Im sure this has been covered before, but I just find it strange the lack of development in LA, sure you have a thread for LA downtown, but a city of LA's size and population should have its own folder like New York and Chicago and have mutiple projects. Ia it because of earthquakes that there arent more highrises going up?

The reason for the stratospheric rise of LA's real estate is because homeowners and legislature have made it impossible for more housing to be made, ie highrises or condos in areas where single family houses predominate.
The single family house is no longer viable IMHO as a goal or living place for most of LA. I find it strange that supply hasnt even remotely kept up with demand.

When will this mentality change, if ever? With home prices continuing to rise, will LA have enough doctors, policemen, firemen, services in general, teachers?
There isnt any hud housing available at all. New york is more affordable than LA and thats scary. Has LA pulled up the drawbridge and left everyone out in the cold?

Obviously youve never actually been to LA...

homeowners and legislature have made it impossible for more housing to be made

No, thats only in areas with money. I know koreatown is growing like mad, as is westlake and that area.

New york is more affordable than LA and thats scary

SWEET BABY JESUS, THIS CAN'T BE SO. Seriously, how did you come up with that?

^^ that NY thing is true, except for manhattan

Im sure this has been covered before, but I just find it strange the lack of development in LA, sure you have a thread for LA downtown, but a city of LA's size and population should have its own folder like New York and Chicago and have mutiple projects. Ia it because of earthquakes that there arent more highrises going up?

The reason for the stratospheric rise of LA's real estate is because homeowners and legislature have made it impossible for more housing to be made, ie highrises or condos in areas where single family houses predominate.
The single family house is no longer viable IMHO as a goal or living place for most of LA. I find it strange that supply hasnt even remotely kept up with demand.

When will this mentality change, if ever? With home prices continuing to rise, will LA have enough doctors, policemen, firemen, services in general, teachers?
There isnt any hud housing available at all. New york is more affordable than LA and thats scary. Has LA pulled up the drawbridge and left everyone out in the cold?


Let me correct you on your assumptions. The fact that we don't have a Los Angeles development thread means just that. No one was interested enough to start one. It doesn't mean that 80 percent of the city fell into an abyss.

Second of all, the development threads in Chicago and NY are 95 percent about downtown Chicago and downtown NYC. So what's the difference?
It's basically if all our developments in the downtown LA thread were given individual threads. It makes sense with Chicago as this forum is dominated by Chicagoans. But it doesnt make sense for LA which only has 4 active threads a day and a handful of posters. Check the roll call thread. It's only 2 pages long and half the people aren't even from LA!!!!

You expect that if developments got individual threads, it would struggle to survive. That is why we don't have one.

Highrises are always popping up, but why cover an area a million times bigger than NY or Chicago? That's impossible. We aren't interested in a highrise in the San Fernando Valley.

As far as NY being cheaper than LA, I don't know where you are getting that information. NYC has always topped worldwide polls with London and Tokyo as the most expensive cities in the world. So clearly, even highrise NYC is having difficulty with the housing crunch.

"NYC has always topped worldwide polls with London and Tokyo as the most expensive cities in the world." ?

World's most expensive cities
1 Tokyo, Japan
2 Osaka, Japan
3 London, United Kingdom
4 Moscow, Russia
5 Seoul, South Korea
6 Geneva, Switzerland
7 Zurich, Switzerland
8 Copenhagen, Denmark
9 Hong Kong, Hong Kong
10 Oslo, Norway

"NYC has always topped worldwide polls with London and Tokyo as the most expensive cities in the world." ?

World's most expensive cities
1 Tokyo, Japan
2 Osaka, Japan
3 London, United Kingdom
4 Moscow, Russia
5 Seoul, South Korea
6 Geneva, Switzerland
7 Zurich, Switzerland
8 Copenhagen, Denmark
9 Hong Kong, Hong Kong
10 Oslo, Norway


I stand corrected. But check number 12. It's NYC. In 2001 NYC was number 7. LA is number 27. I doubt LA has jumped 16 places to overtake NYC's reputation.

There are over 50 towers under constuction or planned in DT LA. Add Wilshire, Century City, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Glendale, Hollywood and you ahve a few dozen more. Most of these are in the 15 - 40 story range, but there are at least 3 55 story toers in DT propsed and a bunch of 30 - 50 story buildings as well.

Well towers don't really cover anything, that means mainly just more business, expect the residental towers ofcourse(prosentually how many?)

L.A is supposed to be the capital of entertaiment, entertaiment means culture but I personally don't see it growing much of a anywhere really. Both Echo and MacArthur Park are such a beatiful places, the city gave up after mexicans took over, how sad?
Let the mexicans have those areas but don't ignore the place eventhough white people are no longer a major there.

