Does LA feel like the 2nd biggest city in America to you? (Los Angeles: high school, bars)

[RaymondChandlerLives]

Originally Posted by PA Born

Uh, I don't think so.

Multfamily can definitely be super-suburban. There's dense multifamily all over OC, but no one would mistake Irvine for urban living.

Let's see if I have this straight.

Your rowhouse = urban
Our massive apartment buildings = suburban

Where do you guys get this logic from? Because our housing is actually modern and comes with dedicated parking? You guys out there really need to stop acting like you're the authority on urbanity and city living. You're really not.

[RaymondChandlerLives]

I always got a kick out of this stat.

Los Angeles + Riverside + Mission Viejo (combined; urbanized areas):
2430.99 sq miles
population: 14,667,342
density: 6,033 ppsm

Philadelphia + Boston + Washington DC (combined; urbanized areas):
5176.56 sq miles
population: 14,209356
density: 2745 ppsm

Basically this shows that the L.A. footprint is more populous than Philly, Boston, and DC combined and it gets to that population in less than half the land area. And they call us sprawling! People underestimate how leafy and suburban EC cities are outside their core regions. They gobble up land inefficiently for thousands of sq miles, sprawling into other states, then acuse L.A. of unsustainable urban planning. Funny stuff.

[Chicano3000X]

lol speaking of rowhomes, I found this little gem in Glendale:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=glend...10142985756363

Also, I think they are acalling these rowhomes:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Chevy...78029288008304

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

lol speaking of rowhomes, I found this little gem in Glendale:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=glend...10142985756363

Also, I think they are acalling these rowhomes:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Chevy...78029288008304

That first link has way too much of a townhouse vibe but they are probably the closest to a rowhouse I have seen in LA so far.

These might end up being pretty rowhouse like too: 11 Little Houses Coming to Long-Barren Gower/Fountain Lot - Small Lots - Curbed LA

[PDF]

Originally Posted by BarcelonaFan

Why is NYC always the standard for urbanization? Los Angeles is dense and huge and grand in a different way. The long stretch on Wilshire is still dense even if it is more auto oriented than pedestrian. It can go from being super urban like DTLA or Koreatown to crossing suburbs closer to Hollywood to going back to urban density like Miracle Mile, Wilshire Corridor, and Westwood, ending at the beach. It's not a pre-Auto gothic city like NYC or Chicago totally reliant on public transport. It's a city which was built (or I should say re-built after the destruction of the trolly system) around the post-war ideal of suburbanization, i.e. the commuter model. But if you take the city as it is, as a whole, then it's just as grand as NYC or Chicago.

I agree, but this is a different kind of urban we are talking about here.

[taydigga]

Originally Posted by trancedout

There is a level of international in LA that Chicago doesn't come close to, although on paper, it should.

So many people from Australia, Japan, Europe, Latin America, that went to LA because they wanted to. In Chicago, it's more because they had family already there, usually true with the Mexicans and Indians (from India).

Chicago's has a large international presence, but in a different way. Established ethnic neighborhoods (Polish, Russian, Greek) are not the same as having a truly international vibe the way you have in LA.

Also, it seems like absolutely everyone is from the midwest there, and the narrow provincial interests of beer, food, and sports gets old after awhile.

I still think Chicago is a great city and I spent over a year there, but there was nothing interesting about it. If you're a guy into style (beyond the business sense), people will just think you are gay as well. It's as midwestern as it gets.

As a person that's from the region of Milwaukee/Chicago, it's true, everything you said is true. The midwest is only a few steps ahead of the south so somethings are very similar.

[taydigga]

Originally Posted by BarcelonaFan

I have to be jaded because I have not run into a whole spectrum of folks that match the talent that I've seen in NYC and Boston or DC. I am not saying that they're not smart or somehow lack creativity, but I still think the best of the best go to those three cities. Here I just think in a lot of fields, there are a lot of people that clog the lines that just shouldn't be there but have this persistent dream which is cool too, but makes that much more difficult. I never meant to say that LA doesn't have it's fair share of talented individuals, it certainly does, it's LA! The point is that they seem overshadowed or overwhelmed by the many more people who are lacking. That's all. I mean some of the worst of the worst I've seen here in LA in the same place with the best. I like the fact that LA gives them that opportunity to compete, which NYC would've eliminated them from the onset, but they are just clogging the lines.

