7 ms·

People 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 n

by scoofy 4y ago

People 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.

dylan604 4y ago
That sign doesn't seem like a very comfy home for people to live in, so no wonder it didn't do well as a housing development. That was a very bad design from an architect if they thought people were going to live there.
nocsi 4y ago
The rest of this century is dedicated to undoing the zoning practices of a certain generation.
- lotsoweiners 4y ago
  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.
- twblalock 4y ago
  Millennials are entering the home buying market in large numbers now, and it turns out they want detached single family homes in quiet suburban neighborhoods, just like everyone else. It is important to be very clear about this because the HN crowd seems to have a massive over-representation of people who like dense living arrangements: the vast majority of Americans want to live in a detached home that they own, and they want to transport themselves in cars that they own. They don't want to live in apartments, they don't want to rent, and they don't like mass transit. There are indeed some Americans who want to live in places like Manhattan, but they are a small minority. A large majority of the Americans who currently live in apartments only do so because they cannot afford a detached home.
  - kaetemi 4y ago
    People who like dense living spaces should visit some of the dense high rise areas in Manila. Enjoy the gridlock and queueing ten minutes for the elevator to your floor.
    - brenns10 4y ago
      It's a strawman to compare detached suburban housing to the densest housing options on the planet. If you do that, it's only fair to compare it against cabins without utilities, off road and miles away from the nearest grocery. Very, very few of the "majority of Americans" want to live in that. So, be honest and just compare suburban sprawl against, well, normal development where people can build town houses, duplexes, small apartment buildings, and of course small stores and restaurants. THAT is the density that the majority of people are talking about. Not high rises in ultra dense urban cores. I think more Americans than you think would like to be walking distance from a decent grocery store, bar, and breakfast place. I enjoy it!
    - mixmastamyk 4y ago
      People should visit a proper city like Paris, barcelona, even Washington DC. Maybe they wouldn’t push for a car dystopia in their own.
  - brenns10 4y ago
    It's important to be very clear: you're misrepresenting the options! It's not a choice between suburbia and Manhattan. It's a choice between exclusionary, backwards suburban zoning (which is subsidized by denser development due to the increased cost of utilities for sprawling development), and literally any more sane option. Let people build duplexes, corner stores, local markets, and get rid of the cul de sacs. That's literally the core of the "density" people are talking about. Not Manhattan style high rises. Saying that people (really any group, but millenials here) prefer suburbia because that's what you see them currently buying on the housing market, is ignoring the fact that the available housing stock probably doesn't match up to their preferences! Plenty of people are buying the "lesser of two evils" rather than their dream home. Plenty of people would choose something within walking distance of a decent park and grocery, if they had that option. But America, despite being built on the train and the pedestrian, has been rebuilt on the automobile and the cul-de-sac with single family home zoning. So people are buying what is available, even if it's not what they want. If you doubt what I'm saying, check the prices of homes in prewar "streetcar suburbs" which are denser, but still have small yards, detached houses, and yet are near small commercial uses too. Plenty of people want to buy these and the prices have skyrocketed: it's illegal to build them now, so the supply is limited.
asdff 4y ago
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: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/LACountyPopDensity.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/LACounty...
- eganist 4y ago
  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.
  - twblalock 4y ago
    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.
    - frosted-flakes 4y ago
      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. https://youtu.be/y3XoUBzfXps https://youtu.be/y3XoUBzfXps
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
aa-jv 4y ago
I lived in one of those hanging apartments depicted in the postcards, up there in Beachwood Canyon, for a period during the 80's and early 90's .. in my particular place, it was old and decrepit and run down, but the 'developer' had sauced up one of the upper levels sufficient to a working kids needs .. I will always remember the peril I felt, looking up at the slowly reclining detaining wall, earthquake memories borne in its cracks, and wondering why the heck someone would do this. The answer is in the dreams that everyone had, in that house, over the decades. Those hills are a pretty haunted lot. Something about the tension of the Earth, in my opinion, that can be felt if you listen long enough ..
throwaway22032 4y ago
As someone who's visited, this is a confusing comment to me. I think of that as being the entire point of the city. It's a deliberate contrast to places like NYC, Tokyo, London. A place where you can have a big old lot, a store that's half empty, a car collection. Cause there's so much land kicking about. Too bad it became expensive anyway, I guess.

