los angeles 2024

[FYI]

21 hours ago, Nacre said:

Dallas did start trying to build its downtown area in the 1920's, and yet is only marginally better off than LA. (If it is at all.) The intentional sprawl was a mistake, but even if LA had opted to build vertically it would not be the equal of the east coast cities. New York already had a million people in the 1870's while many of the west coast cities were only villages.

I'm not trying to say that L.A. should be 'equal' to that of the east coast cities (although, San Francisco (which I brought up earlier) & Seattle (which you brought up) illustrates that it could've been done.

With L.A. being the second largest city in the U.S. something of significance to differentiate themselves from other midsize cities would've been appropriate (which is why I brought up Dallas, when it's only the ninth largest city in the country, & yet IMO it's skyline is still more definitive than L.A.'s). 

I mean, take away the U.S. Bank tower, the Aon center & the new Wilshire Grand & L.A.'s skyline is then more akin to Phoenix's, Portland (Oregon's) or Tampa's. Certainly not representative of the mega metropolises that L.A. actually is. 

21 hours ago, Nacre said:

This is a thread about Los Angeles' Olympic bid on a forum about Olympic bids. So I think it is only fair to note that Los Angeles' sprawl has not hurt its Olympic bid. San Francisco is a better urban environment than Los Angeles in my opinion, but it is a much worse Olympic bid city.

Yeah, but then it's also fair to note, that's only bcuz it's a matter of circumstances that aren't coming together for San Francisco (or New York for that matter) to place an Olympic bid that works for them, than it being about anything else, which have nothing to do with L.A.'s sprawl, or their bid, in the first place. 

[zekekelso]

Ahem. Authentic Mexican food can be found in trucks. And it's amazing. 

[FYI]

24 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Lol, that's a stretch. I mean they'd look just like LA even though in all 3 instances Los Angeles has 18 taller skyscrapers before the tallest in either Portland, Phoenix or Tampa show up.

I didn't say that they'd be exact replicas. I said "more akin", meaning, more in-line with. I'm also not necessarily just referring to height, but also *density*. I'm well aware that L.A. has several 700-plus feet tall buildings. But again, take away the top three tallest ones from the L.A. skyline, then yeah, with Phoenix, Portland & Tampa (& other similar size cities, not just those three) would all start to look about the same, regardless of the respective city's building heights.

[Nacre]

1 hour ago, ejaycat said:

No offense to people from the Pacific Northwest but Washington state likes to portray itself as liberal, at least Seattle does, but I've found many people from Washington state to be quite hokey, so I'm not surprised they refused to speak to you. 

The issue is not "hokiness" but fear of Californians migrating to their land, cutting down the trees and and driving up real estate prices. Which, to be fair, is exactly what has happened. Other than my parents cutting down all of the large trees on their property to "make it sunnier" that's not really the fault of Californians, though. The whole world has an overpopulation crisis, and blaming it on California/Mexico/the Muslim world/etc is silly.

45 minutes ago, FYI said:

Yeah, but then it's also fair to note, that's only bcuz it's a matter of circumstances that aren't coming together for San Francisco (or New York for that matter) to place an Olympic bid that works for them, than it being about anything else, which have nothing to do with L.A.'s sprawl, or their bid, in the first place. 

Yes, but the availability of land is one of the circumstances affecting Olympic bids. Paris, London, Sydney, Moscow, Beijing, etc are also sprawling cities, even though many have good metro systems. (And Beijing also had to forcibly displace its citizens to build their Olympic Park.) Tokyo is the only vertically oriented Olympic host city, and they have had major problems because of it.

Just look at the location of the NFL stadiums for San Francisco and New York. Finding land for sporting venues in those cities is very, very difficult even with billions of dollars in revenue and tremendous political leverage.

[JesseSaenz]

On the Topic of the BART, my only complaint is that the Red, Yellow, Blue, and Green line all share station stops between West Oakland and Daly City. If a train is disabled, or held up, in tends to affect 4 of the 5 lines of the entire system's service. I was once on a train for 1 hr and 20 minutes at McCarthur Station because a train broke down in the tunnel spanning the bay. Service on the 4 of the lines was affected as a result. That is absolute madness.



 

[JesseSaenz]

I wonder how the new 6th Street bridge could be used if LA wins the bid. It would make for some pretty nice shots/views.

