Is L.A. the closest thing to a perfect metro? (Los Angeles: neighborhoods, to buy)

[2Easy]

Originally Posted by botticelli

that's really good to know.
I lived in LA about exactly 10 years ago (2001-2004) and at that time, DTLA is somewhere you go only when 1) you work there 2) you have no car and have to shop there. I went to downtown for less than 5 times during the 3.5 years stay.

Glad things have improved.

You left just as the changes were slowly beginning downtown and you'd surely be surprised to see it now. Even people where I work in Orange County go to downtown and given how people from Orange County feel about LA in general, that is saying something.

[MantaRay]

I would say no. Lack of extensive rail in a metro that size is really a big negative. Most of LA just feels like sprawl with not a whole lot of character. My favorite parts of LA are Santa Monica and the Rancho Cucamonga areas. Both are microcosms of good neighborhood/town planning and have a distinctive character, even though they are different in feel. But by and large, LA just grew without good planning. Also, if you can't bike around the downtown area safely, in my opinion that automatically disqualifies a city from being a good example of a city, let alone perfect. LA is a city for the car, and only pockets are welcoming to bicyclists. Downtown is not one of those pockets.

[415_s2k]

Originally Posted by botticelli

that's really good to know.
I lived in LA about exactly 10 years ago (2001-2004) and at that time, DTLA is somewhere you go only when 1) you work there 2) you have no car and have to shop there. I went to downtown for less than 5 times during the 3.5 years stay.

Glad things have improved.

The first time I visited LA was in '01, and I took a bus downtown because that's generally where one goes to have fun (I was 17, saved up, flew out there with my HS girlfriend, and didn't have a guidebook or anything). Was shocked to discover that it was a bunch of bankers and lawyers from 9-5, and then bums on the off hours.

I'd heard a bunch of friends mention DTLA and seen a bunch of posters here talk about it before I moved back, so a couple days after I got back into town, I headed down there and yes, it had definitely done a 180. You could see it starting in Little Tokyo with the advent of the Little Tokyo lofts and the increasing influence that Japan has had on US pop culture, as well as the Disney Concert Hall and the renovation of disused warehouses and factories into hip lofts and live/work spaces, and it's only accelerated in the meantime.

The next time you're in town, check out Seven Grand. Cool bar.

[2Easy]

Originally Posted by MB8abovetherim

I'm sick of hearing people boost public transport like it's so amazing. The most effecient systems STILL don't beat having a car. Maybe in places like Manhattan where the "Reich" has made it a pain in the ass to find parking that is cheap and available this concept has legs. But that's not everywhere! There's an episode of Top Gear where the three hosts came up with a race: They all would go from London to Monte Carlo. One of the host would drive the entire way and the other two would take the TGV. The guy in the car won. He in a car (Granted it was an Aston Martin) beat the most efficient PT system ON EARTH!

On PT, one will always have to wait, never get off exactly where they need to be and lack the freedom to take the most direct route. Somebody in a car can.

Anyway, sorry to rant. I think LA is Americas perfect metro when you consider all the elements it brings to the table. Yeah NY and other east coast metros have a lot of urban characteristics that LA doesn't have a lot of. But guess what? in NY when I get tired of looking at identical tennaments I can just look the other way and....um wait. Oh, nevermind...

There's also a Top Gear where they race from IIRC Fulham to City Airport by bike, public transit, speed boat, and car and the car finishes last.

Public transit gives people choices, that's all. No one need be forced to give up their car, but having a choice is important.

[415_s2k]

Originally Posted by MantaRay

Also, if you can't bike around the downtown area safely, in my opinion that automatically disqualifies a city from being a good example of a city, let alone perfect. LA is a city for the car, and only pockets are welcoming to bicyclists. Downtown is not one of those pockets.

Although I own this:


I put more miles per week on this:

I generally ride as a hobby and for fitness, and put on average 20-40 miles per day on it. My rides start in BH, and usually take me down Sunset, down Hilgard/UCLA, then down Santa Monica Blvd, out to the beach, back up Wilshire, SM, or Olympic, then back up to Sunset, through the Strip, out to Silverlake, to DTLA, up 3rd through Koreatown, then back through to BH. I don't generally run into any problems.

