I've had some business in Los Angeles over the years - not much, but I got there off and on. Depending on the airport you're flying into, depending on the landing approach your plane takes, and depending on what side of the plane you're seated on, the sign can come into view and it is quite large in the distance. I don't think I ever got over the thrill of seeing it - it is just so iconic - I really don't have the words to describe it.
The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
31–40 of 142 posts
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#32People need to remember the Hollywood sign was for a housing development at the edge of town in Los Angeles. That's how long it's been, and we've added almost no density, and eternal sprawl.
We've added no density? The population of the city went from 500k to 4 million since that sign went up. Koreatown has over 50 thousand people living per square mile. Is there an imbalance between jobs and housing today? Yes, but to imply that no housing has been built since the 1920s or that the entire area is low density suburban sprawl is a whole lot of hyperbole. Here is the population density map for reference: h…
Your own reference seems to confirm OP's point that sprawl, not density, is what increased. Relatively few places in the greater LA area have properly dense housing projects, and you just have to look across LA from vantage points along either Mulholland drive or Rancho Palos Verdes to see for yourself.
Plenty of opportunity for high-rise and even more mid-rise projects, but nearly everything is low-rise. Thankfully it looks like recent zoning changes will throw nimbyism to the wolves, but op is entirely right in describing how LA is essentially the epitome of sprawl.
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've added no density? The population of the city went from 500k to 4 million since that sign went up. Koreatown has over 50 thousand people living per square mile. Is there an imbalance between jobs and housing today? Yes, but to imply that no housing has been built since the 1920s or that the entire area is low density suburban sprawl is a whole lot of hyperbole. Here is the population density map for reference: h…
Your own reference seems to confirm OP's point that sprawl, not density, is what increased. Relatively few places in the greater LA area have properly dense housing projects, and you just have to look across LA from vantage points along either Mulholland drive or Rancho Palos Verdes to see for yourself. Plenty of opportunity for high-rise and even more mid-rise projects, but nearly everything is low-rise. Thankfully…
That’s because people want to live in low rise buildings.
The average person in California (and in the rest of the country) desires to live in a detached home that they own.
It is not wrong to want that.
However, it is definitely wrong to assume that high-rise apartments are “proper” density and that LA is doing it wrong. LA is the way the people live there want it to be. If you want high density and high-rise living, there are other cities that offer that.
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#34I've had some business in Los Angeles over the years - not much, but I got there off and on. Depending on the airport you're flying into, depending on the landing approach your plane takes, and depending on what side of the plane you're seated on, the sign can come into view and it is quite large in the distance. I don't think I ever got over the thrill of seeing it - it is just so iconic - I really don't have the wo…
It's more or less directly north of where the LAX traffic pattern makes the U-turn to line up final approach.
So the right side of the plane can always catch a glimpse of the sign, but the left side coming from anywhere north-ish will have a closer view.
If you're coming from south or east you won't make that turn and left side won't see it at all.
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your own reference seems to confirm OP's point that sprawl, not density, is what increased. Relatively few places in the greater LA area have properly dense housing projects, and you just have to look across LA from vantage points along either Mulholland drive or Rancho Palos Verdes to see for yourself. Plenty of opportunity for high-rise and even more mid-rise projects, but nearly everything is low-rise. Thankfully…
That’s because people want to live in low rise buildings. The average person in California (and in the rest of the country) desires to live in a detached home that they own. It is not wrong to want that. However, it is definitely wrong to assume that high-rise apartments are “proper” density and that LA is doing it wrong. LA is the way the people live there want it to be. If you want high density and high-rise living…
The average person has no choice but to live in single-family homes. That doesn't mean they want that. Your solution of 'move somewhere else' is completely tone-deaf.
Furthermore, you completely ignored mid-rise housing, and the fact that it can be seamlessly mixed in with SFH without significantly changing the feel or character of the neighbourhood. Oh The Urbanity made a great YouTube video about this recently where they made a neutral comparison of different densities, from 0 to ultra-dense NYC skyscrapers.
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s because people want to live in low rise buildings. The average person in California (and in the rest of the country) desires to live in a detached home that they own. It is not wrong to want that. However, it is definitely wrong to assume that high-rise apartments are “proper” density and that LA is doing it wrong. LA is the way the people live there want it to be. If you want high density and high-rise living…
The average person has no choice but to live in single-family homes. That doesn't mean they want that. Your solution of 'move somewhere else' is completely tone-deaf. Furthermore, you completely ignored mid-rise housing, and the fact that it can be seamlessly mixed in with SFH without significantly changing the feel or character of the neighbourhood. Oh The Urbanity made a great YouTube video about this recently wher…
Any solution that involves shared walls with neighbors is not desirable to the vast majority of Americans.
Anyone who wants to live in apartments can do so. Nobody is forced to live in single-family homes -- on the contrary, we work long and hard to afford the money to get into them because they are better than listening to our neighbors all the time.
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
The average person has no choice but to live in single-family homes. That doesn't mean they want that. Your solution of 'move somewhere else' is completely tone-deaf. Furthermore, you completely ignored mid-rise housing, and the fact that it can be seamlessly mixed in with SFH without significantly changing the feel or character of the neighbourhood. Oh The Urbanity made a great YouTube video about this recently wher…
Any solution that involves shared walls with neighbors is not desirable to the vast majority of Americans. Anyone who wants to live in apartments can do so. Nobody is forced to live in single-family homes -- on the contrary, we work long and hard to afford the money to get into them because they are better than listening to our neighbors all the time.
That's a big claim with nothing backing it up.
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've added no density? The population of the city went from 500k to 4 million since that sign went up. Koreatown has over 50 thousand people living per square mile. Is there an imbalance between jobs and housing today? Yes, but to imply that no housing has been built since the 1920s or that the entire area is low density suburban sprawl is a whole lot of hyperbole. Here is the population density map for reference: h…
Your own reference seems to confirm OP's point that sprawl, not density, is what increased. Relatively few places in the greater LA area have properly dense housing projects, and you just have to look across LA from vantage points along either Mulholland drive or Rancho Palos Verdes to see for yourself. Plenty of opportunity for high-rise and even more mid-rise projects, but nearly everything is low-rise. Thankfully…
NYC density: 26,403 people per square mile (source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_Cit...)
Hollywood density: 22,193 people per square mile
Koreatown density: 42,611 people per square mile
Source: https://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/population/density/ne...
Yes, greater LA area also has a lot of what people like to call “sprawl”, but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods. You also don’t need high rises for density - Paris is not all that tall, but at 53k people per square mile, it’s denser on average than NYC…
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#39I've had some business in Los Angeles over the years - not much, but I got there off and on. Depending on the airport you're flying into, depending on the landing approach your plane takes, and depending on what side of the plane you're seated on, the sign can come into view and it is quite large in the distance. I don't think I ever got over the thrill of seeing it - it is just so iconic - I really don't have the wo…
I'm lucky to be able to see it from my apartment living room window, and even after 3 years it never gets old!
Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago
#40People need to remember the Hollywood sign was for a housing development at the edge of town in Los Angeles. That's how long it's been, and we've added almost no density, and eternal sprawl.
The rest of this century is dedicated to undoing the zoning practices of a certain generation.
You’re assuming their kids don’t want the same things. My parents are off the “certain generation” and I am very happy with the zoning as it is. My peers share this mentality.