U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: LA or NYC
NYC 28 50.91%
LA 27 49.09%
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-07-2019, 11:20 AM
 
116 posts, read 98,705 times
Reputation: 123

Advertisements

LA will never come close to New York City. Never.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2019, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Point Loma, San Diego, CA
1,047 posts, read 976,842 times
Reputation: 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pro1000 View Post
Far from dying.. A big reason Silicon Beach happened in LA was so that tech companies can get in close to the entertainment business. I guess you never heard of streaming cause Netflix, Amazon, etc are buying up office space like crazy all over the city. Sorry pal try again.



-also with the Olympics coming there's lots of of new rail lines being built as we speak plus new law that should pass which will allow dense vertical housing next to these new rail stops. LA is moving into the future.
In other words:

New York-more of the same. More skyscrapers to add to the man made scenery, minor mass transit upgrades, more boring corporate HQ stuff, etc. Exciting!


Los Angeles-continuing legacy as being a truly innovative city of the future-3rd olympic games, mass transit going from nearly nothing in 1990 to passing Chicago soon, skyscraper innovation literally setting world records downtown. Los Angeles had already consolidated something like %80 of the major film studios by 1915, like this poster points out, streaming companies are just piling on top of that legacy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2019, 08:24 PM
 
Location: Downtown & Brooklyn!
2,063 posts, read 1,184,995 times
Reputation: 1750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Losfrisco View Post
mass transit going from nearly nothing in 1990 to passing Chicago soon, skyscraper innovation literally setting world records downtown.
Mass transit surpassing Chicago??? In what world?

And how are skyscrapers boring for NYC but “world record setting” for LA when NY is building much more in total numbers and has more innovative engineering like Hudson Yards and the skinny supertalls?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2019, 09:02 PM
 
Location: SoCal
1,029 posts, read 1,384,934 times
Reputation: 1011
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy View Post
Mass transit surpassing Chicago??? In what world?

And how are skyscrapers boring for NYC but “world record setting” for LA when NY is building much more in total numbers and has more innovative engineering like Hudson Yards and the skinny supertalls?
Los Angeles has 105 miles of track from 4 light rail and 2 subway lines.
Chicago has 103 miles of track with lines.

Los Angeles system is a county wide system that is many times the area covered by Chicago's system, but you are spreading the rail coverage very thin in LA county. LA will add about another 15+ miles in the next 5 years with the Purple line extension phase 1, the Crenshaw line and Regional Connector. And by 2028, it could add another 25 miles with the phase one of Gold Line light trail extension to Pomona, Green Line etension to Torrance, and the phase 2 and3 of the Purple line subway extension to Westwood/VA Hospital and Van Nuys light rail line. Whether it can get the Valley to Westside Sepulveda subway line that connects the Orange Line to the Expo line is anyones guess but that would be critically needed for a more effective for the 2028 Olympics. By 2050. Should by another 50 miles of rail transit as the sepulveda line should extend to LAX, Crenshaw line goes north to connect to Hollywood's Red line. Downtown LA to the Orange County line light rail line, Gold Line expension from Pomona to maybe Ontario Airport, East LA to Whittier extension. Orange Line conversion from BRT to rail, Vermont Ave rail.

LA will double its rail system as well as make its commuter rail system more functional with service nearly as good the Metro system. plus there will be High Speed Rail by early 2030s.

Im not saying LA's system is better or more used than the L system. In terms of miles and coverage, LA's system will surpass Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2019, 09:12 PM
 
Location: Point Loma, San Diego, CA
1,047 posts, read 976,842 times
Reputation: 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy View Post
Mass transit surpassing Chicago??? In what world?

And how are skyscrapers boring for NYC but “world record setting” for LA when NY is building much more in total numbers and has more innovative engineering like Hudson Yards and the skinny supertalls?
Hello, "That One Guy"

Here is a study from five years ago explaining how Los Angeles ranks ahead of Chicago in mass transit in terms of its usefulness in getting to work:

https://www.wired.com/2014/10/americ...ublic-transit/

Since this article, LA metro has been dramatically expanded, and is still being expanded. I understand Chicago has "plans" to expand their system, but Los Angeles is far past the planning stage, tunnels are being completed as we speak. So, yes, Los Angeles will almost certainly surpass Chicago as a mass transit city within the next few years.


