Seems folks who downplay the Los Angeles as a big suburb seem to only ever experience the Valley or the West side (San Francisco: cul-de-sac, 2015)

[Chicano3000X]

Or they've haven't been there since 1995..

Koreatown, Hollywood, Pico Union, Chinatown Little Tokyo, Los Feliz, Franklin Village, etc. All these spots seem to be skipped by folks who always have that train of thought.

Also, the "Suburbs" within city limits don't feel suburban. Always pictured suburbs as a none grid system with cul-de-sacs linked by a main road with an island of big box stores nearby. LA is not like that. YOu got neighborhoods with cornerstores and shops, even with trains going through them, and some apartment buildings with old brick facades and fire escapes dotting various spots.

[disgruntled la native]

yeah, they're wrong. even the westside and most of the valley is urban.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

Always pictured suburbs as a none grid system with cul-de-sacs linked by a main road with an island of big box stores nearby.

Not exactly the definition of suburb. Also, I can't think of an actual "big box store" (= large warehouse retailer) that even existed in greater L.A. more than a couple of decades ago.

[GatsbyGatz]

I respond to this topic in the 'General U.S. Forum." My post there was that people mislabel LA as suburban. LA is very dense and not suburban, but the mislabeling is due to LA not feeling cohesively walkable. Even Wilshire Blvd which is highly developed is quite unappealing to walk along from my personal experience.

[disgruntled la native]

Wilshire has sidewalks its whole route. What makes it unappealing to walk? I mean, any more so than any other urban city.

Sunset on the other hand, unappealing if not impossible to walk west of Doheny.

[PDF]

Some people don't even know that LA has a subway system. I think that says it all.

[jamills21]

I wouldn't really harp on people's perception on what a "real" city is. It really is pretty stupid in concept and practicality.

[John_marts]

I fell in love with LA. I visited there for 9 days a week ago and immediately wished I grew up there. I explored as much as the city as I could. The whole "giant suburb" is a bit of crap since there are plenty of bigger buildings scattered throughout. And anyway, I loved the suburb feel, it makes it feel like you have a home in an actual neighborhood, no?

I was completely amazed at how huge LA is from visiting the griffith, hollywood sign, and runyon. That and looking at the city from the opposite perspective. Driving down the 405 or the 10 and just admiring the giant mountains surrounding the city kinda blew me away.

LA is the most diverse city I've ever been to in the US by a mile, both culturally and scenery wise. The positives completely made up for the negatives. (traffic, homeless)

[StreetLegal]

The central core of LA is as dense as San Francisco (17,000 residents per square mile).

By central core I mean a 47 square mile area which is the same size as San Francisco. Roughly bounded by Fairfax (west), Downtown LA/LA River (east), Hollywood (north) and West Adams/10 Freeway (south).

This is from an analysis by a transportation planner from San Francisco.

Finding Los Angeles's Dense, Urban, Transit-Riding Core - Los Angeles Things - Curbed LA

[GatsbyGatz]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Wilshire has sidewalks its whole route. What makes it unappealing to walk? I mean, any more so than any other urban city.

Sunset on the other hand, unappealing if not impossible to walk west of Doheny.

Yeah, I didn't mean to complain that there was anything wrong with the street itself that prohibits walking. I was just saying that it isn't really an attraction upon itself besides offices save for some points to lend itself to creating a vibrant pedestrian scene.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0563...uXAsMkZumw!2e0

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0617...vCh6A-RlZA!2e0