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.
I see what the guy is saying in this thread. What exactly is a city without an active and lively downtown? We can all sit around and talk about how great the "metro" and surrounding areas is all day, but without a vibrant lively downtown what good does being one giant spread out place do? I am reading people saying "Well L.A is it's OWN it has it's own way of doing things" Well that's nice.. How many other cities do you see people talking about the metro and not the actual downtown?
People are forgetting surrounding areas are just that, surrounding areas! Downtown is the heart , a place that should be the most alive , and most vibrant, but the fact is, downtown LA is not vibrant, is not happening, and is nothing to talk about. I understand the LA "metro" or "surrounding" areas has a lot to offer, but people are missing the entire point the guy is making here. What good does having a bunch of great surrounding areas do, when the heart of the city has nothing really going on?
People laugh at LA because it seems to have the population part because it is the "2nd largest in the US" , but yet a downtown of a midsize city that nobody seems to care about, and that is quite sad if you ask me. The people can find any and every excuse in the book they can say "Well all cities are different" or "LA doesn't want to be like New York" blah blah blah, but the bottom line is LA has a great surrounding setting and metro (beaches, mountains etc), but God awful downtown and central gathering place for urban setting - lets also forget being "dense" and being "urban" are not the same thing! LA has dense sprawl, urban is something where everything is in walking distance and you dont need a vehicle, just because LA is dense in population doesnt make it a desirable urban setting.
LA's reputation is built entirely off of its METRO/SURROUNDING AREAS!! LOL! Just imagine if people talked about how great surrounding NYC is, or surrounding Chicago is, but yet they never talked about the actual heart of the city itself. And than people would defend it by saying "its a different type of city" or "it doesnt wanna be like other cities" do you know how ridiculous that sounds?? If I was talking about how great Jersey City or North Jersey is but failing to actually talk about the core of NYC (manhattan ) . People are so blind I am rolling in laughter at all the ignorance at this thread. "YEAH our city is great because of our surroundings"......uhhhh..........Surroundings are great, but what about the heart of the city? Downtown? Urban living? How are people seriously going to try and convince themselves and others that the surroundings of the city are what make the city what it is?
That's like going to a restaurant and purchasing a meal and it's the complete opposite of what you expected, a disappointment to say the least, and you are not satisfied. But yet their reasoning for awful food is "well it's the setting that you are in" "it doesn't want to be like other restaurants", the bottom line is the food sucked, and if the food sucks who cares what the setting are or what reasoning behind them serving terrible food is. Same with LA people want to go to a place where the heart of the city is, that is downtown. People go downtown and are nothing short of disappointment. There excuse? "It's the surrounding areas !" "we dont wanna be like other cities". I dont know anybody that goes to a city and brags about the metro and surrounding areas but never brings up downtown as being the most vibrant place in the city. LA people can convince themselves all they want that there sprawl, and spread out metro is what defines a "city", but I am not convinced at all.
Bottom line, LA is one giant suburb with no downtown, it is known for it's surrounding areas, but not for it's actual downtown. That to me makes it undesirable as a "city" as a metro sure , great, but I've not once ever heard anybody go to New York City or Anywhere USA city and talk solely about how great there metro is and nothing else. LA may be able to get away with it, but I am not buying it at all. Yeah.. Let's go to San Francisco and talk about how great the surrounding bay area is - the beaches, the mountains, the suburbs , but lets not talk about the actual urban setting of San Francisco itself....Riiiiiight...use that excuse for any other city, and people would seriously laugh at you.....
have you never been downtown? apparently not. ever gotten round without a car in LA? apparently not.
it is not good grace to come somewhere and attempt to make it over in the image of another city. i don't go back home to atlanta and say, "yeah, we need to knock down all these here pine trees and plant some palms. atlanta needs to be angelized!"
apparently, since you aren't actually a MEMBER of city data, i can only assume that you are trying to sell something? a bit of market research, perhaps?
For those saying we don't need a downtown. Ever think it's a sin to let those old buildings, all that history, the only part ofLA that actually feels like a city die out?
Downtown LA is very much needed. It is the main heart and origin of the city. What good is it for a city to have a neglected downtown?
LA is a victim of vanity. Other cities took pride in themselves. Watch the documentary "LA Plays Itself", and it will tell you how the Hollywood industry screwed with LA's image. How much a joke of a city it has been depicted as. Downtown is the true LA, the true city feel of LA. It deserves more respect and more care than than it has been given the past several decades.
