Spring Break: Los Angeles or San Diego (Long Beach, Pasadena: middle-class, transplants)

[Sandy Springs Rep.]

I live in Atlanta and am taking a trip to Southern California for spring break. I'm only 20 and have never been to the West Coast before, but I'm fascinated with urban planning and development. I was really excited about seeing Los Angeles, but one of the people who's going with me really wants to go to San Diego instead. I would much rather go to Los Angeles since it's the second largest city in the country, not to mention one of the biggest cities in the world, and is a great subject of issues relating to urban planning. My friend has never been to San Diego before and has been to LA several times, so I can definitely understand why he wants to go to San Diego this time. But I have a strong interest in the major urban centers of the United States and I want to see Los Angeles as soon as I can.

What really gets me is that he argues that there's more to do in San Diego and that San Diego is more interesting. That's just absurd. I'm like...last time I checked Los Angeles was the entertainment capital of the world and Los Angeles has a population of 15+ million people and San Diego has a population of 3 million people! I mean, this is not a knock on San Diego, there are many cool things in San Diego like the zoo, but there's just no comparison, Los Angeles is 5 times bigger. There's no way there's more to do in San Diego. Another reason he doesn't want to go to LA is because of the traffic, but that is not a very high priority of mine. (not to mention we're rather accustomed to it!)

So am I right that Los Angeles/Greater Los Angeles has a lot more for someone with my interests? I don't know a whole lot about the different neighborhoods and towns, but some places I want to see are Downtown, Old Town Pasadena, Long Beach, and Venice. What other places are interesting? This includes farther away areas like Orange County, but probably not the Inland Empire, not that there's anything interesting there anyway.

[JSmith799]

San Diego is nice, but boring. It's cleaner, more manicured, but very cookie cutter and dull. If you've never been to CA, then start in Los Angeles. Much more to see and do, and you can still stay on the west side and get some beach time in. Don't do the tourist things though. Things in LA to check out

Melrose
Old Town Pasadena
Santa Monica
Beach cruisers in Venice Beach
West Hollywood
Museums
Downtown Standard Hotel Rooftop
Hiking up Runyon or Topanga Canyon
Surf leson in Malibu
Sidewalk Cafes
Sunset Strip
Beverly Hills
Etc. Etc.

You can see San Diego in a day, but in no way does SD compare to LA. Be prepared though, for a large city, the majority of LA is very gritty, run down, and resembles a 3rd world country. But, despite that there is an awesome energy that makes it a great place.

[uptown_urbanist]

I think you'd much prefer LA for your interests. I'd skip Orange County, and just stick with what's already on your list. Hollywood could be fun, too; touristy enough for your friends, but interesting enough from an urban planning perspective because it's seen a lot of change over the past decade (also an interesting blend of historic preservation plus new development).

If you want a fun day trip you could consider taking the train up to Santa Barbara for the day; it's a nice train ride (you could drive, too, but the train is fun), it's in a beautiful coastal setting, and the downtown is very walkable (the train station is centrally located). It would give you a different CA experience.

If your friend has only been to LA a few times then there's no way he could have even begun to scratch the surface on what there is to see, anyway. I lived there for 3+ years, made every attempt to get out and explore different neighborhoods, and still only saw a portion of what there is to see. A lot of people come to LA, do the standard tourist stuff, then think they've seen the city.

San Diego is fun, too, and you'll have a good time wherever you end up visiting. It could just be that you have really different travel styles. I like cities, too, but I think some of my relatives have been a little surprised when they got the grand tour of the Toy District and Broadway (downtown) instead of heading for the Rodeo Drive or somewhere more typical. (the tourist stuff can be fun, too, of course, but there's a lot else out there, too) Oh, and even if you rent a car do try out public transportation at least once; take the Red Line (subway) to Hollywood (or to downtown, if you're staying in Hollywood), and the Gold Line (light rail) out to Pasadena. It's a nice way to see the city, and gives you a different experience. There's also been a lot of transit-oriented development, and in a city choked with traffic transportation is going to continue to be a major issue in the way the city evolves in the future.

[NYSD1995]

Spring Break in San Diego is like Spring Break in Florida, you come here for beaches, babes and booze. If urban planning and architecture is your thing, LA has much more to offer.

[BRinSM]

why not look into traveling to SF if your friend has never been there? it is definitely very urban and has plenty to see and do.

