Chicagoan to LA (Los Angeles, Pasadena, Santa Monica: 2015, apartments, city hall)

[andrecle]

I would definitely recommend Culver City/Palms over Pasadena after looking at your list. It gives you a much more urban feel while still being relatively safe. Pasadena might feel to suburban for you.

[PDF]

I like both Culver City and Pasadena, but I can see how someone could prefer one over the other. To me, Pasadena is way more lively.

[RaymondChandlerLives]

Old Pasadena's pedestrian activity trumps Culver City's by a clear margin. It's also a less congested part of town for those times when you want to hop in your car. Closer to work too.

Have you considered Hollywood?

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives

Old Pasadena's pedestrian activity trumps Culver City's by a clear margin. It's also a less congested part of town for those times when you want to hop in your car. Closer to work too.

Have you considered Hollywood?

Hollywood - one bedrooms range everywhere from about $1300 a month. It would fit the criteria of being walkable, fairly affordable, around a 30-60 minute drive or 30 ride on the Red Line to DTLA, lots of street life, 2 train stations, up-and-coming (something like 5 major projects underway), and I find it to be perfectly safe.

If you can, look for a place in Franklin Village. It is the area of Hollywood along Franklin to the east of the 101 Freeway. My wife and I are looking to relocate to that area after being more in Central Hollywood for the last 2.5 years. It is decidedly Los Angeles, but it has a bit of an East Coast vibe to it, probably because it has a ton of transplants.

[PDF]

Originally Posted by munchitup

Hollywood - one bedrooms range everywhere from about $1300 a month. It would fit the criteria of being walkable, fairly affordable, around a 30-60 minute drive or 30 ride on the Red Line to DTLA, lots of street life, 2 train stations, up-and-coming (something like 5 major projects underway), and I find it to be perfectly safe.

If you can, look for a place in Franklin Village. It is the area of Hollywood along Franklin to the east of the 101 Freeway. My wife and I are looking to relocate to that area after being more in Central Hollywood for the last 2.5 years. It is decidedly Los Angeles, but it has a bit of an East Coast vibe to it, probably because it has a ton of transplants.

Is that the area by the Vermont/Sunset subway stop? I didn't know what that area was called. Now that's somewhere in central LA I wouldn't mind being. Checked it out a few times when I go for dinner at Mother Dough.

[Chicagoist123]

Originally Posted by munchitup

Hollywood - one bedrooms range everywhere from about $1300 a month. It would fit the criteria of being walkable, fairly affordable, around a 30-60 minute drive or 30 ride on the Red Line to DTLA, lots of street life, 2 train stations, up-and-coming (something like 5 major projects underway), and I find it to be perfectly safe.

If you can, look for a place in Franklin Village. It is the area of Hollywood along Franklin to the east of the 101 Freeway. My wife and I are looking to relocate to that area after being more in Central Hollywood for the last 2.5 years. It is decidedly Los Angeles, but it has a bit of an East Coast vibe to it, probably because it has a ton of transplants.

Hollywood be cool. But is it very touristy? I just am not a big fan of touristy areas to live in and I remember when I went to Hollywood I did not like it. BUt again that was from a tourists perspective. I hate Navy Pier in Chicago, but doesn't mean I wouldn't live in the area.

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by Chicagoist123

Hollywood be cool. But is it very touristy? I just am not a big fan of touristy areas to live in and I remember when I went to Hollywood I did not like it. BUt again that was from a tourists perspective. I hate Navy Pier in Chicago, but doesn't mean I wouldn't live in the area.

Hollywood is mostly touristy along Hollywood and Sunset Blvd between Highland and Vine. The rest of it isn't as much. I would say at this point Santa Monica is considerably more touristy as a whole than Hollywood.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Culver City is a lot more fun than Pasadena, and you can take the Expo to work in Downtown LA. Every bullet point you put on your list is Culver City. You should try to live as close to Downtown Culver City as possible (near the intersection of Washington Blvd and Culver Blvd).

Another reason Culver City is preferable to Pasadena is its proximity to the popular areas in the Westside like Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Venice, Marina del Rey, West LA.

Really? Based on what? Have you thoroughly explored Pasadena?

Well, I am moving to NE LA next month from the Palms/Culver City area. Some people actually prefer Pasadena to the west side for many reasons.

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Really? Based on what? Have you thoroughly explored Pasadena?

Well, I am moving to NE LA next month from the Palms/Culver City area. Some people actually prefer Pasadena to the west side for many reasons.

Haven't thoroughly explored Pasadena but I've been enough times to decide it's pretty dull compared to the Westside and central LA. It's also kind of isolated. Even if Culver alone vs Pasadena, and Pasadena has more going on, Culver is right by a ton more options, a short drive or public transit route.

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by PDF

Is that the area by the Vermont/Sunset subway stop? I didn't know what that area was called. Now that's somewhere in central LA I wouldn't mind being. Checked it out a few times when I go for dinner at Mother Dough.

It's more towards Franklin / Bronson. It's where the UCB theater. I think Sunset / Vermont is straight East Hollywood.

To the OP - Hollywood is touristy, but definitely a great place to live too. Lots of practical, neighborhood serving retail and amenities. And only getting better.