[FYI]

I know what you mean. That's exactly what I say every time you post your gobble-de-gook.

[zekekelso]

9 minutes ago, JesseSaenz said:

I wonder how the new 6th Street bridge could be used if LA wins the bid. It would make for some pretty nice shots/views.

 

They could add hot-rod racing as a new event and race down in the viaduct. 

[baron-pierreIV]

11 minutes ago, JesseSaenz said:

On the Topic of the BART, my only complaint is that the Red, Yellow, Blue, and Green line all share station stops between West Oakland and Daly City. If a train is disabled, or held up, in tends to affect 4 of the 5 lines of the entire system's service. I was once on a train for 1 hr and 20 minutes at McCarthur Station because a train broke down in the tunnel spanning the bay. Service on the 4 of the lines was affected as a result. That is absolute madness.



 

 

It is a medium-sized transit system and there are strategically placed rail switchings.   On peak days, it's known to carry as many as 420,000 rides; and as high as 568,000 on a World Series day in 2012.  Not bad for a 45-year old system.  They're expanding to San Jose (I think ETA is about 2 years' time) and new cars will be replacing the old ones starting next year.  They also hope to expand the Embarcadero and Montogomery St. stations I think starting in 2018.  

[ejaycat]

30 minutes ago, Nacre said:

The issue is not "hokiness" but fear of Californians migrating to their land, cutting down the trees and and driving up real estate prices. Which, to be fair, is exactly what has happened. Other than my parents cutting down all of the large trees on their property to "make it sunnier" that's not really the fault of Californians, though. The whole world has an overpopulation crisis, and blaming it on California/Mexico/the Muslim world/etc is silly.

If I may just ask, why would you cut down all the large trees?  I would get angry too.  In fact, in some of the older established neighborhoods in SoCal where there are actually tree canopies in many neighborhoods (my city included), there have been issues with new people moving in and cutting down trees.  I know in Glendale and Arcadia, where many Armenians and Chinese people (respectively) have moved in, people have become angered when a new Armenian or Chinese neighbor decides to cut down a very old native oak tree.  

 

59 minutes ago, zekekelso said:

Ahem. Authentic Mexican food can be found in trucks. And it's amazing. 

I'm aware of that, yes, but very good authentic Mexican food can also be found at actual restaurants in many Mexican neighborhoods.  When one of my partner's friends who had moved to Portland came to LA to visit, she told us she had heard of a very good taco truck somewhere in LA, and we were like "please, we'll take you to a restaurant in Bell or Huntington Park or Lynwood and get you some really good tacos, and then some.  Maybe even a Salvadoran place later for some pupusas!"

Edited October 10, 2016 by ejaycat

[ejaycat]

1 hour ago, FYI said:

I mean, take away the U.S. Bank tower, the Aon center & the new Wilshire Grand & L.A.'s skyline is then more akin to Phoenix's, Portland (Oregon's) or Tampa's. Certainly not representative of the mega metropolises that L.A. actually is. 

Oh gosh no, Phoenix's downtown is nothing like LA's.   Phoenix's downtown basically is a collection of newer mid-rises lined up in a few rows with the kind of architecture that looks like they could be in suburban office parks.  Also, Phoenix's downtown is not dense like LA's, and does not have the large collection of old buildings that downtown LA has.  In that first picture I posted of DTLA (which actually has more buildings out of frame to the left and right), if you look closer, you can see many mid-rises that are residential buildings.  Phoenix doesn't have that.  When you're in downtown LA, you feel like you're in a big city.  When you're in downtown Phoenix, you feel like you're in... downtown Phoenix.  And there's no vibrancy in downtown Phoenix, and I've been there in the late fall, so no people walking around can't be blamed on the extremely hot desert weather.  

[FYI]

IDK, but something about food from a truck just doesn't sound very appetizing.

[Nacre]

19 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

If I may just ask, why would you cut down all the large trees?  I would get angry too.  In fact, in some of the older established neighborhoods in SoCal where there are actually tree canopies in many neighborhoods (my city included), there have been issues with new people moving in and cutting down trees.  I know in Glendale and Arcadia, where many Armenians and Chinese people (respectively) have moved in, people have become angered when a new Armenian or Chinese neighbor decides to cut down a very old native oak tree.

