Los Angeles myths
This article by Eric Morris in today’s Freakonomics blog addresses some common myths and assumptions about Los Angeles that I often see brought up by writers who say they could never live here:
Exactly one of the following statements about transportation in Los Angeles is indisputably true. Two are (at best) half-truths, and the rest are flat-out myths. Can you figure out which of the following is accurate?
Los Angeles’s air is choked with smog.
Los Angeles has developed in a low-density, sprawling pattern.
Angelenos spend more time stuck in traffic than any other drivers in the nation.
Thanks to the great distances between far-flung destinations, and perhaps to Angelenos’ famed “love affair” with the car, Angelenos drive considerably more miles than most Americans.
Los Angeles is dominated by an overbuilt freeway system that promotes autodependence.
Los Angeles’s mass transit system is underdeveloped and inadequate.
He hasn’t provided the answers (yet), but here are my opinions and guesses, without any Googling or other fact-finding missions:
False. Talking with friends who grew up here, the air quality was apparently horrible up through the mid-1980s, with “smog alert” days common. But thanks to nation-leading emissions standards, it’s improved dramatically. The air is cleaner than what I grew up with in Boulder, Colorado.
Half-true. Los Angeles is huge — and that’s not counting all the smaller cities that cling to it. But you’re not required to go everywhere — most of what you want is quite close. I drive less than 5000 miles per year. And while the city is not as high-density as New York City, it’s a lot denser than most people realize. Most of the new construction you see in the city is now “urban in-fill,” which increases the density.
Likely true, because it’s the only claim that could be “indisputable.”
False. Commutes in Los Angeles aren’t particularly long; they can just take a long time. I predict Los Angelenos drive significantly less than motorists in, say, Denver.
False. A lot of loaded words here — “dominated,” “overbuilt,” “autodependence” — none of which are defined.1 Los Angeles has a lot of freeways. At two in the morning, it’s amazing how quickly you can get from point A to point B. Most other times, I avoid them.
Half-true. “Underdeveloped” and “inadequate” feel like subjective measurements, so you need something to compare them against. In my experience, New York, Washington D.C., London and Tokyo have better mass transit systems, making it much easier to get where you need to go. But compared to most U.S. cities, I suspect Los Angeles has significantly higher usage of public transportation.
- Though I like the term “autodependence,” which sounds like a reflexive psychological condition. ↩
Articles
February 6th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
There was actually an article on the yahoo front page today about living in NYC
the commutes there are the longest in the nation by far…an average of some 50 minutes
I live in Culver City and work mostly in the Valley, but my average commute is prolly only 25mins…if you’re going the right way, the freeways here are great.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Nice to know. I moved to Los Angeles a couple years ago and love it here, but most people where I came from (Santa Cruz) think I’m a nut, usually citing bad air / terrible traffic / not as centralized as San Francisco / etc. Compared to Santa Cruz that may be true, but Santa Cruz also has no economy.
I moved here for my career, but even if I were not doing so, I very much enjoy living here regardless.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
All those points are crap. I mean I’ve never been to LA, but by watching the first 6 seasons of “24″ I’m pretty sure every location in LA is reachable in less then 10 minutes. So, I think you LAers have it pretty good. It takes me way more time then that to get around here in Vancouver.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
The only thing I identified with on this list is the public transportation knock. Here’s a short list of American cities that have much, much, much better public transportation systems than LA (in terms of convenience and reliability): New York, Washington D.C., Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Oakland. I’ve never been, but I hear Atlanta has a better system too.
I’m a big public transit guy, so moving to LA was hard in that sense. But I have never had an issue with smog, traffic, or anything of that ilk. At least no more than living in Philadelphia, where I’m from.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
When I visited LA, we traveled everywhere just fine…although most of the time it was 2 or 3 AM…which is the perfect time to travel if you hate traffic.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
In regard to number 2, I think you’re making the classic standardized test mistake and overthinking the problem. While you’re on the money about things being more centralized than people realize, it’s hard to argue that Los Angeles is not sprawling. It’s the classic example of urban sprawl.
In terms of density, I jut moved from New York and I feel very comfortable calling LA a low-density city. Most of the buildings are a lot lower here; There are few tall residential buildings and most apartments are at least twice the size of comparably-priced apartments in New York. Obviously New York is the archetypal dense city, so almost anything would seem less dense in comaparison, but what city is less dense than LA?
Then again, the structure of number 3 is such that it can’t really be a half-truth so I’m not sure what to make of it.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
I don’t think Los Angeles is as spread out as the Dallas/Fort Worth area. I’m amazed at how far away some things are (in distance, not counting the time which is affected by traffic and depends on the time of day).
I’ve spent time driving in Los Angeles, and it never seemed any worse than any other southern city (and not as bad as San Antonio, which is, in my opinion, the worst city to drive in).