The coastal line hasnt added anything recently and they're still arguing about the one fucking subway that shoulda been done decedes ago. How difficult is it to figure how the metro would bring these two closer to each other?

Downtown became a business districs a while ago, it's dead quiet after 5pm, no cinemas, no galleries, no coffeeshops, no nada. This is supposed to change eventually, I just hope they're not trying it clean the place up like Hitler back in the 40's.
L.A Live is not a bad idea but look at the location, they're expanding downtown surprisingly west, not east to the roots.
It feels like historic downtown is the forgotten city and the forgotten people live there. There's absolutely nothing worth of seeing out there.

Pershing Square is a nice park in the middle of everything, they're having concerts twice a week I think. More stuff like this. Be patient?

My major concern is it's money greed people from Malibu who make the decisions. Those who don't live in the reality, don't know the city at all. Those who live behind closed walls and doors in their fake paradise. Having a new major is a start but still a long way to go. Those very same 'politicians' don't seriously give a phuck about the people of this city, if they did things wouldnt be like they are now.

Looking at the big picture.
They started from downtown, that will take a while to rebuild it and it's image.
Trying to connect West L.A and downtown. How about the rest? Echo Park, MarArthur Park, South Central, South L.A?
Who's taking care of these people, who's taking care of these areas?

First off, starting from downtown is natural, that's how it should be too but how about that metro connector reaching all over downtown? ' Money money money'..yeah yeah yeah, as if the city didnt actually have it.
All I'm saying don't forget about the rest of the city. I'm not looking for business towers, I'm looking for residental buildings, entertaiment, culture.
Seriously, offices are no solution, they created the problem in the first place. Trying to avoid it should do some good.

^^^I agree with you, but you gotta know, many people in LA(especially South LA and the East LA area) have very historic homes dating back to the early 1900s. Back then, they could just take your home and your home block from you and turn it into a shopping center if you lived in the ghetto, but times have changed, people have rights now. Also, it'd be smart to start from the West, because to the East of DTLA is alot of industry, and tall buildings right next to industry looks kinda tacky IMO. Also, you notice that all the buildings are being built where the Blue Line and 20+ MTA lines go? Thats probably the reason also.

Obviously youve never actually been to LA...



No, thats only in areas with money. I know koreatown is growing like mad, as is westlake and that area.



SWEET BABY JESUS, THIS CAN'T BE SO. Seriously, how did you come up with that?


NO I lived in LA for four years, I left in 2003, I just dont see the condo market keeping up with demand, there is more of a supply problem in LA is my point and like someone here pointed out, when I say NY I mean the WHOLE CITY, ofcourse manhattan is ridiculously priced, but the other boroughs still arent that bad. Sure there are some towers going up but how many of these are affordable? What is the average price for a new condo?
Im not trying to start a fight, Im just curious. I guess its just unrealistic that anyone could get a condo in LA for 200 k price again.

True I havent seen the development in the last two years, I just dont see the excitement on this page, is that because most people now just cant afford anything there? I really miss LA and I loved it there, I lived in santa monica on 18th street by pico, which was a bit of a rough neigborhood for santa monica. I understand how people want to keep their single family home, which does predominate in the LA region. And by LA Im speaking of LA county, which I think is what most people mean when they say LA. I guess there is just more demand in LA and supply may never catch up.
I would just think that development would be even more rampant in such a high demand market. I think the only place you could buy right now is compton, I saw one listing where you had to kick out the people living there as part of the sales agreement :). it was for 140k a few months ago.
And I had seen a 500 square foot hovel in long beach go for 250k. :(

I would just think some or more of these homes would be razed to make way for condo towers. I think that LA as time goes on will become more of a real city in that highrises will become more common and density will increase, but I may be wrong.

There are over 50 towers under constuction or planned in DT LA. Add Wilshire, Century City, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Glendale, Hollywood and you ahve a few dozen more. Most of these are in the 15 - 40 story range, but there are at least 3 55 story toers in DT propsed and a bunch of 30 - 50 story buildings as well.


Are any of these projects affordable for the people on the board here?
How many of you are priced out of the market or having to pay huge mortgages, and is interest only mortgage more common now?
Im just curious, I would love to return to LA, its a great place, Im not one of those naysayers, just depressed at how expensive its gotten there.
I guess you guys are right about the board being dominated by chicagoans and newyorkers, Im just puzzled why there arent more LA people and activity as its a world class awesome city. :)

Let me correct you on your assumptions. The fact that we don't have a Los Angeles development thread means just that. No one was interested enough to start one. It doesn't mean that 80 percent of the city fell into an abyss.

