Skyscraper City Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
city driver
Joined
·
469 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was thinking about the question that's been posed before about "where is our 'manhattan'"--the region with the highest density/urban feel/etc.

We've talked about it a lot as being the area between santa monica and downtown, with the 10 freeway as the southern boundary and the hills as the northern boundary.

I've never been comfortable with this way of looking at it. First of all, this definition completely prioritizes wealthy, less-dense, but more "famous" areas like beverly hills, over very dense south LA. And second, it is easy for a tourist to visit quite a few of the areas in this technical boundary and feel like they're still in the suburbs. There's really no difference between beverlywood and valley village.

So I've been determined to figure out where the "city" of LA is. What is the continuous area in LA that feels undeniably "urban"? I know we've debated this stuff so often, but I don't think we've acknowledged where our traditional city center is. People tend to say "downtown," but they forget that just to the west is koreatown, which to me feels just as traditionally urban, maybe (maybe) to a lesser degree.

I would say that LA's "Manhattan" is really quite small and is bordered by wilton or western on the west, pico or olympic on the south, 3rd street on the north, and Main or Spring on the east.

This area almost acts like an island. When you look at sattelite imagery from google maps or whatever, there is a definitive line at wilton/western. There is a similar line at Main/Spring where it becomes industrial in the fashion district, and a very similar line at 3rd street. The southern boundary is less definite, so I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

I don't think hollywood should be included in this area, even though it almost could be connected. There's a little too much wasteland in between to warrant that.

Anyway, I think if we gave this area a name and hyped it, it would help define our city as a "city," at least in the eyes of everyone else...

If we can come up with a name, I promise I'll take a whole bunch of pictures from only within that zone and make a special thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,500 Posts
A better question would be "Where the Hell is New York's LA?" LA is not New York, it was built in a different time period and its attractions are more spread out. If you keep trying to find Manhattan in LA, you are just going to develop your West coast inferiority complex.

I would stick to the more traditional definition of the core, being pretty much between the Santa Monica Freeway and Mullholland Drive including Venice and Ocean Park on the West, sending up a finger of land to Universal city and NOHO, back down to Hollywood including Los Feliz and Griffith Park, down the Five from Griffith Park to Downtown sweeping a little south of the Ten to include USC, Exposition Park, and the Colliseum, then up along the Pasadena Freeway to Old Town Pasadena all the way to Lake street.

That is our closest equivalent to Manhattan, take it or leave it, It includes most of our tall buildings, our museums, our Universities and our cultural institutions. It also include a few neighborhoods composed of detached homes. Tough. This is LA. If I wanted to live in New York, I would live in New York.
 

·
"There It Is, Take It!"
Joined
·
981 Posts
A better question would be "Where the Hell is New York's LA?"
Oh that's EASY.
Urban Los Angeles = Queens (Expressways, diverse immigrant population, more car-oriented).
Suburban Los Angeles = Staten Island (Nuff said).
 

·
Shaken, never Stirred
Joined
·
8,014 Posts
I don't know about everyone else, the last couple of days some of "Dweebo2220" responses/comments are beginning to worried me. Then this thread is created....Hummmmmmm!!!

Who he/she is and what's he/she real intentions for L.A.? :dunno:
 

·
"There It Is, Take It!"
Joined
·
981 Posts
I personally consider the true heart of the city as - starting from Little Tokyo and going west/northwest: Civic Center, the rest of Downtown, Chinatown, Pico Union, Echo Park, Silver Lake, East Hollywood, Los Feliz, Hollywood and ending up where WeHo begins. In short, basically all the communities where Cesar Chavez/Sunset Blvd runs though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,500 Posts
Oh that's EASY.
Urban Los Angeles = Queens (Expressways, diverse immigrant population, more car-oriented).
Suburban Los Angeles = Staten Island (Nuff said).
Have you ever been in Queens or Staten Island? Believe me it ain't LA.
 

·
"There It Is, Take It!"
Joined
·
981 Posts
Have you ever been in Queens or Staten Island? Believe me it ain't LA.
Yes I have. It's not, but it's more LA-like than Manhattan or Brooklyn. Wasn't that what we were getting at? Surely you weren't looking at identical twins here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,500 Posts
Yes I have. It's not, but it's more LA-like than Manhattan or Brooklyn. Wasn't that what we were getting at? Surely you weren't looking at identical twins here.
You mean Twins like this?

LA on left; Queens and Staten Island on right?
 

·
Smile!
Joined
·
609 Posts
Oh that's EASY.
Urban Los Angeles = Queens (Expressways, diverse immigrant population, more car-oriented).
Suburban Los Angeles = Staten Island (Nuff said).
Yeah I read a story from one of the forumers in the New York thread that lives in Queens and he said that Queens is trying to look more like L.A. with the streets in all.

Im not sure exactly sure what it was but it had something to do with the streets in Queens.
 

