U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada > Vancouver
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-24-2010, 08:44 PM
 
Location: Hollywood North
426 posts, read 683,074 times
Reputation: 686

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robynator View Post
For example, LA's all about freeways and car culture, for example. Hours in gridlock and no sidewalks because nobody walks. You have to drive. Vancouver, by comparison, has banned freeways from even being built in the city, and instead, has an excellent public transportation network. You don't even need to own a car to live in/get around Vancouver.
Los Angeles has a much better transportation system than many people realize. It has a fairly extensive subway system then keeps expanding. Within the next few years it will go all the way to Santa Monica. The last time I was in L.A I flew and took the subway and rapid busses all over the city. It was suprising to me because I had always used a car in L.A and I listened to the people that said that it's pt system was terrible. While it is not as good as it should be for a city of it's size, it is constantly improving. It is also very cheap.I went from Santa monica to Hollywood for 50 cents. Cheap is not a word I would use when talking about public transportation in the lower mainland.
LA's a city of low density suburban sprawl. Vancouver's a city of increasing density akin to Manhattan.

I have to take issue with this. Los Angeles is actually one of the densest cities in the U.S, if you are including all of L.A County then yes it gets less dense. Even if you include the whole county though, it is far more dense than many people realize. There are large areas of L.A that are both walkable and dense. Neighbourhoods like Los Feliz, Hollywood, SilverLake, and EchoPark to name a few. In addition, close in "suburbs" like Pasadena and South Pasadena are on the gold line(subway) and are extremely walkable, particularly South Pasadena. West Hollywood and Santa Monica are also very dense and walkable, however at this time there is no subway in those areas. Many people people have this idea of 50's suburban sprawl that really does not fit L.A anymore. Even in the San Fernando Valley, L.A continues to make great strides in becoming more dense, places like North Hollywood come to mind.

I've lived my life in Vancouver and spent time in LA. I guess if you're from Osoyoos (small town in the interior of BC), you might imagine Vancouver being like LA, but they're really not. If anything, Osoyoos is like LA weather-wise. They're both deserts with lots of sunshine. Vancouver's a rainforest. Literally.
Los Angeles is not a desert. It receives too much precipitation to be a desert. It is classified as having a Mediterranean climate. Phoenix is a desert and has the heat and lack of rainfall to prove it.


The one Californian city where I can draw parallels is San Francisco. That would be more appropriate.
I enjoy your posts Robynator, I just feel that L.A gets a bad rap sometimes especially with the public transportation issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2010, 08:45 PM
 
1,055 posts, read 2,599,905 times
Reputation: 529
Been to both extensively and they aren't even remotely similar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2010, 09:41 PM
 
922 posts, read 1,350,097 times
Reputation: 313
I Have lived in both as a dual citizen, nothing alike LA is a different geography, desert/beach climate and I do consider that nature just of a different sort
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 11:57 AM
Status: "Sunny and 75!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Verde Valley
2,760 posts, read 4,603,886 times
Reputation: 1703
I've lived in BC and I'd say it's a lot more than 10 degrees colder in Vancouver, plus when you add in the grey skies and what felt to me like almost constant rain, I couldn't even compare the climates other than to say they feel like polar opposites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kkgg7 View Post
LA is probably 10 degrees hotter than Vancouver, so not really similar in weather. Vancouver's traffic is not comparable to LA at all. High crimes? maybe in their respective country, but definitely not similar.
In terms of immigrants, LA has Latinos while Vancouver has Asians.
talking about movies, LA is hollywood and celebrity culture. I don't know what Vancouver has.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2010, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Winnetka, IL & Rolling Hills, CA
1,273 posts, read 2,790,837 times
Reputation: 537
Los Angeles does not have a high crime rate. It is below the United States average and is considered one of the safest of the United States' 10 largest cities.

Vancouver is most similar to Seattle or Portland, and maybe somewhat comparable to San Francisco.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 01:25 PM
 
2,023 posts, read 3,562,623 times
Reputation: 1559
I have lived in LA, and been to Vancouver quite a bit, and from what I've seen of both, they are not really comparable at all.