DTLA is actually quite welcoming to cyclists; there have been quite a few cycling-oriented events down there, the fixie/roadbike scene is big from Koreatown/Hollywood/Silverlake/Los Feliz through DTLA and to East LA, and they even put in pretty considerable bike lanes a few months back:



All of this is to say NOTHING about the fact that the weather is conducive year-round to riding!

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer

No. Everything important is far, far too spread out in the LA area.

That is very unattractive in a city to me.

But we are talking about metro areas.

People don't realize that suburbs of dense, walkable transit oriented cities have suburbs that lean more towards woodsy and exurban.

So much, that the overall urbanized area density of greater LA is more than any other metro area.

In highly centralized, core-centered, carless-living urban cores, people are usually completely unaware of the VERY suburban lifestyle that people live in the suburbs of Boston, Philly, Chicago, D.C., even the outer reaches of the NYC tri-state area.

In LA, you have areas like Hermosa beach at 13,000 pp/sm and it is like 25 miles from downtown. Its more multicentered, than spread out.

[botticelli]

Originally Posted by 415_s2k

The first time I visited LA was in '01, and I took a bus downtown because that's generally where one goes to have fun (I was 17, saved up, flew out there with my HS girlfriend, and didn't have a guidebook or anything). Was shocked to discover that it was a bunch of bankers and lawyers from 9-5, and then bums on the off hours.

I'd heard a bunch of friends mention DTLA and seen a bunch of posters here talk about it before I moved back, so a couple days after I got back into town, I headed down there and yes, it had definitely done a 180. You could see it starting in Little Tokyo with the advent of the Little Tokyo lofts and the increasing influence that Japan has had on US pop culture, as well as the Disney Concert Hall and the renovation of disused warehouses and factories into hip lofts and live/work spaces, and it's only accelerated in the meantime.

The next time you're in town, check out Seven Grand. Cool bar.

wow. I miss the whole action!
I vividly remember one night in Dec 2001, a couple of friends from Indiana came to visited me. After dark, we were like: let's go somewhere to have some fun. Where, downtown of course!

When we headed there, it was a darkland without a single soul on the street, except some lights from the empty office buildings. It was so scary and shocking that we drove away at full speed immediately!

Never knew "downtown" has such a unique status in LA back then.

[MB8abovetherim]

Originally Posted by 2Easy

There's also a Top Gear where they race from IIRC Fulham to City Airport by bike, public transit, speed boat, and car and the car finishes last.

Public transit gives people choices, that's all. No one need be forced to give up their car, but having a choice is important.

Agreed. But I know there are a lot of people who are against cars and for strictly PT. It's just not practical. How am I gonna get $100 worth of groceries on the bus ya know? And the size of LA means that PT will never work for that size. However I will concede that if PT was applied moreso to serve individual neighborhoods and maybe connect to a couple other...that would work better in LA.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by MantaRay

I would say no. Lack of extensive rail in a metro that size is really a big negative. Most of LA just feels like sprawl with not a whole lot of character. My favorite parts of LA are Santa Monica and the Rancho Cucamonga areas. Both are microcosms of good neighborhood/town planning and have a distinctive character, even though they are different in feel. But by and large, LA just grew without good planning. Also, if you can't bike around the downtown area safely, in my opinion that automatically disqualifies a city from being a good example of a city, let alone perfect. LA is a city for the car, and only pockets are welcoming to bicyclists. Downtown is not one of those pockets.

You don't like sprawl with no character, but you find Rancho Cucamonga in the Inland Empire your favorite part of LA. OK.

[2Easy]

Originally Posted by MB8abovetherim

Agreed. But I know there are a lot of people who are against cars and for strictly PT. It's just not practical. How am I gonna get $100 worth of groceries on the bus ya know? And the size of LA means that PT will never work for that size. However I will concede that if PT was applied moreso to serve individual neighborhoods and maybe connect to a couple other...that would work better in LA.

I disagree that public transportation will never work for LA as it already works for quite a few people. And regarding groceries, you make more frequent, but smaller purchases. That's not a big deal but what can be a big deal is having kids. I think that it's very hard to be car free in LA (or almost anywhere in the US) if you have kids and both parents work.