and walk around a few blocks.

 

also, i think for the single houses, more than you might expect have additional living quarters behind them (?)

 

for example, on the last night i stayed in an airbnb family home in los feliz that had two airbnb rental pool houses in the backyard with the pool.

 

i was calling it my oj simpson/kato kaelin pool boy compound.  ?

 

people may not know, but cleveland has or had a lot of that too...minus the pools ha.

 

it's a very, very different feel from philly, but funny enough very similar to cleveland these days with its depopulation and scattered neighborhood nodes of activity.

19 hours ago, mrnyc said:

 

 

 

yes, los angeles is a horror for walkability in general.

 

however, there are plenty of, and more and more 'nodes' of walkability.

 

like where you can easily take public transit (which btw was fine) or drive,  park and walk around a few blocks.

 

also, i think for the single houses, more than you might expect have additional living quarters behind them (?)

 

for example, on the last night i stayed in an airbnb family home in los feliz that had two airbnb rental pool houses in the backyard with the pool.

 

i was calling it my oj simpson/kato kaelin pool boy compound.  ?

 

people may not know, but cleveland has or had a lot of that too...minus the pools ha.

 

it's a very, very different feel from philly, but funny enough very similar to cleveland these days with its depopulation and scattered neighborhood nodes of activity.

I'm in Philly a lot.  I've said it before Philly feels and looks like Cleveland to me.  Market street is Euclid.  The architecture, the ethnic neighborhoods.  Center City is compact like DT Cleveland.  The one thing Philly did right is maintain their rail transit throughout the city and commuter rail into the city from the burbs.

1 minute ago, MyTwoSense said:

I'm in Philly a lot.  I've said it before Philly feels and looks like Cleveland to me.  Market street is Euclid.  The architecture, the ethnic neighborhoods.  Center City is compact like DT Cleveland.  The one thing Philly did right is maintain their rail transit throughout the city and commuter rail into the city from the burbs.

 

How?

 

Philly has so many row house neighborhoods and it's ethnic neighborhoods and archeticturial assets are so much grander in scale.

 

^ exactly, the people of philadelphia feel like cleveland's people generally speaking, but not the looks of the place. at all.

 

philly always makes me think of what peak cleveland must have been like, but still, not physically.

Edited June 21, 20195 yr by mrnyc

i knew austin was a-boomin, but i had no idea it had passed peak cleveland population -- yeow!:

 

austin city: 964,254 (July 1, 2018 estimate) - source: US Census Bureau

peak cleveland:   914,808  1950