If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
Apologies if this is a tad off topic for this group, but I'm unsure where
better to start asking! During a trip to Southern California earlier I drove a short way on the PCH between Santa Monica towards Malibu was puzzled by the house numbers. Some online research yesterday has only confused me further. Here's an illustration I've prepared of a random stretch of properties on the beach side of the road, going north: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4019461/HouseNumbers-1.jpg I gather the numbers are in groups, often based on the distance from some base, or on the number of blocks. So I can just about see how that accounts for such large numbers. But can anyone please explain why the gaps between adjacent houses are not simply 2, instead of 4, 6, 8 or 10 - not to mention 34? I can't detect any logical pattern at all! -- Terry, East Grinstead, UK |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
Terry Pinnell wrote:
I gather the numbers are in groups, often based on the distance from some base, or on the number of blocks. So I can just about see how that accounts for such large numbers. But can anyone please explain why the gaps between adjacent houses are not simply 2, instead of 4, 6, 8 or 10 - not to mention 34? I can't detect any logical pattern at all! Aha, I see that you are from the UK, where house numbers always increase by 2 for every house. In North American cities, it widely varies. In Vancouver, which is laid out in a grid pattern, each city block advances by 100, and it is standardized throughout the city. So if an address of a house on any east-west avenue in the city is West 1450, you know the house is a half a block east of Granville street. So, how come the house numbers of adjacent houses vary by such significant amounts? Perhaps becuase the houses on the block were built at different times, and the developer estimated the address. As more houses were built between them over time, their developers just picked a number between the house on the left and the house on the right. Maybe there was to be a townhouse complex on the street, and so a large group of numbers was set aside. But then the complex was never built; accounting for the big gap in numbering. It might also be that a developer wanted a specific number as an address, because he considered it lucky, or whatever. Again, in Vancouver, redeveloped properties are often renumbered to included an 8 in the address. I watched 930 W. 67th avenue being torn down, and replaced with a side-by-side duplex, with the left half numbered 928 and the right half numbered 938. This was to appeal to Chinese buyers, many of whom believe the number 8 to be lucky, and whom will pay a premium to have an address with an 8 in it. Many, many reasons for unusual numbering. -- K. Lang may your lum reek. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
Terry Pinnell wrote:
I gather the numbers are in groups, often based on the distance from some base, or on the number of blocks. So I can just about see how that accounts for such large numbers. But can anyone please explain why the gaps between adjacent houses are not simply 2, instead of 4, 6, 8 or 10 - not to mention 34? I can't detect any logical pattern at all! I looked closer at your pic and I'm pretty sure that I have the answer. When the street was built, but before there were any houses on it, it was already established where the "hundred blocks" were to be. 20700 was at a certain point, 20800 was at a certain point, 20900 was at a certain point, all equidistant from each other. When houses were built in the 20900 block, for example, they started at 20900, and increased the numbering by a small number, like 4, 6, or 8. By the time they had arrived at 20966, they had reached the spot where 21000 was to start. And this is what accounts for the gap of 34 between 20966 and 21000. -- K. Lang may your lum reek. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:26:25 +0100, Terry Pinnell
wrote: Apologies if this is a tad off topic for this group, but I'm unsure where better to start asking! During a trip to Southern California earlier I drove a short way on the PCH between Santa Monica towards Malibu was puzzled by the house numbers. Some online research yesterday has only confused me further. Here's an illustration I've prepared of a random stretch of properties on the beach side of the road, going north: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4019461/HouseNumbers-1.jpg I gather the numbers are in groups, often based on the distance from some base, or on the number of blocks. So I can just about see how that accounts for such large numbers. But can anyone please explain why the gaps between adjacent houses are not simply 2, instead of 4, 6, 8 or 10 - not to mention 34? I can't detect any logical pattern at all! One thing that leaps out is that new hundreds begin from zero, without relationship to the last number in the previous hundred. Aside from that, it's possible that the lots were first platted smaller than the current lots (i.e., lots were combined into larger portions to accommodate the larger houses folks who could afford Malibu wanted to erect, and so the assigned number came from block of numbers that had been provisionally allocated to the original smaller lots. For instance, if one lot owner bought out some of his neighbors the number might be the one assigned to his particular lot. Don't know what the real answer is. Does the "zero starts a new hundred" phenomenon occur consistently in the other sections? Were there stretches where the numbering *was* consistent and orderly? -- Don Kirkman |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
Don Kirkman wrote:
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:26:25 +0100, Terry Pinnell wrote: Apologies if this is a tad off topic for this group, but I'm unsure where better to start asking! During a trip to Southern California earlier I drove a short way on the PCH between Santa Monica towards Malibu was puzzled by the house numbers. Some online research yesterday has only confused me further. Here's an illustration I've prepared of a random stretch of properties on the beach side of the road, going north: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4019461/HouseNumbers-1.jpg I gather the numbers are in groups, often based on the distance from some base, or on the number of blocks. So I can just about see how that accounts for such large numbers. But can anyone please explain why the gaps between adjacent houses are not simply 2, instead of 4, 6, 8 or 10 - not to mention 34? I can't detect any logical pattern at all! One thing that leaps out is that new hundreds begin from zero, without relationship to the last number in the previous hundred. Aside from that, it's possible that the lots were first platted smaller than the current lots (i.e., lots were combined into larger portions to accommodate the larger houses folks who could afford Malibu wanted to erect, and so the assigned number came from block of numbers that had been provisionally allocated to the original smaller lots. For instance, if one