by scoofy 4y ago

People 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.

dylan604 4y ago

That sign doesn't seem like a very comfy home for people to live in, so no wonder it didn't do well as a housing development. That was a very bad design from an architect if they thought people were going to live there.

nocsi 4y ago

The rest of this century is dedicated to undoing the zoning practices of a certain generation.

lotsoweiners 4y ago
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.
twblalock 4y ago
Millennials are entering the home buying market in large numbers now, and it turns out they want detached single family homes in quiet suburban neighborhoods, just like everyone else. It is important to be very clear about this because the HN crowd seems to have a massive over-representation of people who like dense living arrangements: the vast majority of Americans want to live in a detached home that they own, and they want to transport themselves in cars that they own. They don't want to live in apartments, they don't want to rent, and they don't like mass transit. There are indeed some Americans who want to live in places like Manhattan, but they are a small minority. A large majority of the Americans who currently live in apartments only do so because they cannot afford a detached home.
- kaetemi 4y ago
  People who like dense living spaces should visit some of the dense high rise areas in Manila. Enjoy the gridlock and queueing ten minutes for the elevator to your floor.
  - brenns10 4y ago
    It's a strawman to compare detached suburban housing to the densest housing options on the planet. If you do that, it's only fair to compare it against cabins without utilities, off road and miles away from the nearest grocery. Very, very few of the "majority of Americans" want to live in that. So, be honest and just compare suburban sprawl against, well, normal development where people can build town houses, duplexes, small apartment buildings, and of course small stores and restaurants. THAT is the density that the majority of people are talking about. Not high rises in ultra dense urban cores. I think more Americans than you think would like to be walking distance from a decent grocery store, bar, and breakfast place. I enjoy it!
  - mixmastamyk 4y ago
    People should visit a proper city like Paris, barcelona, even Washington DC. Maybe they wouldn’t push for a car dystopia in their own.
- brenns10 4y ago
  It's important to be very clear: you're misrepresenting the options! It's not a choice between suburbia and Manhattan. It's a choice between exclusionary, backwards suburban zoning (which is subsidized by denser development due to the increased cost of utilities for sprawling development), and literally any more sane option. Let people build duplexes, corner stores, local markets, and get rid of the cul de sacs. That's literally the core of the "density" people are talking about. Not Manhattan style high rises. Saying that people (really any group, but millenials here) prefer suburbia because that's what you see them currently buying on the housing market, is ignoring the fact that the available housing stock probably doesn't match up to their preferences! Plenty of people are buying the "lesser of two evils" rather than their dream home. Plenty of people would choose something within walking distance of a decent park and grocery, if they had that option. But America, despite being built on the train and the pedestrian, has been rebuilt on the automobile and the cul-de-sac with single family home zoning. So people are buying what is available, even if it's not what they want. If you doubt what I'm saying, check the prices of homes in prewar "streetcar suburbs" which are denser, but still have small yards, detached houses, and yet are near small commercial uses too. Plenty of people want to buy these and the prices have skyrocketed: it's illegal to build them now, so the supply is limited.

asdff 4y ago

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: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/LACountyPopDensity.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/LACounty...

eganist 4y ago
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.
- twblalock 4y ago
  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.
  - frosted-flakes 4y ago
    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. https://youtu.be/y3XoUBzfXps https://youtu.be/y3XoUBzfXps

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

aa-jv 4y ago

I lived in one of those hanging apartments depicted in the postcards, up there in Beachwood Canyon, for a period during the 80's and early 90's .. in my particular place, it was old and decrepit and run down, but the 'developer' had sauced up one of the upper levels sufficient to a working kids needs .. I will always remember the peril I felt, looking up at the slowly reclining detaining wall, earthquake memories borne in its cracks, and wondering why the heck someone would do this. The answer is in the dreams that everyone had, in that house, over the decades. Those hills are a pretty haunted lot. Something about the tension of the Earth, in my opinion, that can be felt if you listen long enough ..

throwaway22032 4y ago

As someone who's visited, this is a confusing comment to me. I think of that as being the entire point of the city. It's a deliberate contrast to places like NYC, Tokyo, London. A place where you can have a big old lot, a store that's half empty, a car collection. Cause there's so much land kicking about. Too bad it became expensive anyway, I guess.