Bottom line, LA is one giant suburb with no downtown, it is known for it's surrounding areas, but not for it's actual downtown. That to me makes it undesirable as a "city" as a metro sure
One of the many reasons why LA is so nice is because it does not have a super-overcrowded downtown. I live in San Francisco and have not been downtown voluntarily since 2007. Overcrowded downtowns are unsuitable for human habitation!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityKing
What exactly is a city without an active and lively downtown?
I see what the guy is saying in this thread. What exactly is a city without an active and lively downtown? We can all sit around and talk about how great the "metro" and surrounding areas is all day, but without a vibrant lively downtown what good does being one giant spread out place do? I am reading people saying "Well L.A is it's OWN it has it's own way of doing things" Well that's nice.. How many other cities do you see people talking about the metro and not the actual downtown?
People are forgetting surrounding areas are just that, surrounding areas! Downtown is the heart , a place that should be the most alive , and most vibrant, but the fact is, downtown LA is not vibrant, is not happening, and is nothing to talk about. I understand the LA "metro" or "surrounding" areas has a lot to offer, but people are missing the entire point the guy is making here. What good does having a bunch of great surrounding areas do, when the heart of the city has nothing really going on?
People laugh at LA because it seems to have the population part because it is the "2nd largest in the US" , but yet a downtown of a midsize city that nobody seems to care about, and that is quite sad if you ask me. The people can find any and every excuse in the book they can say "Well all cities are different" or "LA doesn't want to be like New York" blah blah blah, but the bottom line is LA has a great surrounding setting and metro (beaches, mountains etc), but God awful downtown and central gathering place for urban setting - lets also forget being "dense" and being "urban" are not the same thing! LA has dense sprawl, urban is something where everything is in walking distance and you dont need a vehicle, just because LA is dense in population doesnt make it a desirable urban setting.
LA's reputation is built entirely off of its METRO/SURROUNDING AREAS!! LOL! Just imagine if people talked about how great surrounding NYC is, or surrounding Chicago is, but yet they never talked about the actual heart of the city itself. And than people would defend it by saying "its a different type of city" or "it doesnt wanna be like other cities" do you know how ridiculous that sounds?? If I was talking about how great Jersey City or North Jersey is but failing to actually talk about the core of NYC (manhattan ) . People are so blind I am rolling in laughter at all the ignorance at this thread. "YEAH our city is great because of our surroundings"......uhhhh..........Surroundings are great, but what about the heart of the city? Downtown? Urban living? How are people seriously going to try and convince themselves and others that the surroundings of the city are what make the city what it is?
That's like going to a restaurant and purchasing a meal and it's the complete opposite of what you expected, a disappointment to say the least, and you are not satisfied. But yet their reasoning for awful food is "well it's the setting that you are in" "it doesn't want to be like other restaurants", the bottom line is the food sucked, and if the food sucks who cares what the setting are or what reasoning behind them serving terrible food is. Same with LA people want to go to a place where the heart of the city is, that is downtown. People go downtown and are nothing short of disappointment. There excuse? "It's the surrounding areas !" "we dont wanna be like other cities". I dont know anybody that goes to a city and brags about the metro and surrounding areas but never brings up downtown as being the most vibrant place in the city. LA people can convince themselves all they want that there sprawl, and spread out metro is what defines a "city", but I am not convinced at all.
Bottom line, LA is one giant suburb with no downtown, it is known for it's surrounding areas, but not for it's actual downtown. That to me makes it undesirable as a "city" as a metro sure , great, but I've not once ever heard anybody go to New York City or Anywhere USA city and talk solely about how great there metro is and nothing else. LA may be able to get away with it, but I am not buying it at all. Yeah.. Let's go to San Francisco and talk about how great the surrounding bay area is - the beaches, the mountains, the suburbs , but lets not talk about the actual urban setting of San Francisco itself....Riiiiiight...use that excuse for any other city, and people would seriously laugh at you.....
Looks like we have a visitor from the city vs city board. How nice of you to stop by.
Wanna know why folks in New York and Chicago don't talk about anything outside their downtown and near downtown neighborhoods? Because they're colossal bores, that's why. Naperville, LOL. Staten Island, LOL. Stamford, CT...LMAO.
I'll take highly interesting metro with a so-so downtown over a city with a great downtown and thousands of sq miles of filler. Now scram.
Last edited by RaymondChandlerLives; 12-06-2012 at 01:07 AM..
For those saying we don't need a downtown. Ever think it's a sin to let those old buildings, all that history, the only part ofLA that actually feels like a city die out?
Downtown LA is very much needed. It is the main heart and origin of the city. What good is it for a city to have a neglected downtown?
