This is the difference between Chicago and LA (Los Angeles, Santa Monica: condo, crime)

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Nope, too boring.

Wow. You do realize you have pretty much removed any respectability here, right. From hence forth, nothing you say, either right or wrong should be taken seriously. Its not a hard article - I think your public education failed you.

[HyperionGap]

Agreed. No reason to bother posting if you can't even take the time to read something.

[MB8abovetherim]

I did watch that documentary on Netflix. It was good but didn't tell me anything that I already didn't know. In my experience Skid Row has gotten better, it occupies a smaller footprint and the area just looks a bit cleaner. I'm talking around 5th and Wall streets and 6th/San Julian area. All in all Downtown Los Angeles is much MUCH better now than back in 1995 thankfully. I think it's resurgence is exciting and hopefully it's best is yet to come. As for Chicago and LA, I think LA is a lot more bustling outside of Downtown than Chicago is outside of the Loop. But that's for another thread lol

[Harrier]

Originally Posted by HyperionGap

While the information in that article was accurate for 2008, things have drastically changed in downtown LA (and Chicago) even in the last five years.

Yep - all news reports portray Chicago as more dangerous - while I have been in downtown L.A. several times in the intervening years and have never felt "unsafe".

I suppose that Chicago is just trying to live down its "second" - or is it now "third" - city complex.

[TBideon]

Well, most of these reports about Chicago's violence stem are just political i.e. anti-Obama. By and large the violence is basically unchanged in the last ten years, with the exception of some of the gang attacks in white communities like the northside beaches and Lakeview. Those are relatively new due to social networking and cell phone prevalence.

[Mashi]

Originally Posted by TBideon

Well, most of these reports about Chicago's violence stem are just political i.e. anti-Obama. By and large the violence is basically unchanged in the last ten years, with the exception of some of the gang attacks in white communities like the northside beaches and Lakeview. Those are relatively new due to social networking and cell phone prevalence.

Nine dead in Chicago's most violent weekend of the year

And that's just from yesterday. Get your head out of the sand.

[moonsparkle]

Chicago is more organized as a city, making it seem less dangerous in a way if you avoid obvious parts of the city. LA, for example, you can be in Sherman Oaks, then be in Van Nuys a minute later. Also, in winter when it's -10 the panhandlers aren't going to be as annoying.

There doesn't seem to be as much of this "neighborhood changing" in Chicago. LA can go from first to third world very quickly, besides just near downtown.

[the12ronin]

From someone who lives in K-town:


-Barring skid row, L.A. downtown is far safer than Chicago. I walk it at least once a week and often at night. I've been to DT Chicago multiple times. No comparison here.

-Agree, LA is not a city of the future per say, but in certain parts of downtown like South Park, it is definitely developing and improving. This is not to say rapidly. Walking down Broadway, one quickly sees the many dilapidated vestiges of the theater district, and it's a shame the city is not doing more to get these babies refurbished and functioning or at least open to the public.

-Memphis and most all the southern small-mid cities will never...-ever- be in the same glaxay as L.A. all things considered. The ice age will hit before that comes to pass.

-Hate to say it, but attraction-wise, Chicago handily defeats DTLA, a decidedly weak point in the city's current offerings. Once you take L.A. Live out of the picture, there really is very little going on downtown here, and it's been that way for a good bit now. Yes you have your fine dining and a few sights to see, but Downtown Los Angeles is simply put, not worth the trip.

[HyperionGap]

Exactly, I would never tell someone from out of the country to go "visit" downtown LA (apart from seeing maybe Disney Concert Hall for 5 minutes, eating lunch in Chinatown, and maybe a trip up Angels Flight what is there to do downtown on a Saturday afternoon?. Instead, you would tell them to go to Disneyland, Santa Monica Pier, Hollywood, Getty Museum, Rodeo Drive, etc. All of which are spread out over the entire metro area.

Downtown Chicago on the other hand has Grant Park, the Shedd Aquarium, a billion museums, the Bean, etc. all within walking distance from Lake Michigan. On top of that it has significantly better restaurants and theater scene than anything downtown LA can boast of.

[the12ronin]

Agreed.

Downtown Chicago by a landslide.


Now Metro to Metro? Heh, that's a different story. Chicago falls back to runner-up status. Period, point blank. Owned.