Sun is a major issue for people moving from California to the Pacific Northwest. They don't like the huge fir, pine, and redcedar trees because they create lots of shade and seem claustrophobic to people from an arid climate. (example) So many Californians end up cutting down the big conifers and replacing them with smaller trees like fruit trees, and it sometimes makes their neighbors really angry.

Anyway, my point is that people from Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico do many of the same things. California is only blamed for it because there are lots of Californian immigrants and relatively few from Nevada. There may be some truth in the stereotypes of Californians, but the stereotypes only exist because there are so many Californians and they get so much publicity.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Nacre

[Quaker2001]

1 hour ago, FYI said:

I didn't say that they'd be exact replicas. I said "more akin", meaning, more in-line with. I'm also not necessarily just referring to height, but also *density*. I'm well aware that L.A. has several 700-plus feet tall buildings. But again, take away the top three tallest ones from the L.A. skyline, then yeah, with Phoenix, Portland & Tampa (& other similar size cities, not just those three) would all start to look about the same, regardless of the respective city's building heights.

Pretty sure we'd need to eliminate more than 3 buildings from the top photo to make it look more like the bottom photo..

It's been discussed here before that LA is not known for an iconic skyline or notable buildings the way that New York or Chicago or San Fran are.  And yes, in many respects, that makes it more similar to some of the cities you mentioned than comparable large cities.  But so what.  LA doesn't represent a city of its size because it doesn't have enough tall buildings and let's take away 3 of them to compare them to smaller cities?  To the original point that started this conversation.. does anyone really think less of LA because they don't have a lot of notable skyscrapers or an iconic skyline?  Let alone in the context of a Olympic bidding.

[ejaycat]

35 minutes ago, FYI said:

IDK, but something about food from a truck just doesn't sound very appetizing.

Right?  I don't even think to go to a food truck if I'm hungry, I'll go to a fast food place or a restaurant with table service, and eat in comfort.

I don't like the idea of buying something from a truck, and then standing on the sidewalk and eating.  

[FYI]

34 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

Oh gosh no, Phoenix's downtown is nothing like LA's.   Phoenix's downtown basically is a collection of newer mid-rises lined up in a few rows with the kind of architecture that looks like they could be in suburban office parks.  Also, Phoenix's downtown is not dense like LA's, and does not have the large collection of old buildings that downtown LA has.  In that first picture I posted of DTLA (which actually has more buildings out of frame to the left and right), if you look closer, you can see many mid-rises that are residential buildings.  Phoenix doesn't have that.  When you're in downtown LA, you feel like you're in a big city.  When you're in downtown Phoenix, you feel like you're in... downtown Phoenix.  And there's no vibrancy in downtown Phoenix, and I've been there in the late fall, so no people walking around can't be blamed on the extremely hot desert weather.  

I certainly wouldn't refute any of that. And by that comparison, I'm not saying that L.A. is any less of an exciting place like perhaps Phoenix (or Portland or Tampa) is. That picture that you posted of the Wilshire Grand in the background looks very 'Downtown-ish'.

But generally speaking, the two from afar wouldn't look or seem that much different from one another. And certainly don't mean anything by that as far in an Olympic bid context is concerned or anything else, like others seem to think that's what I meant, when in fact, it wasn't.

[FYI]

21 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Pretty sure we'd need to eliminate more than 3 buildings from the top photo to make it look more like the bottom photo..

For starters, the top picture you used is much more from afar than the bottom picture you used. So of course it's not going to look quite the same. And second, it's only ONE example of the three that I used.

25 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

LA doesn't represent a city of its size because it doesn't have enough tall buildings and let's take away 3 of them to compare them to smaller cities?  

I said that its lack of, doesn't necessarily represent the MEGA-metropolis that L.A. actually is (particularly for a major U.S. city), & that's it. If you think otherwise, or want to make more of it than it actually is, (to quote you)  - then "good for you!" 

 

33 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Let alone in the context of a Olympic bidding.

NEVER said that, or even implied it (you & nacre took it there), It has no more of a context in Olympic bidding as much as where you can find the best Thai or Mexican food in L.A., which is also being discussed in this thread.

[Quaker2001]

2 hours ago, FYI said:

For starters, the top picture you used is much more from afar than the bottom picture you used. So of course it's not going to look quite the same. And second, it's only ONE example of the three that I used.

