why dont i like santa monica? (Huntington Beach, Orange: house, cinema, living in)

[PDF]

All of the things you listed are things anyone knows about Santa Monica. So you knew all that prior to moving. Maybe it's just not your place?

[Chowhound]

Originally Posted by JohnG72

Malibu, all the South Bay beaches, and all the OC beaches are much nicer beaches than anything from Dockweiler up through Santa Monica.

For areas with big city type amenities, all the South Bay beaches as well as Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, and even Belmont Shores are nicer places to live IMO. A bit more suburban, but cleaner, safer, less traffic, and much more of a traditional beach city vibe.

As far as the small town feel, Seal Beach, San Clemente, and Belmont Shores overwhelmingly blow away everything else in LA/OC away.

In short, I really do not beleive that Santa Monica is as an amazing place as posters on CD make it out to be.

I agree, Seal Beach, Belmont Shores, Sunset Beach and Huntington are way way more casual laid back "beach" lifestyle than Santa Monica, Santa Monica is too "hip" and touristy for my tastes.....at least it seems like it's trying to be too hip.....

[chessgeek]

Originally Posted by YoungTraveler2011

so i moved to santa monica not too long ago (i dont regret the move by any means, i can def. stay here until my lease is up) but for some reason, i dont like it as much as where i used to live.

i was living in west hollywood, border line beverly hills. on sunset blvd & larrabee st.

i moved to santa monica to be closer to work. commute is outstanding (less than 10 mins in the morning and about 10 in the afternoon).

the thing is, santa monica is not as appealing to me as the weho/bev hills and even westwood areas.

i cannot understand why but i think it might be:

1. santa monica is too boring as far as streets go (north, south, east, west), like no hills or cool streets.
2. way too touristy.
3. streets are too small/traffic moves through the city too slow.
4. not many restaurants. there are maybe a handful of restaurants that are really good, the rest is just fast food or not so good.
5. getting to the beach sucks. stairs, stairs, stairs.
6. living in santa monica u feel a little secluded from other parts of LA because its "difficult" to get out.
7. bums... BUMS...BUMS
8. overall, the city is too "right" ...if u know what i mean.

i think a lot of it has to do with the fact that i used to like a lot more restaurants and other places around the weho / bev hills area.

idk....

#7 surprises me a little. I thought the bums were mostly in Venice Beach. Anyways, I don't live there. The last time I traveled to SoCal I got down to Malibu and then headed back to my motel in Carpinteria. I should have made time for Santa Monica, but did not. Malibu also has frustrating beach access in its central area.

I still think having a 10 minute commute in LA is virtually unheard of. Most people would seriously envy that! Heck, even in small town middle America, that is a nice commute.

[Aldous9]

Santa Monica isn't what it used to be. It's been overdeveloped and the chain restaurants have taken over.

The Pier is a disaster. 3rd st promenade is a tourist trap. $7 for a pint of beer is the norm.

It used to be a sleepy city by the sea. It had character and romance. Both of which it is devoid of now.

[Panamajack78]

Originally Posted by Aldous9

Santa Monica isn't what it used to be. It's been overdeveloped and the chain restaurants have taken over.

The Pier is a disaster. 3rd st promenade is a tourist trap. $7 for a pint of beer is the norm.

It used to be a sleepy city by the sea. It had character and romance. Both of which it is devoid of now.

Chain restaurants? really? I disagree with you, not any more chain-y than other parts of L.A. Geez you make it sound like Orange County, which is not at all. And why is the pier a disaster? It's tremendously popular with tourists, which is exactly what the way it should be.
I love how everyone always says how SM "used" to be a sleepy town. Yes, it was. A long time ago. Things change. Times change. At one point, L.A and all big cities were sleepy.

I think SM is a great place to live, if one can afford it. Much better than the mess east of the 405.
So the promenade is touristy. There are other streets in downtown SM that are frequented only by locals. There are also OTHER AREAS to go if you're a local, like Montana and Main St.

Overdeveloped? I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. It's L.A man, not a hay field in Kansas.

[Panamajack78]

Originally Posted by YoungTraveler2011

so i moved to santa monica not too long ago (i dont regret the move by any means, i can def. stay here until my lease is up) but for some reason, i dont like it as much as where i used to live.

i was living in west hollywood, border line beverly hills. on sunset blvd & larrabee st.

i moved to santa monica to be closer to work. commute is outstanding (less than 10 mins in the morning and about 10 in the afternoon).

the thing is, santa monica is not as appealing to me as the weho/bev hills and even westwood areas.

i cannot understand why but i think it might be:

1. santa monica is too boring as far as streets go (north, south, east, west), like no hills or cool streets.
2. way too touristy.
3. streets are too small/traffic moves through the city too slow.
4. not many restaurants. there are maybe a handful of restaurants that are really good, the rest is just fast food or not so good.
5. getting to the beach sucks. stairs, stairs, stairs.
6. living in santa monica u feel a little secluded from other parts of LA because its "difficult" to get out.
7. bums... BUMS...BUMS
8. overall, the city is too "right" ...if u know what i mean.

i think a lot of it has to do with the fact that i used to like a lot more restaurants and other places around the weho / bev hills area.

idk....