Size and accessibility come to mind. LA, while admittedly mostly accessible via public transit, is tremendously more spread out than Vancouver is. Simply put, it's a MUCH bigger city where going on one public transit line will not enable you to be within a stone's throw of anywhere you would want to go in the city. (Thinking the Canada Line in Vancouver here...with, perhaps, a quick hop onto the Expo line). Traffic-wise, there's no comparison. LA, again due to its size (and its unhealthy aversion to public transit) is a just about constant nightmare. Vancouver? Not so much at all, unless there's a parade or fireworks going on.

The weather is not comparable at all. The "Mediterranean climate" in LA, with its desert winds and monsoon rains can't compare to the temperate climate that we enjoy up here. In the 3 years that I lived in LA, I "had to" wear a sweater a handful of times. After three years living in the PNW, I can vouch for the fact that, even though snow isn't plentiful, we *do* have "real winters", and plenty of gray days. Summers are generally very comfortable (which the lack of A/C in most homes up here will attest to). Can't say that about LA.

Also, from what I've seen of both places, the attitudes of the people couldn't be more different. Yes, without a doubt, there are "down-to-earth" people in LA, but, by and large, the attitude of the people and the general vibe of the city is one of "I couldn't care less about you, unless you can do something for me". Fakeness abounds. I've never gotten that vibe from Vancouver.

I'd say that a way more apt comparison would be of Vancouver to San Fransisco or Seattle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Winnetka, IL & Rolling Hills, CA
1,273 posts, read 2,790,837 times
Reputation: 537
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishigas73 View Post
I have lived in LA, and been to Vancouver quite a bit, and from what I've seen of both, they are not really comparable at all.

Size and accessibility come to mind. LA, while admittedly mostly accessible via public transit, is tremendously more spread out than Vancouver is. Simply put, it's a MUCH bigger city where going on one public transit line will not enable you to be within a stone's throw of anywhere you would want to go in the city. (Thinking the Canada Line in Vancouver here...with, perhaps, a quick hop onto the Expo line). Traffic-wise, there's no comparison. LA, again due to its size (and its unhealthy aversion to public transit) is a just about constant nightmare. Vancouver? Not so much at all, unless there's a parade or fireworks going on.

The weather is not comparable at all. The "Mediterranean climate" in LA, with its desert winds and monsoon rains can't compare to the temperate climate that we enjoy up here. In the 3 years that I lived in LA, I "had to" wear a sweater a handful of times. After three years living in the PNW, I can vouch for the fact that, even though snow isn't plentiful, we *do* have "real winters", and plenty of gray days. Summers are generally very comfortable (which the lack of A/C in most homes up here will attest to). Can't say that about LA.

Also, from what I've seen of both places, the attitudes of the people couldn't be more different. Yes, without a doubt, there are "down-to-earth" people in LA, but, by and large, the attitude of the people and the general vibe of the city is one of "I couldn't care less about you, unless you can do something for me". Fakeness abounds. I've never gotten that vibe from Vancouver.

I'd say that a way more apt comparison would be of Vancouver to San Fransisco or Seattle.
The only thing Vancouver and Los Angeles have in common is Pacific Time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2011, 01:30 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
5,637 posts, read 2,663,376 times
Reputation: 3032
The areas around downtown LA (around 100 sq miles) are actually more dense than Vancouver's 45 sq mike footprint. Someone said LA has no nature--I'm sure the 50 miles of beaches and the San Gabriel and Santa Monica mountains would take issue with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2011, 10:58 AM
 
111 posts, read 161,050 times
Reputation: 52
Yup... LA has no nature.
It only has one of the largest urban parks (griffith park is >4000 acres), miles of beaches, 2 mountain ranges. I've seen coyotes, deer, mountain lions, rattlesnakes, along with whales and dolphins all in the city proper (and the bay area).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2011, 11:34 AM
 
604 posts, read 611,763 times
Reputation: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by US-Traveller View Post
Los Angeles does not have a high crime rate. It is below the United States average and is considered one of the safest of the United States' 10 largest cities.

Vancouver is most similar to Seattle or Portland, and maybe somewhat comparable to San Francisco.
LOL Vancouver does not have a high crime rate. You are right it is similar to Portland or Seattle. Just lots of petty theft and drugs.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada > Vancouver

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, 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 - Top