How did I know that there was going to be a "those pictures aren't representative" response to that.  Sorry I didn't use all THREE of the examples you used.  Still a stupid point, IMO

2 hours ago, FYI said:

I said that its lack of, doesn't necessarily represent the MEGA-metropolis that L.A. actually is (particularly for a major U.S. city), & that's it. If you think otherwise, or want to make more of it than it actually is, (to quote you)  - then "good for you!" 

NEVER said that, or even implied it (you & nacre took it there), It has no more of a context in Olympic bidding as much as where you can find the best Thai or Mexican food in L.A., which is also being discussed in this thread.

This is another one of those "why is this a discussion here" things where apparently we're bored and can't think of anything more interesting.  This is only slightly less pedantic than talking about how to pronounce Los Angeles.  You're the one who was making a big deal of this and have some desire to put them in their place because their "plain Jane" skyline isn't big city enough for you.  I really don't give 2 shits.

[Quaker2001]

23 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Yea. The making more than it actually is is a big problem in this thread. I won't mention Quaker or FYI on the subject but if you know what I mean... 

Nah, be more subtle about it.  You should just refer to "a certain other poster" like a certain other poster does.

[FYI]

35 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

How did I know that there was going to be a "those pictures aren't representative" response to that.  Sorry I didn't use all THREE of the examples you used.

Well, probably bcuz you knew the pictures you used were lop-sided examples simply to try & be embellishing & trivial. The pics above are far more relative than the ones you used, if you had any inkling to be fair, but obviously not. A "stupid" point, yet here you are trying to argue it nontheless. Go figure.

43 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

This is another one of those "why is this a discussion here" things where apparently we're bored and can't think of anything more interesting.  This is only slightly less pedantic than talking about how to pronounce Los Angeles.  You're the one who was making a big deal of this and have some desire to put them in their place because their "plain Jane" skyline isn't big city enough for you.  I really don't give 2 shits.

You mean like when you make a HUMONGOUS "big deal" & "have some 'desire' to put them in their place"  when discussing "pedantic" things like why NBC does what it does with it's coverage (when the majority of people can also give two sh!ts), or when vehemently trying to argue the merits of what does or doesn't constitute "sexism", or when going around & around in circles with Truff over the same repetitive nonsense bcuz you want to show him that he can't always "control the conversation", etc, etc. So yeah, sure, whatever. Pot/kettle.

[ejaycat]

 

"Some walk by night, some fly by day..."

 

Ah, my favorite show when I was in high school.  And a mid-1980s downtown LA skyline!

 

And the version of the opening credits they used for the last two seasons of "Moonlighting."  Slightly different musical arrangement, and different montage scenes.  You can see the original Johnny Rockets on Melrose Ave. at :05 (which doesn't exist anymore), and the bookstore in Westwood Village at :40, which also doesn't exist anymore.  Ah, memories... back when Westwood was a happening place in the 1980s, and even the athletes during the 1984 Summer Olympics would hang out there.

 

Edited October 11, 2016 by ejaycat

[Athan]

I was taking a look at the second part of the bid book with all the venue changes and realized that, although they appear in the map legend numbered 31-33, there are no venues for mountain bike, archery and modern pentathlon. What happened to them?

[LatinXTC]

16 hours ago, FYI said:

IDK, but something about food from a truck just doesn't sound very appetizing.

At the very least avoid Mexican food trucks. If they're anything like the ones in Houston, a lot of them are not clean and regularly fail inspection. Usually the "white" food trucks are far cleaner and offer some pretty amazing food. Check your local news page for info on food trucks that pass or fail inspection. Yes they get inspected just as much aa regular restaurants.

[TeamBlakeUSA]

I Saw The Skyline of Los Angeles Before.

[JesseSaenz]

LA's skyline without city hall and without the US Bank Tower would make it stand out less. I agree that it would look like many other American cities.

Even Chicago without the Sears Tower and Hancock would not stand out.

The truth is, most cities are only recognizable by one or two buildings that make them just different enough to tell them apart. That or their location. 

For example Without the Transamerica Pyramid in SF, the SF Skyline looks a lot like San Diego's, Boston's or Vancouvers, a shimery city by the water.

No city is an exception to this except for maybe NYC which is in a league of its own.