Second of all, the development threads in Chicago and NY are 95 percent about downtown Chicago and downtown NYC. So what's the difference?
It's basically if all our developments in the downtown LA thread were given individual threads. It makes sense with Chicago as this forum is dominated by Chicagoans. But it doesnt make sense for LA which only has 4 active threads a day and a handful of posters. Check the roll call thread. It's only 2 pages long and half the people aren't even from LA!!!!

You expect that if developments got individual threads, it would struggle to survive. That is why we don't have one.

Highrises are always popping up, but why cover an area a million times bigger than NY or Chicago? That's impossible. We aren't interested in a highrise in the San Fernando Valley.

As far as NY being cheaper than LA, I don't know where you are getting that information. NYC has always topped worldwide polls with London and Tokyo as the most expensive cities in the world. So clearly, even highrise NYC is having difficulty with the housing crunch.


I dont mean to be picky but a whole lot of building is going on in chicago that isnt downtown, which is the loop, a whole lot of it is in the near north side and by the lake and the near south side and even in evanston the first suburb north of chicago has some highrises going up, so its definitely not just in one location. With New York its in manhattan, which I guess you could just call manhattan the downtown of new york, but its inaccurate, as there is midtown and downtown, and all points inbetween. And there definitely is some development in brooklyn just across the river.

I am just surprised that the development isnt like on a miami or dubai level because there definitely is the demand there.

You may not be interested in a highrise in the sanfernando valley but it sure would help with affordable housing, I think you will start to see LA having a problem retaining police cadets, teachers, firemen and even doctors. I have a buddy from san diego and he isnt going to return because of how ridiculous the real estate market has gotten in cali in general and he's a urologist. I suppose he could afford a small house, but I guess he feels he would have a lower quality of life there, and prefers to look elsewhere. And I think this is more and more common, and sad. When teachers have to double/triple/quadruple up with other people just to live, the cracks are beginning to show, and there definitely is an exodus from LA that is starting.

I dont think Villaragosa ? spelling will be able to change the lack of affordable housing. Check out hud.gov is there hud housing in new york? Yes, in cali? No. Thats scary. I know cali is the best place to live, I was there, its just that I think that the people who arent in the entertainment industry and help the city run should have adequate housing.

There are over 50 towers under constuction or planned in DT LA. Add Wilshire, Century City, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Glendale, Hollywood and you ahve a few dozen more. Most of these are in the 15 - 40 story range, but there are at least 3 55 story toers in DT propsed and a bunch of 30 - 50 story buildings as well.


Is new housing affordable to most middle class people?

Are any of these projects affordable for the people on the board here?
How many of you are priced out of the market or having to pay huge mortgages, and is interest only mortgage more common now?
Im just curious, I would love to return to LA, its a great place, Im not one of those naysayers, just depressed at how expensive its gotten there.
I guess you guys are right about the board being dominated by chicagoans and newyorkers, Im just puzzled why there arent more LA people and activity as its a world class awesome city. :)


Most of the LA forumers are on SSP with over 45 active LA members. If you went there, you would realize how many LA forumers there are and how many projects there are going on in LA County. Granted most of the new projects are expensive, but Downtown Condos are still a bargain compared to other areas of the city. 300,000 - 450,000 for most and that is much less than the rest of LA. Also, there are numerous projects in the Wilshrie corridor that arent mentioned here, a few in Centruy City (4 Condo Towers up to 50 stories), Long beach, marina Del Rey, Hollywood with three Mega projects, all around Hollywood and Vine, Sunset with a couple of big projects... etc

HAHA "If it's not on this board, it must not exist!"

HAHA "If it's not on this board, it must not exist!"


Its too bad that more of the projects are posted on the boards,
I guess you guys dont have a dedicated psycho to take photos of each sales office and renderings :). I would be interested in seeing them.
I guess 300-400k isnt too bad for a place there,
Arent you guys nervous about living in a highrise there? Have they gotten really good at earthquake proofing the buildings? :puke:

there are very stringent earthquake codes. skyscrapers might be the safest places for earthquakes.

I would actually be very afraid to live in a building that is more than 4 or 5 stories tall, especially if I were at the top. I know they are probably the safest buildings around, what with all the strong codes, but there I have a fear of heights and earthquakes, so as you can imagine, those two don't really mix! :)

One can't compare it to NYC. They have populous downtowns, so they HAVE to build new housing. LA has a bigger burden (and relief) of both building highrises and CONVERSION of the tons of unutilized buildings it already has. That's what people are forgetting about LA development. The importance of conversions is something in LA, which makes it unlike the elder cities like NYC.