·
"There It Is, Take It!"
Joined
·
981 Posts
Yeah I read a story from one of the forumers in the New York thread that lives in Queens and he said that Queens is trying to look more like L.A. with the streets in all.

Im not sure exactly sure what it was but it had something to do with the streets in Queens.
Yes, Queens has the wider streets. You also do need a car to get around a great deal of Queens, as the subway lines there aren't as comprehensive as in Manhattan or even Brooklyn. And look at Shea Stadium/Citi Field - it's surrounded by a huge parking lot not unlike our Chavez Eavine. The Expressways there are very similar to our freeways in terms of the urban layout -- last time I was out in NYC 4 years ago, I recall driving in parts of the Long Island Expressway that reminded me of the Pasadena Freeway.
Like I also mentioned, Queens has a large, diverse immigrant population and the sight of foreign-language signage there compared to Manhattan or Brooklyn makes it more "Los Angeles" like.
 

·
city driver
Joined
·
469 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
what the hell.

I wasn't trying to compare new york and LA.

Take a chill pill, everyone, please.

All I was trying to do was highlight this area, one of my favorite regions of LA. It also happens to be the densest populated area of LA and the one that, to me, looks most like the traditional concept of a city center.

I don't feel a need to prioritize this place, I just think it would be nice to have a way to define it, since it is a unique part of the city that I think is underrated/under-represented.

I'll start a newer, better thread. This one's apparently too inflammatory...
 

·
Shaken, never Stirred
Joined
·
8,014 Posts
what the hell.

I wasn't trying to compare new york and LA.

Take a chill pill, everyone, please.

All I was trying to do was highlight this area, one of my favorite regions of LA. It also happens to be the densest populated area of LA and the one that, to me, looks most like the traditional concept of a city center.

I don't feel a need to prioritize this place, I just think it would be nice to have a way to define it, since it is a unique part of the city that I think is underrated/under-represented.

I'll start a newer, better thread. This one's apparently too inflammatory...

All have to say is:

:toilet::toilet:*******:toilet:***********:toilet:*:toilet:
:toilet::toilet:*******:toilet:*********:toilet:*****:toilet:
:toilet:*:toilet:******:toilet:******:toilet:**********:toilet:
:toilet:**:toilet:*****:toilet:*****:toilet:*************:toilet:
:toilet:***:toilet:*****:toilet:****:toilet:**************:toilet:
:toilet:****:toilet:****:toilet:*****:toilet:************:toilet:
:toilet:*****:toilet:***:toilet:******:toilet:**********:toilet:
:toilet:******:toilet:**:toilet:********:toilet:*******:toilet:
:toilet:*******:toilet:*:toilet:**********:toilet:***:toilet:
:toilet:********:toilet::toilet:***********:toilet:*:toilet:*********:toilet:
 

·
Silver Lake
Joined
·
5,451 Posts
I don't know about everyone else, the last couple of days some of "Dweebo2220" responses/comments are beginning to worried me. Then this thread is created....Hummmmmmm!!!

Who he/she is and what's he/she real intentions for L.A.? :dunno:
I'd have to agree w/ you "Fern", the last straw was the 304 not going to Union Station comment.:nuts: Anyway, when I first got here from NYC I'd have to admit that I started making mental comparisons of the 2 places though not deliberately. The reason that I concluded that from downtown to SM (incl Venice) and from the hills to the 10 was "Manhattan" was not only because of top densities in this area but also because of the numerous points of interest. All of Manhattan is not 40 story condo towers, far from it! Both the Upper Westside and Eastside are blocks and blocks of single family brownstone homes, yes some have been converted but not unlike sfh's in LA that are in reality multifamily homes. Also a phenomena not common in LA, abandoned buildings especially pre-2000 stretched on for blocks and blocks in depressed areas like Harlem, Spanish Harlem, Mt. Washington and Inwood. I've seen entire blocks renovated at ONE time!
So it's not just density as to the reason why I continue to feel that the area that I mentioned up above is LA's "manhattan" or contiguous urban core it's because it includes points of interest, jobs, nightlife, eateries and tourist trails.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
Was just concerned that this was gonna turn into a I Love NYC discussion in the L.A Forum.

what the hell.

I wasn't trying to compare new york and LA.

Take a chill pill, everyone, please.

All I was trying to do was highlight this area, one of my favorite regions of LA. It also happens to be the densest populated area of LA and the one that, to me, looks most like the traditional concept of a city center.

I don't feel a need to prioritize this place, I just think it would be nice to have a way to define it, since it is a unique part of the city that I think is underrated/under-represented.

I'll start a newer, better thread. This one's apparently too inflammatory...
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Our Manhattan is confined to Downtown LA, specifically the Historic Core and some parts of the Financial District which are mainstream Manhattan density at best. Cross over into City West and Koreatown and it's more like Queens than anything else, with a hint of Brooklyn in there.
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
^Why? This is a topic that I'm always genuinely interested in. And it is a topic worthy of discussion.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top