LA is a victim of vanity. Other cities took pride in themselves. Watch the documentary "LA Plays Itself", and it will tell you how the Hollywood industry screwed with LA's image. How much a joke of a city it has been depicted as. Downtown is the true LA, the true city feel of LA. It deserves more respect and more care than than it has been given the past several decades.
L.A. is one of the biggest and most visited cities on Earth, one of the most talked about places on the globe, all without a particularly dominant downtown. So no, L.A. doesn't need one, never has. Even at its peak, DTLA wasn't the center of energy The Loop and Midtown are for their regions. Did that slow the region's growth? Did it prevent the region from going 0-18 million in the relative blink of an eye?
Don't get me wrong, its great that DTLA is revitalizing, but that revitalization is a like a cherry on top of a great dessert, not the dessert itself.
I see what the guy is saying in this thread. What exactly is a city without an active and lively downtown? We can all sit around and talk about how great the "metro" and surrounding areas is all day, but without a vibrant lively downtown what good does being one giant spread out place do? I am reading people saying "Well L.A is it's OWN it has it's own way of doing things" Well that's nice.. How many other cities do you see people talking about the metro and not the actual downtown?
People are forgetting surrounding areas are just that, surrounding areas! Downtown is the heart , a place that should be the most alive , and most vibrant, but the fact is, downtown LA is not vibrant, is not happening, and is nothing to talk about. I understand the LA "metro" or "surrounding" areas has a lot to offer, but people are missing the entire point the guy is making here. What good does having a bunch of great surrounding areas do, when the heart of the city has nothing really going on?
People laugh at LA because it seems to have the population part because it is the "2nd largest in the US" , but yet a downtown of a midsize city that nobody seems to care about, and that is quite sad if you ask me. The people can find any and every excuse in the book they can say "Well all cities are different" or "LA doesn't want to be like New York" blah blah blah, but the bottom line is LA has a great surrounding setting and metro (beaches, mountains etc), but God awful downtown and central gathering place for urban setting - lets also forget being "dense" and being "urban" are not the same thing! LA has dense sprawl, urban is something where everything is in walking distance and you dont need a vehicle, just because LA is dense in population doesnt make it a desirable urban setting.
LA's reputation is built entirely off of its METRO/SURROUNDING AREAS!! LOL! Just imagine if people talked about how great surrounding NYC is, or surrounding Chicago is, but yet they never talked about the actual heart of the city itself. And than people would defend it by saying "its a different type of city" or "it doesnt wanna be like other cities" do you know how ridiculous that sounds?? If I was talking about how great Jersey City or North Jersey is but failing to actually talk about the core of NYC (manhattan ) . People are so blind I am rolling in laughter at all the ignorance at this thread. "YEAH our city is great because of our surroundings"......uhhhh..........Surroundings are great, but what about the heart of the city? Downtown? Urban living? How are people seriously going to try and convince themselves and others that the surroundings of the city are what make the city what it is?
That's like going to a restaurant and purchasing a meal and it's the complete opposite of what you expected, a disappointment to say the least, and you are not satisfied. But yet their reasoning for awful food is "well it's the setting that you are in" "it doesn't want to be like other restaurants", the bottom line is the food sucked, and if the food sucks who cares what the setting are or what reasoning behind them serving terrible food is. Same with LA people want to go to a place where the heart of the city is, that is downtown. People go downtown and are nothing short of disappointment. There excuse? "It's the surrounding areas !" "we dont wanna be like other cities". I dont know anybody that goes to a city and brags about the metro and surrounding areas but never brings up downtown as being the most vibrant place in the city. LA people can convince themselves all they want that there sprawl, and spread out metro is what defines a "city", but I am not convinced at all.
Bottom line, LA is one giant suburb with no downtown, it is known for it's surrounding areas, but not for it's actual downtown. That to me makes it undesirable as a "city" as a metro sure , great, but I've not once ever heard anybody go to New York City or Anywhere USA city and talk solely about how great there metro is and nothing else. LA may be able to get away with it, but I am not buying it at all. Yeah.. Let's go to San Francisco and talk about how great the surrounding bay area is - the beaches, the mountains, the suburbs , but lets not talk about the actual urban setting of San Francisco itself....Riiiiiight...use that excuse for any other city, and people would seriously laugh at you.....
New York and Chicago are truly amazing cities to visit, and offers urban living unparalleled anywhere else, but living anywhere in those metro areas beyond the downtown and near neighborhoods are going to be indistinctive relative to LA.
One can argue, what the point of having a world class downtown area, if the social scene in then urban neighborhoods beyond the urban core largely revolve around sports bars and drinking, and the suburbs beyond them are boring, segregated, and homogenous?