Cool streets? I don't know what that means. If you want famous streets go take a drive down PCH, Rte 66 or Ocean. SM doesn't have hills, but it is surrounded by hills which can be seen from any part of the city.
Too touristy? Try Rodeo Drive, or The Grove, or Hollywood, or the BH Sign on Santa Monica Blvd, or any other major attraction in L.A.
Small streets? Have you driven around L.A??? L.A has old infrastructure all over the place. Actually, SM, by not being a part of L.A has better streets than most other areas.
Not too many restaurants? Because SM has some of best dining in L.A. I mean, it is an extremely popular dining destination. SM has fabulous restaurants and gorgeous luxury hotels, all which have fantastic restaurants.
Getting to the beach? You know, you can drive to the beach instead of taking "the stairs" geez. Take the CA incline and you're there. It used to take me 5 minutes.
When I lived in SM I never felt like it was difficult to get out. I actually felt like it was easier to get around in SM than the mess east of the 405.
Bums....like everywhere in L.A, there are bums every were. Most homeless stay within a small area in SM, by the pier. I used to live near Robertson Blvd and 3rd in WeHo, across the street from BH. There were bums DAILY pushing their shopping carts. There is a permanent homeless encampment on the corner of Olympic and Beverly in BH. Drove by it today.

Yes the city is very, very liberal. That, I will give you.

[Cinema Cat]

I've lived in SM since 1987, and agree with most of the OP's comments, though not all of those things are bad.

I don't understand that SM is too "right." As someone else asked, do you mean politically? SM is very left politically. The Republicans are a third party. I say this because at one point in the 1990s, the city council had two registered Green Party members, and the rest were all Democrats. That's pretty left, by American standards.

Local election are non-partisan, but candidates do sometimes mention their registrations, so the above was known to those paying attention to local politics. One of the Green council members even served as mayor for a while.

Yes, the Third Street Promenade is touristy. And CROWDED. I avoid it, especially on weekends. One Saturday night, years ago, I happened to be there, and tried to walk down it from Wilshire to Broadway. I was INCHING along the sidewalk, surrounded by the crowd. Like trying to walk on a New York City subway platform during rush hour.

Yes, the Pier is losing its scuzzy beach town feel. There's always talk of building pricier, "trendier" restaurants on it, and shuttering the low-end, fast food eateries. Of course, it's been years since I've been on the Pier, so I don't know if they've done that yet.

Yeah, there are tons of homeless. But they tend to be passive. Unlike Seattle. I visited Seattle last December and was shocked by the aggressiveness of the Emerald City's homeless. They shout and wave at you to come on over. They get in your face, asking for money.

No restaurants? I like unpretentious diners like Izzy's and Denny's. Yes, such diners are closing down. Zucky's and Biff's closed long ago. Norm's closed recently. Denny's is set to close. Trendy restaurants are on the rise. I hate those trendy outdoor eateries on the Promenade. Tiny tables, where people go to be seen rather than to get comfy and eat.

Ironically, I think Santa Monica is increasingly like West Hollywood's Sunset Strip (at least the Promenade). Trendy restaurants with tiny tables, and no place to park.

[rzzz]

Santa Monica nightlife is pretty square, maybe that is what he meant by "right."

[Jean Jeunet]

Yeah, I don't think by him saying SM is too "right" that it means it's too left. =o) Especially since he loves WeHo. Hello!

[botticelli]

Originally Posted by Panamajack78

I love how everyone always says how SM "used" to be a sleepy town. Yes, it was. A long time ago. Things change. Times change. At one point, L.A and all big cities were sleepy.

I think SM is a great place to live, if one can afford it. Much better than the mess east of the 405.
So the promenade is touristy. There are other streets in downtown SM that are frequented only by locals. There are also OTHER AREAS to go if you're a local, like Montana and Main St.

Overdeveloped? I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. It's L.A man, not a hay field in Kansas.

I agree.

Why is everyone missing the sleepy town?? SM is on the coast of America's second largest city, why should it be sleepy?? Seriously, if you want to live in a sleepy town, move to a sleepy town, there are like a million of them in the US. Actually the only thing the US doesn't lack is sleepy towns. I honestly don't know what's so good about sleepy towns.

SM over developed? Except for the downtown area, it is still a pretty dull city dominated by low rise residential houses, gas stations and parking. A couple of bars and malls make it "over-developed"? Do you see high rise condos shooting up? Do you see office/hotels burgeoning? Visit northern part of SM and tell me it is over-developed. Sm has like 90k people, how over-developed can it be?

The promenade is touristy, so what. A city needs some touristy destinations. We want tourists, they bring revenue, energy and new faces. what's wrong with that? If you don't like it, avoid the area. big deal.

so much whining about the loss of a sleepy town for a more energetic city right beside Los Angeles. Hard to fathom.