[LA.pm] hollywood.pm.org

[Peter Scott]

At 10:47 PM 2/1/2006, Peter Benjamin wrote:
>At 05:08 PM 2/1/2006, Robin Rowe wrote:
> >gone away due to lack of interest. He plainly doubted another group here
> >could be supported. When I pointed out that Los Angeles is a 465 square
> >mile area, Dave said that London is 600 square miles and served very
> >well by just one Perl group.
>
>The difference of housing density between London and LA.
>LA is wall to wall houses.  London is mostly grass from
>what I saw on the train leaving the "city" of London.

Your impression is erroneous.  Firstly, that which goes by the term 
"City of London" is actually a tiny area in the heart of London 
encompassing the financial district.  "Greater London" refers to that 
city plus numerous surrounding boroughs.  But from outside Greater 
London, people will invariably refer to Greater London as just 
"London".  Much like Los Angeles, only the ratio of surroundings to 
core is more pronounced.

In order to see "mostly grass" you would have been leaving Greater 
London.  Anywhere near the City, London is packed densely with far more 
residential high-rise housing than Los Angeles.  Its population 
eclipses that of Los Angeles (see 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London).  British people live in 
much smaller average footprints than Americans.  Also, Greater London 
has public transportation that works extremely well.  My wife, a native 
Angeleno, could not comprehend its efficiency when I described it until 
we went there.  Transit times can be shorter than they would be if you 
used a car and the streets were clear, which they are not.

That last factor argues in favor of breaking out Hollywood simply 
because of the sheer difficulty of travelling in and out of the 
area.  Although I can't help wondering whether it would be followed by 
a West Hollywood schism.


-- 
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com/
http://www.perlmedic.com/