One of the many reasons why LA is so nice is because it does not have a super-overcrowded downtown. I live in San Francisco and have not been downtown voluntarily since 2007. Overcrowded downtowns are unsuitable for human habitation!
Less crowded and a better place to live!
Crowdedness is inevitable. It's a c ity. Sprawl is not a suitable thing for a city. It's unorganized and a mess. Why do you think LA is trying to change?
also I think the LAPD needs to be learn how to be more approachable and dispell these myths from what people see of the LAPD in the news and movies & TV shows, in essence they need to be more like NYPD cops, on any given day for example in Midtown Manhattan, you'll be able to see people casually talking with the NYPD officers, smiling, laughing, shaking hands etc., or even compassion and generosity like that New York cop who gave that homeless man a pair of shoes last week; you just don't get that vibe with the LAPD, with the LAPD there's more of fear and standoffishness, that it's like if you don't treat them with respect they'll beat the crap out of you
I see what the guy is saying in this thread. What exactly is a city without an active and lively downtown? We can all sit around and talk about how great the "metro" and surrounding areas is all day, but without a vibrant lively downtown what good does being one giant spread out place do? I am reading people saying "Well L.A is it's OWN it has it's own way of doing things" Well that's nice.. How many other cities do you see people talking about the metro and not the actual downtown?
People are forgetting surrounding areas are just that, surrounding areas! Downtown is the heart , a place that should be the most alive , and most vibrant, but the fact is, downtown LA is not vibrant, is not happening, and is nothing to talk about. I understand the LA "metro" or "surrounding" areas has a lot to offer, but people are missing the entire point the guy is making here. What good does having a bunch of great surrounding areas do, when the heart of the city has nothing really going on?
People laugh at LA because it seems to have the population part because it is the "2nd largest in the US" , but yet a downtown of a midsize city that nobody seems to care about, and that is quite sad if you ask me. The people can find any and every excuse in the book they can say "Well all cities are different" or "LA doesn't want to be like New York" blah blah blah, but the bottom line is LA has a great surrounding setting and metro (beaches, mountains etc), but God awful downtown and central gathering place for urban setting - lets also forget being "dense" and being "urban" are not the same thing! LA has dense sprawl, urban is something where everything is in walking distance and you dont need a vehicle, just because LA is dense in population doesnt make it a desirable urban setting.
LA's reputation is built entirely off of its METRO/SURROUNDING AREAS!! LOL! Just imagine if people talked about how great surrounding NYC is, or surrounding Chicago is, but yet they never talked about the actual heart of the city itself. And than people would defend it by saying "its a different type of city" or "it doesnt wanna be like other cities" do you know how ridiculous that sounds?? If I was talking about how great Jersey City or North Jersey is but failing to actually talk about the core of NYC (manhattan ) . People are so blind I am rolling in laughter at all the ignorance at this thread. "YEAH our city is great because of our surroundings"......uhhhh..........Surroundings are great, but what about the heart of the city? Downtown? Urban living? How are people seriously going to try and convince themselves and others that the surroundings of the city are what make the city what it is?
That's like going to a restaurant and purchasing a meal and it's the complete opposite of what you expected, a disappointment to say the least, and you are not satisfied. But yet their reasoning for awful food is "well it's the setting that you are in" "it doesn't want to be like other restaurants", the bottom line is the food sucked, and if the food sucks who cares what the setting are or what reasoning behind them serving terrible food is. Same with LA people want to go to a place where the heart of the city is, that is downtown. People go downtown and are nothing short of disappointment. There excuse? "It's the surrounding areas !" "we dont wanna be like other cities". I dont know anybody that goes to a city and brags about the metro and surrounding areas but never brings up downtown as being the most vibrant place in the city. LA people can convince themselves all they want that there sprawl, and spread out metro is what defines a "city", but I am not convinced at all.
Bottom line, LA is one giant suburb with no downtown, it is known for it's surrounding areas, but not for it's actual downtown. That to me makes it undesirable as a "city" as a metro sure , great, but I've not once ever heard anybody go to New York City or Anywhere USA city and talk solely about how great there metro is and nothing else. LA may be able to get away with it, but I am not buying it at all. Yeah.. Let's go to San Francisco and talk about how great the surrounding bay area is - the beaches, the mountains, the suburbs , but lets not talk about the actual urban setting of San Francisco itself....Riiiiiight...use that excuse for any other city, and people would seriously laugh at you.....
What a terrible post. Did you sign up to this site just to post this nonsense?
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.
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.