lot owner bought out some of his neighbors the number might be the one assigned to his particular lot. Don't know what the real answer is. Does the "zero starts a new hundred" phenomenon occur consistently in the other sections? Were there stretches where the numbering *was* consistent and orderly? Thanks both. That makes sense. In fact now that I think about it more seriously it's sort of obvious that for a road some 130 miles long there would have to be great provision for flexibility. My assumption about 1 mile 'groups' proved wrong, as the 19000 to 20000 is about 1.3 miles. I haven't examined much more of the PCH's 131 miles, but the semi-random pattern looks similar to the section I illustrated. BTW, this has me wondering how properties in any country end up uniquely numbered when many of them on the same road/street are built years apart? In my road, a small housing 'estate' of maybe half a dozen building types, all the numbers except one follow the simple pattern, 1 2, 3 etc. I'm guessing they were all planned at the same time and building followed the plan strictly. Or perhaps it started at one end and subsequent development had to take place progressively on the next physical plot. Otherwise you'd end up with numbers bearing no relation to position ion the street. The exception is our house, 29A. It was built later than the 3 similar designs at numbers 25, 27 and 29. Probably on land that was either originally part of a larger house's garden (yard), or that was initially considered unsuitable. On a different topic entirely, I was astonished at the listed prices and estimated values of these very small properties, squashed between a busy highway (and its accompanying tangle of telephone and electricity cables) and a few square feet of beach. Typically $2M - $8M, with the occasional 1-bed, 1-bath at around $1.5M! -- Terry, East Grinstead, UK |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
On 16 Oct 2011 in rec.travel.usa-canada, Terry Pinnell wrote:
BTW, this has me wondering how properties in any country end up uniquely numbered when many of them on the same road/street are built years apart? The numbers may be allocated in advance when the road is laid out. Near me, numbers on a road got allocated 'organically' over the years. When 911 (emergency telephone system) got sufficiently advanced to require a more rational system, they were renumbered. -- Joe Makowiec http://makowiec.org/ Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
"Terry Pinnell" wrote in message
... /snip - follow the thread/ On a different topic entirely, I was astonished at the listed prices and estimated values of these very small properties, squashed between a busy highway (and its accompanying tangle of telephone and electricity cables) and a few square feet of beach. Typically $2M - $8M, with the occasional 1-bed, 1-bath at around $1.5M! ************* That is the law of supply and demand at work. If the demand were not as high and/or the supply not as low, those prices would be significantly much lower. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 12:44:41 +0100, Terry Pinnell
wrote: [Snipping my original message] Thanks both. That makes sense. In fact now that I think about it more seriously it's sort of obvious that for a road some 130 miles long there would have to be great provision for flexibility. My assumption about 1 mile 'groups' proved wrong, as the 19000 to 20000 is about 1.3 miles. I haven't examined much more of the PCH's 131 miles, but the semi-random pattern looks similar to the section I illustrated. BTW, this has me wondering how properties in any country end up uniquely numbered when many of them on the same road/street are built years apart? In my road, a small housing 'estate' of maybe half a dozen building types, all the numbers except one follow the simple pattern, 1 2, 3 etc. I'm guessing they were all planned at the same time and building followed the plan strictly. Or perhaps it started at one end and subsequent development had to take place progressively on the next physical plot. Otherwise you'd end up with numbers bearing no relation to position ion the street. I live in the suburbs of Los Angeles. In most of the urban area comprising Los Angeles and other cities of the region, the numbers basically run the entire width of the county area from the ocean on the west and south to neighboring counties on the east, and are divided into East and West and North and South. There are exceptions in some cities, however--mostly larger or older ones that probably preceded the establishment of the county-wide system. I happen to live in a very small area that is inside Los Angeles county but, because the development straddles the county line, takes its numbers from adjoining Orange County. The exception is our house, 29A. It was built later than the 3 similar designs at numbers 25, 27 and 29. Probably on land that was either originally part of a larger house's garden (yard), or that was initially considered unsuitable. Secondary homes on the same property may become A, B, C, etc. or, more rarely, become xxx1/2. I think the general scheme is widespread in the US, but not universal. -- Don Kirkman |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?
As for pricing... you've picked one of the most valuable spots in the USA.
It's within driving distance of LA suburbs for the rich and famous to commute ( or is it 'be driven'?) Barbra Streisand lives nearby. Jay Leno lives nearby. etc http://www.seeing-stars.com/live/malibu.shtml You can see the sunset from the living room - not too many spots near LA offer such a view /privacy. ( In many places in LA you can't even SEE the sunset thru the smog.) "Terry Pinnell" wrote in message ... Don Kirkman wrote: On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:26:25 +0100, Terry Pinnell wrote: During a trip to Southern California earlier I drove a short way on the PCH between Santa Monica towards Malibu was puzzled by the house numbers. Some online research yesterday has only confused me further. Here's an illustration I've prepared of a random stretch of properties on the beach side of the road, going north: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4019461/HouseNumbers-1.jpg On a different topic entirely, I was astonished at the listed prices and estimated values of these very small properties, squashed between a busy highway (and its accompanying tangle of telephone and electricity cables) and a few square feet of beach. Typically $2M - $8M, with the occasional 1-bed, 1-bath at around $1.5M! -- Terry, East Grinstead, UK |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Photos from Australia's Old Pacific Highway | Carl Rogers | Australia & New Zealand | 7 | January 11th, 2009 05:09 PM |
Traveling down the Pacific Highway | [email protected] | Travel - anything else not covered | 1 | June 13th, 2007 09:32 PM |
Getting to the Pacific Coast of Mexico | Richard[_2_] | Latin America | 2 | March 17th, 2007 10:55 AM |
Pacific Coast Highway drive time? | thirty-seven | USA & Canada | 18 | February 10th, 2006 08:56 AM |
Jamaica North Coast Highway ? | Dave | Caribbean | 2 | February 23rd, 2004 11:30 PM |