I thought I had heard somewhere that there are lots of skyscrapers in New York City. Lots of skyscrapers in ideal building conditions. It's not really surprising to anyone that they are there.

Los Angeles is in an active seismic zone.

Yes, an actual Guinness world record was set when the foundation was poured for the 1100 foot Wilshire Grand in downtown Los Angeles.


New Wilshire Grand concrete foundation in place after record pouring - latimes

Have a great night!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2019, 09:55 PM
 
Location: Downtown & Brooklyn!
2,063 posts, read 1,184,995 times
Reputation: 1750
Quote:
Originally Posted by saybanana View Post
Los Angeles has 105 miles of track from 4 light rail and 2 subway lines.
Chicago has 103 miles of track with lines.

Los Angeles system is a county wide system that is many times the area covered by Chicago's system, but you are spreading the rail coverage very thin in LA county. LA will add about another 15+ miles in the next 5 years with the Purple line extension phase 1, the Crenshaw line and Regional Connector. And by 2028, it could add another 25 miles with the phase one of Gold Line light trail extension to Pomona, Green Line etension to Torrance, and the phase 2 and3 of the Purple line subway extension to Westwood/VA Hospital and Van Nuys light rail line. Whether it can get the Valley to Westside Sepulveda subway line that connects the Orange Line to the Expo line is anyones guess but that would be critically needed for a more effective for the 2028 Olympics. By 2050. Should by another 50 miles of rail transit as the sepulveda line should extend to LAX, Crenshaw line goes north to connect to Hollywood's Red line. Downtown LA to the Orange County line light rail line, Gold Line expension from Pomona to maybe Ontario Airport, East LA to Whittier extension. Orange Line conversion from BRT to rail, Vermont Ave rail.

LA will double its rail system as well as make its commuter rail system more functional with service nearly as good the Metro system. plus there will be High Speed Rail by early 2030s.

Im not saying LA's system is better or more used than the L system. In terms of miles and coverage, LA's system will surpass Chicago.
Sounds like you’re comparing all of LA’s regional transit to only the L? The L is only the equivalent to the Red and Purple lines in LA, except obviously much larger. It’s the rapid transit system for Chicago city limits. Chicago also has Metra regional rail, which is the largest outside of NYC. Idk the exact size of Chicago’s system, but I’d imagine it would be much larger than that. Also not sure if Chicago has any light rail — idts but maybe someone from Chicago can give more info on that. Heavy rail is far superior anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Losfrisco View Post
Hello, "That One Guy"

Here is a study from five years ago explaining how Los Angeles ranks ahead of Chicago in mass transit in terms of its usefulness in getting to work:

https://www.wired.com/2014/10/americ...ublic-transit/

Since this article, LA metro has been dramatically expanded, and is still being expanded. I understand Chicago has "plans" to expand their system, but Los Angeles is far past the planning stage, tunnels are being completed as we speak. So, yes, Los Angeles will almost certainly surpass Chicago as a mass transit city within the next few years.


I thought I had heard somewhere that there are lots of skyscrapers in New York City. Lots of skyscrapers in ideal building conditions. It's not really surprising to anyone that they are there.

Los Angeles is in an active seismic zone.

Yes, an actual Guinness world record was set when the foundation was poured for the 1100 foot Wilshire Grand in downtown Los Angeles.


New Wilshire Grand concrete foundation in place after record pouring - latimes

Have a great night!
Growth in both NY and LA are impressive. You don’t have to discredit one to promote the other... sounds to me like you just aren’t aware of what’s going on in NY. NYC is setting world records too, like worlds tallest residential skyscrapers, and worlds skinniest skyscrapers.

