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

[cityKing]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

I annoy this forum with my criticisms of L.A.

But being around it, I can assure you that the suburban feel you talk about really only starts when you start entering the valley or more of the outer areas of L.A.

I been to a real suburb before, after moving from Chicago to something that looked similar to this:

Well we are just glad you know what a "suburb " is , now apply that same thinking to LA .

Here's some homework for you. Go back and look at a map of LA again, and you or anybody with half a brain will CLEARLY see LA consists of a vast majority of suburbs compiled together into one particular region. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out, in fact it is common sense.

If you still need some help here you go :

1. You need a car to get around
2. The metro is the "main highlight" of the the "city"
3. It downtown is dead and nobody seems to care about it
3. The vast majority of people are living in Single family Homes, OR suburban styled apartments

That's exactly what you call a SUBURBAN city, a SUBURBAN city, is a city that most people drive cars, and live in single family homes, an URBAN city, a lot of people are walking and living in the core of the city(ex a Condo downtown) do you see the difference now? Did I explain it to ina way that makes sense to a 2nd grader? Is it clear now why Los Angeles is more of a suburban city, than a true urban center?

[nslander]

Originally Posted by cityKing

The reality is, Los Angeles is nothing more than a bunch of suburbs piled on top of each other that people usually refer to as "LA" when realistically when they are talking about "LA" they are talking more about the entire METRO than the actual CITY! Isn't that funny ?

Funny, no. Just sad.

Definition of SUBURB

a : an outlying part of a city or town
b : a smaller community adjacent to or within commuting distance of a city
c plural : the residential area on the outskirts of a city or large town
Suburb - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

So, where exactly is that large city “adjacent to within commuting distance “ of this supposed collection of suburbs?

It’s apparent words aren’t your thing.

[Chicano3000X]

Originally Posted by cityKing

Well we are just glad you know what a "suburb " is , now apply that same thinking to LA .

Here's some homework for you. Go back and look at a map of LA again, and you or anybody with half a brain will CLEARLY see LA consists of a vast majority of suburbs compiled together into one particular region. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out, in fact it is common sense.

If you still need some help here you go :

1. You need a car to get around
2. The metro is the "main highlight" of the the "city"
3. It downtown is dead and nobody seems to care about it
3. The vast majority of people are living in Single family Homes, OR suburban styled apartments

That's exactly what you call a SUBURBAN city, a SUBURBAN city, is a city that most people drive cars, and live in single family homes, an URBAN city, a lot of people are walking and living in the core of the city(ex a Condo downtown) do you see the difference now? Did I explain it to ina way that makes sense to a 2nd grader? Is it clear now why Los Angeles is more of a suburban city, than a true urban center?

Idk, lets see.
I've been using public transit for a while. I take he 780 to pcc, and to holywood, the subway to downtown, and walk to different spots. Now the subway and bus, I could not find a seat cuz they were crowded. Then as for downtown, I have been going there. Dead is not a word I would use to describe. People walking their dogs, open businesses, not to mention ordinary stores are open there. Ordinary people walking around who live there and also talked to a couple of women there(some real fine ones too), they loved living in downtown. Middle class, nice clothes, just on a stroll brought spring street.

Tell me again how downtown is dead..

[munchitup]

Take a look at the charts on the links:

Transit Mode Share Trends Looking Steady; Rail Appears to Encourage Non-Automobile Commutes « The Transport Politic

The metro area of Los Angeles comes in at 8th best in the nation for least people driving alone to work.

The city itself comes in at 10th best in the nation for non-auto share (transit + walking + cycling), though it is 7 percentage points behind Portland at 9th so needs to gain a lot to improve.

The Miami metro comes in at 18th, far below the LA metro.

[cityKing]

Originally Posted by munchitup

Hate to break it to you but Miami is also one of those cities - Little Havana is much denser than downtown Miami. It is a little bit funny someone from Miami is so critical of Los Angeles and how urban it is, considering a lot of Miami (and the most walkable parts) look like a toned-down version of Central Los Angeles.

Last time I checked Little Havana (Density 21,815/sq miles) is not as densely populated as downtown Miami ( Density 27,487/sq mile)

Little Havana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Downtown Miami - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I can't take any of what you say as credible until you get your facts straight.

And just to remind you LA's downtown is a density of 8,580/sq mi. meanwhile Koreatown = 42,609/sq mi

That is really kind of scary, the 2nd largest "city" in America it's OWN downtown urban center is not it's own most populated region..

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by cityKing

Last time I checked Little Havana (Density 21,815/sq miles) is not as densely populated as downtown Miami ( Density 27,487/sq mile)

Little Havana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Downtown Miami - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I can't take any of what you say as credible until you get your facts straight.

And just to remind you LA's downtown is a density of 8,580/sq mi. meanwhile Koreatown = 42,609/sq mi

That is really kind of scary, the 2nd largest "city" in America it's OWN downtown urban center is not it's own most populated region..

Ah I didn't see that one stretch of high-density census tracts to the south. I wasn't going off of Wikipedia: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...bile-commutes/

The point is still valid that almost every big city has higher density neighborhoods outside the downtown. BTW the Historic Core in DTLA is pretty dense, in the 30k range and growing.

[cityKing]

Originally Posted by nslander

Funny, no. Just sad.

Definition of SUBURB

a : an outlying part of a city or town
b : a smaller community adjacent to or within commuting distance of a city
c plural : the residential area on the outskirts of a city or large town
Suburb - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

So, where exactly is that large city “adjacent to within commuting distance “ of this supposed collection of suburbs?

It’s apparent words aren’t your thing.

Here is some education for you

Urban = downtown = walkability, no vehicle necessary = people living in a central gathering where everything is at your fingertips.

suburban is the neighborhoods just outside of downtown = meaning you have to use a CAR in order to get around, meaning more than likely you live in a single family home and drive around everywhere

Rural = a small town not located anywhere near the "city".

People care more in Los Angeles for living in a suburban setting - ex: single family home/driving car, than an URBAN setting - ex: living in a condo downtown/ not having to drive a car. When you think of CITY what you should be thinking is the core of the city (downtown) and that should be the most vibrant, and active place with the highest population density.

The fact is, people don't go to LA for the actual downtown most of the time when they go to LA they are going to visit the METRO. When was the last time you know someone who went to NYC to visit the metro ? People go to NYC to get it's URBAN setting, when people go to LA they go to see it's densely populated SUBURBS, do you see the difference?

The people in LA value living more of a suburban style than an urban style, therefore it isn't LA you a really even getting, when people think LA they think they are getting the "city" when realistically all they are getting is a suburban setting outside of a CITY. And when people care more about it's surrounding suburbs more than the actual urban center point, that right there tells you the main focus isn't on the cities urban center.

Los Angeles is suburban city on steroids. San diego is another classic example of a suburban city, where everyone is living in single family homes, and needs a car to get around almost everywhere, and the main focus isn't on the downtown. There are plenty of suburban cities, San Diego, Phoenix, Tucson. Than there are urban cities : Miami, CHICAGO, NYC , San Francisco, Philly. I hope that finally sunk in.

[nslander]

Originally Posted by cityKing

Here is some fevered nonsense for you

I'm not enabling your silliness. Just stick to the definition:

Where is that large city “adjacent to within commuting distance" of this supposed collection of suburbs?

[Chicano3000X]

I think CityKing is behind the times with how he describes L.A.

It's not the 80's or 90's anymore.

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

I think CityKing is behind the times with how he describes L.A.

It's not the 80's or 90's anymore.

More like the 50's. In Sun Valley.