A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » USA & Canada
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

House numbering on Pacific Coast Highway?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 15th, 2011, 09:26 AM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Terry Pinnell[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default 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  
Old October 15th, 2011, 06:27 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Király[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 276
Default 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  
Old October 15th, 2011, 06:33 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Király[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 276
Default 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  
Old October 15th, 2011, 09:26 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Don Kirkman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default 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  
Old October 16th, 2011, 12:44 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Terry Pinnell[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default 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  
Old October 16th, 2011, 01:00 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Joe Makowiec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default 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  
Old October 16th, 2011, 04:00 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default 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  
Old October 16th, 2011, 07:49 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Don Kirkman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default 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  
Old October 28th, 2011, 01:00 AM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
- Bobb -[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 550
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 06:09 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 11:55 AM
Pacific Coast Highway drive time? thirty-seven USA & Canada 18 February 10th, 2006 09:56 AM
Jamaica North Coast Highway ? Dave Caribbean 2 February 24th, 2004 12:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.