Also, Hudson Yards is anything but an ideal building condition. I’m assuming you either haven’t heard of it or don’t understand exactly what it is
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2019, 07:28 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,986 posts, read 22,563,879 times
Reputation: 10939
31 years is a long period of time. 31 years ago was 1988 and while the kindling was still building up for the LA riots and many people were still afraid of the big bad city. Essentially, it’s a long enough timespan where things can shift dramatically for or against either city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2019, 01:16 AM
 
486 posts, read 350,750 times
Reputation: 433
I still think the difference is obvious that its LA. New York has the Hudson Yard as the only serious transformation. More tall buildings don't fundamentally change NYC, that's what it is already. Unless there are others that I missed, enlighten me since I only heard that one.

Think about it like this, in ~30 years you will be able to tell children

- Yeah the USC area used to be considered the hood, but it's nice now
- The Inglewood area was not a place that people wanted to live, but now its expensive and has the Ram's stadium along with the Clippers stadium there
- The public transportation was nothing, but then the Olympics came and they about doubled the size of the train lines
- The LA river was paved over, but they took out the concrete in some of the sections so you can go have a walk down there now
- The downtown area used to be underwhelming, but it's gotten much nicer now
- The air quality was way worse, but then electric vehicles came along and really helped clean up the air
- Now with driverless cars, you don't NEED to buy a car in LA anymore, you can just catch an Uber or Lyft because its cheap and easy; before this was unthinkable


By the way these aren't things LA is talking about, these are things that LA is doing.


Obviously LA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2019, 02:34 AM
 
16,392 posts, read 3,480,224 times
Reputation: 4812
La
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2019, 08:53 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,986 posts, read 22,563,879 times
Reputation: 10939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logicist027 View Post
I still think the difference is obvious that its LA. New York has the Hudson Yard as the only serious transformation. More tall buildings don't fundamentally change NYC, that's what it is already. Unless there are others that I missed, enlighten me since I only heard that one.

Think about it like this, in ~30 years you will be able to tell children

- Yeah the USC area used to be considered the hood, but it's nice now
- The Inglewood area was not a place that people wanted to live, but now its expensive and has the Ram's stadium along with the Clippers stadium there
- The public transportation was nothing, but then the Olympics came and they about doubled the size of the train lines
- The LA river was paved over, but they took out the concrete in some of the sections so you can go have a walk down there now
- The downtown area used to be underwhelming, but it's gotten much nicer now
- The air quality was way worse, but then electric vehicles came along and really helped clean up the air
- Now with driverless cars, you don't NEED to buy a car in LA anymore, you can just catch an Uber or Lyft because its cheap and easy; before this was unthinkable


By the way these aren't things LA is talking about, these are things that LA is doing.


Obviously LA
Hudson Yards is the largest development in the entire US, but that by no means makes it the only major development in the city or metropolitan area.

The tall buildings aren’t going soley to Manhattan but to downtown Brooklyn, Long Island City (Queens), and Jersey City in New Jersey as they now have massive growing skylines as well as development throughout other parts of the metropolitan area.

There are cities in the Tri-State Area that have been seeing growth and infill in the last decade or two that have went through a half century of loss and that is a strong fundamental difference.

There’s currently one of the single most (excessively) expensive mass transit project happening right now in NYC (East Side Acces) which is happening in already packed Midtown Manhattan, but its greatest benefit will be to allow for far greater commuter train frequencies and new services which is great for even those outside of Manhattan.

The Hudson River and New York Harbor are cleaner than they’ve been in decades and the city has built many parks around what was a pretty derelict waterfront and has also introduced several frequent public ferry services.

Also, it was not electric vehicles that cleaned up the air in LA, though they will likely help greatly in the future. It was much more stringent emissions standards which California passed that are above and beyond what federal emissions standards stipulate and which some states have wisely adopted.

Consider that NYC is actually adding more people than LA is on the city, MSA and CSA level since the last census and think about the changes that have to come to accomodate more people.

NYC has changed quite a bit in recent years as has LA. However, 31 years is very long time and the fortunes of US cities have in the past dramatically changed within such a timespan for better or worse, so these new developments are interesting but their importance to the overall trajectory over such a timeline is difficult.

Last edited by OyCrumbler; 02-09-2019 at 10:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top