[esmith143]

LA is big, but boring, and 90% of it is scary post-WW2 suburbia that used to be populated by middle-class Americans but has since been taken over by transplants from south of the border. San Diego is better in terms of things to see per square mile. If your interest in LA is specifically as an urban center, than go for it. If you're looking for a bigger picture, SD might be a better choice. SD is sorta like what LA was 50 years ago, before it was overbuilt and overrun.

Sure, LA used to be a big entertainment center. For you that means that you can spend a day in University Studios theme park, look at the stars along Hollywood Boulevard, and look at heavy gates and 10-foot fences of movie stars' mansions in Beverly Hills. That's it. The vast majority of residents of LA have nothing to do with entertainment industry. In fact, the entertainment industry is shrinking here, as companies leave for greeener pastures, in seach of cheaper labor. Think of a recent non-locality-specific TV show or a movie. "Watchmen"? Shot in British Columbia. "Battlestar Galactica"? Shot in British Columbia. "Grey's Anatomy"? Shot in Seattle. "Vampire Diaries"? Shot in Georgia and British Columbia. Not much gets shot in LA any more.

One lesson of globalization is that population is no longer an indicator of importance. Mexico City is 400 times bigger than Palo Alto. Drop a nuke on Mexico City, six months later people will forget it happened. Drop a nuke on Palo Alto, our civilization will still feel repercussions twenty years from now. Same with LA. It's really big, but it's not particularly important any more. The Port of Long Beach happens to be within the boundaries of Greater LA (BTW - if you go with LA, make sure to visit the port), and it handles a lot of imports from China, so that makes it the most significant part of the city.

[BRinSM]

@esmith143

most of NYC is outside of Manhattan, but not many tourists end up in those boroughs. also, the financial business has been leaving the city for years as well. this doesn't stop people from visiting though. don't get me wrong, I like both cities, but given the option of visiting LA or SD, I would chose LA, just as I would choose NYC over Philadelphia.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Sassberto

If urban planning and architecture is your thing, LA has much more to offer.

You can experience extremes of urban planning by visiting both San Diego and Tijuana in one day. An eye-opening experience.

[Hollywood Inquirer]

Originally Posted by esmith143

LA is big, but boring, and 90% of it is scary post-WW2 suburbia that used to be populated by middle-class Americans but has since been taken over by transplants from south of the border. San Diego is better in terms of things to see per square mile. If your interest in LA is specifically as an urban center, than go for it. If you're looking for a bigger picture, SD might be a better choice. SD is sorta like what LA was 50 years ago, before it was overbuilt and overrun.

Sure, LA used to be a big entertainment center. For you that means that you can spend a day in University Studios theme park, look at the stars along Hollywood Boulevard, and look at heavy gates and 10-foot fences of movie stars' mansions in Beverly Hills. That's it. The vast majority of residents of LA have nothing to do with entertainment industry. In fact, the entertainment industry is shrinking here, as companies leave for greeener pastures, in search of cheaper labor. Think of a recent non-locality-specific TV show or a movie. "Watchmen"? Shot in British Columbia. "Battlestar Galactica"? Shot in British Columbia. "Grey's Anatomy"? Shot in Seattle. "Vampire Diaries"? Shot in Georgia and British Columbia. Not much gets shot in LA any more.

Wow, this is how ignorant you are. All shows that have stories and places set in other cities are mostly filmed in Hollywood backlots with images of the city to make it like there actually there, but there not. Seinfeld is a good example, it's a show about New York, but was made in LA.

"Set predominantly in an apartment block on Manhattan's Upper West Side (but shot mainly in Los Angeles),

link Seinfeld - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


even those CSI NY shows are shot in LA.

CSI:NY: Sorry About the Wake Up Call :: blogdowntown

the entertainment business is not dying in LA, it's just spitefull people that hate LA saying that it is. Several ordnances and incentives have been placed recently to bring back business in LA and to keep it here so please do us all a favor and stay out of LA's forums.

I'll agree with you on one thing that population isn't a good indacator anymore for measuring the importance and greatness of a city, but that's it, good day!

[NYSD1995]

Originally Posted by esmith143

It's really big, but it's not particularly important any more. The Port of Long Beach happens to be within the boundaries of Greater LA (BTW - if you go with LA, make sure to visit the port), and it handles a lot of imports from China, so that makes it the most significant part of the city.

The level of misinformation you've managed to get out in this single post is staggering. I'm waiting for the tail-wagging-the-dog-style evidence using lots of contrived google-sourced statistics.