But if we are talking about all of LA county, we probably have the most development of most cities, minus the southwestern cities. Because we are also including Long Beach, Santa Monica, Century City, etc.

By the way, everyone check out LAsportsfan's thread about developments in downtown LA, which is the REAL eyeopener about how much is going on in downtown. It's a million times more than what we've posted on this forum as of late.

many people in LA(especially South LA and the East LA area) have very historic homes dating back to the early 1900s. Back then, they could just take your home and your home block from you and turn it into a shopping center if you lived in the ghetto, but times have changed, people have rights now.
I wasnt talking about shopping or anything, but the culture and cultural things.
Like a cinema for mexican films, a stage for mexican music performances. Something that would bring the people together.

South L.A...Look at Crenshaw, not a bad example in my opinion. Rastas come to play drums every sunday, lowriders hopping around 4.pm. That's what I had in mind.

L.A's problem is people live too tightly in the squirrel wheel, work, go shopping, hit the sack, wake up, go to work and so on. No one really goes out because there's nothing to where to go but stores and that's no good.

L.A's problem is people live too tightly in the squirrel wheel, work, go shopping, hit the sack, wake up, go to work and so on. No one really goes out because there's nothing to where to go but stores and that's no good.

We wouldnt have the most museums in the US if no one went to them. Or restaurants. Or the symphony. Or movie theatres. Or local theatre. So I think this is wrong.

You can live in the most vibrant city in the world, Paris. And most people work, go shopping, go home, sleep. Maybe a very small percentage are going to something like mexican theatre, which, by the way, Los Angeles has a lot of.

The great thing about LA is that there is always something of entertainment in the immediate neighborhood. That's one of the benefits of decentralized cities. The problem with centralized cities is that if you don't live in the core, you are screwed, because there will be nothing in your neiborhood.

But in ten years, this talk is going to be pointless, because not only with LA have a vibrant core (downtown) it will also enjoy the benefits of resources in one's immediate hoods.

Yeah but the problem with L.A is our Downtown would be much more bigger and energized but they focus more development elsewhere in Los Angeles. Especially in the San Fernando Valley where development is constantly booming with new apartments and restarants,etc. I see apartment construction everywhere in The Valley. Before LA Live and other construction in Downtown started taking place, Downtown LA was on of the most underrated areas for construction, but it sounds like thats taking a turn for the better.

Yeah but the problem with L.A is our Downtown would be much more bigger and energized but they focus more development elsewhere in Los Angeles. Especially in the San Fernando Valley where development is constantly booming with new apartments and restarants,etc. I see apartment construction everywhere in The Valley. Before LA Live and other construction in Downtown started taking place, Downtown LA was on of the most underrated areas for construction, but it sounds like thats taking a turn for the better.


I would rather live downtown than the valley, as the valley's summers are much hotter. What I find mind boggling is that I did residency at LA county usc and cant believe that not even boyle heights is affordable, do many people band together to buy there? I just cant picture young professionals killing themselves with a big mortgage to buy in boyle heights, I suppose it may have improved a bit, but I suspect not much. What do you guys think? I havent been in boyle heights for two years, I thought it was a very interesting run down neigborhood with alot of potential seeing as how close it is to downtown LA.

We wouldnt have the most museums in the US if no one went to them. Or restaurants. Or the symphony. Or movie theatres. Or local theatre. So I think this is wrong.

You can live in the most vibrant city in the world, Paris. And most people work, go shopping, go home, sleep. Maybe a very small percentage are going to something like mexican theatre, which, by the way, Los Angeles has a lot of. .

I agree with this...there is plenty to do in Los Angeles. I have been most everywhere in the U.S. and the L.A. area has more to do than most towns except for obviously New York and probably Chicago. There are hundred of theaters (not movie theaters, live theaters) museums, several wonderful symphonies and the L.A. philharmonic, plenty of concert halls for every style of music, places like Little Tokyo, Old Pasadena, Santa Monica, Hollywood etc...

My friends used to always say there is nothing to do in Los Angeles, and I believed them. Then I got to thinking that this is one of the biggest cities in the world, there has to be stuff to do. Once I actually went out and looked for stuff, there was stuff everywhere...I just had to show interest in looking. Sure things could be open a bit later, that would be great, but there is plenty more to do here than shop.

Good point I would also rather live downtown than the valley. But I think L.A.'s prices for homes is barbareric. An ordinary 2 bedroom house costs about $400,000 to $500,000. The only way to by a house these days is you have to buy fixerupper or buy or forclosure and who wants to do that? You still got to put money in just to got the house cleaned up, which is not cheap. From what ive seen out here L.A. should of been number 10 with the most expensive cites in the us