Taydigga, I may be jaded by places like DC, NYC and Boston but aren't you simply making things appear a little too balanced? I mean everything that you've been posting lately has been largely to quash any outlook that LA can be better or worse than other places? This isn't disrespecting what you're saying, just that it seems like there is too much middle ground from where you're coming from and not a straight position. I mean the main reason why I am here and not NYC or DC or Boston is because of the straight cut throat competition and overwhelming number of pedigreed and super talented individuals. Not only that but the attitude is overwhelmingly douchey and pretentious among these types vying for the same positions.
I understood what a recruiter for major firms in Century City was telling me when he said that LA is lacking in qualified candidates for many positions but there is an overwhelming number of applications. So there is objectivity to be found in this debate.

Yup, you hit that on the nail I'm all about balance, but I wouldn't say I don't have a position. That might be a projection on your part. I just don't deal in extremes unless they are real and not just my perception based on just my experiences. I've always noticed that your type might get frustrated with that but that's just something I've learned through time. I'm assuming you're younger than me, I'm 33 and I've been there mentally but I just don't think in extremes based on limited info, it's too dangerous. Recruiters everywhere say that the market is overcrowded with unqualified people. You also maintain this mindset that people with "california dreams" come here and/or grow up here and they are without talent and they are the reason that the job market is the way it is. I say that only really applies in the entertainment industry because as far as business, tech and etc., go, this place attracts no different than what you see on the east coast as far as the job market particular to this region goes (mostly tech and marketing jobs). I picked up on that early on in your convos and I think that's what I was getting at. You gotta release that mindset. Most things in life are balanced, sure you'll find extremes but the stuff you're talking about is based off 6 months of being in LA and a comment from a recruiter and I've been here 14 years. Not saying youth always loses to age and experience, you can be right, I mean you have helped me see that their is definitely a big divide between the rich and poor here (I still wouldn't say third-world but I know what you mean when you say it). Now, don't get me wrong, I mean no disrespect at all. You're the internet homie! I just think sometimes you can be a little extreme with some of the things based on perceptions you have (like people coming here with dreams of hollywood, you seem to kinda not like that, i know, I know, you've tamed it down a little but I recognized it early on) and I think you'll chance your mind in a few years once you've really seen this city. what I thought 5 years into LA is no where what I think now...that is part age and part exposure.

[Chicano3000X]

LA and NY are pretty much siblings.


Both are huge, and dense but in their own way(though I prefer a more of NYC's density and compactness).

LA is coming up on transit

Both are the graffiti capitals of the U.S.
NY had the trains, LA had the LA river. At a point int time you were able to see amazing pieces on the sides of trains or on the river's concrete banks.

Both had great influence in hip hop, especially in the golden years

Tallest in their coasts

Most influential

Most diverse

Known for glamore and being sketchy

LA is divided by mountains(sort of), NY is bordered by bodies of water

Biggest sports cities

[PDF]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

LA and NY are pretty much siblings.


Both are huge, and dense but in their own way(though I prefer a more of NYC's density and compactness).

LA is coming up on transit

Both are the graffiti capitals of the U.S.
NY had the trains, LA had the LA river. At a point int time you were able to see amazing pieces on the sides of trains or on the river's concrete banks.

Both had great influence in hip hop, especially in the golden years

Tallest in their coasts

Most influential

Most diverse

Known for glamore and being sketchy

LA is divided by mountains(sort of), NY is bordered by bodies of water

Biggest sports cities

LA couldn't be more different from NYC in my opinion. They do have a few things in common, but after having been in both this summer what I really came away with was how different they are.

I've only been to LA once, but NY countless times. I tried to determine which I liked better objectively, but they are both totally different. I don't think you can compare.

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by PDF

LA couldn't be more different from NYC in my opinion. They do have a few things in common, but after having been in both this summer what I really came away with was how different they are.

They could be way more different - like if Los Angeles was Oklahoma City. I think NYC and OKC are just about two sides of the spectrum. I think at first glance LA would appear to be more like OKC but with more experience it is actually more similar to NYC at least in the way that it functions (though I agree the two cities look nothing alike).

I do like Chicano's comparison of mountains/hills in Los Angeles vs. the bays/rivers in New York City. I always thought of them being very similar geographic features and unique to most US cities.