And mass transit? We have whole large suburbs that have no bus service (Arlington, for example), let alone something like light rail (and the light rail doesn’t go to either airport yet).
February 6th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
it’s a fact that LA has fewer freeway miles per capita than many major U.S. cities. so the “overbuilt” part of #4 is disputable. i’m curious to see the answers.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
@ Mallet
while it may only take 10mins to get anywhere in LA, the yearly terrorist (and cougar) attacks do vex one horribly
February 6th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
It’s anecdotal evidence, but according to my friend in Hawaii who occassionaly visits, LA’s traffic is nothing.
I can’t speak for myself. Every job I’ve been to has been fine with me arriving off-hours to avoid traffic. In November, I moved to an apartment walking distance from work.
February 6th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
I’d agree with your assessment on these John. The smog in LA was pretty bad when I first visited the city in 1992 but the air is a lot cleaner these days. For really atrocious smog, you can’t beat Beijing – or any other major city in China. I’d wager Beijing would give LA a run for its money in the time-spent-in-traffic stakes as well.
LA is definitely spread out, but then so is my home city of Sydney. The geographic centre of Sydney is Parramatta – an area that takes about an hour to reach from the central business district, which isn’t actually central at all but hugging the east coast of the city.
The past four times I have visited LA I’ve not bothered renting a car and have had little trouble getting around using the public transport system, cabs and my legs. I find if I stay in West Hollywood, I can find ample restaurants and bars within walking/stumbling distance to keep me amused too. No, it’s not quite as easy to navigate as the Tube in London, but it’s better than the reputation it largely gets.
February 6th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
I used to live in Culver City, now West Hollywood area. I couldn’t agree more with #1. Usually West on the 10 is fine, and East (on 10) between Noon and 3 is “OK.” No doubt the freeways are fine at 2 in the morning. But I think if venture out a little, you can get anywhere in LA within reasonable time. Fairfax South is great.
Besides if you live in LA, you drive defensively. If you didn’t cut people off, you wouldn’t get anywhere. My favorite trick – which is probably the worst to do – is to get in the far right hand lane, go all the way up to the light, bypassing all the traffic, then flooring it to get back over a lane before the meter parking starts.
February 6th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
You seem to comment on the quality of his arguments and lack of examples more than the truth of the arguments. Regardless, the arguments don’t lend themselves to true or false statements.
Someone from a small town in the Midwest, like myself, would say that absolutely this place is choked with smog. You’re not really saying the statement is false, just that it’s improved from what it was. Is it not as choked as it was, sure, but it’s still pretty damn choked.
Most of the new construction does seem to be high density, but the key word is that it’s “new” construction. Strip malls and one to two story buildings are by no means high density, and this is what we have now. Sure, the new buildings will increase the density, and if this trend continues than your argument might hold more weight, but for now the construction cranes are mostly still up and much of the work still unfinished.
Agreement.
Absolute agreement.
Lack of definitions demonstrates that you’re attacking how he phrases the argument, not really the argument itself. To see how the freeways dwarf all other means of transportation, to see how they’re generally built above everything else, seems to say “look at me, buy a car,” or it could say something else, but it seems unlikely. Still, they are certainly quick at 2 in the morning, but probably because it’s the dominate form of transportation and thus has been developed as such.
Outright disagreement on this one. Why should we compare ourselves to anyone else? LA is a unique city. In LA county there are almost 10 million people. (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html) Stare at that number long enough and then look at the public transportation system that exists to handle it; it’s then that you realize we don’t have one.
February 6th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
@Ryan Paige – I have to agree with you on the San Antonio point. I lived there for nearly ten years before moving to Austin. For anybody who doesn’t know San Antonio, there are seven major highways – Interstates 10, 35, and 37, two loops (410 and 1604), and two state highways (281 and 151) that all run through towns. In all of this, there are only a handful of actual interchanges. If you want to get off one highway and onto another, chances are you’re going to wind up a stoplight. Of course, the city recognizes this and wants to correct it, but everything has developed around these intersections and there’s no room to build interchanges anymore. L.A. can’t be that bad.
Besides, there’s this web series I watch called I Am Not Infected (http://www.iamnotinfected.com) that’s filmed in L.A. They always manage to find times when there is nobody around and there is also sunlight. That’s a good sign.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
It’s like a tutorial in Sim City 4– but I am also near-tripping with the 100 degree fever I have.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
DC has worse traffic than LA, from what I understand.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
I’d guess that Number 2 is half-true. The metropolitan area spreads out, but LA is still very dense for an American city.
Nos 1, 5, and 6 are the flat out myths.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
I am guessing that Atlanta traffic is worse than LA. If you don’t live in the city or live near a MARTA station, and have to drive to work, it is gonna be a huge pain in the ass even if you live close to the city.
February 6th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
@Sam:
That’s why I answered half-true for #2. You don’t usually get that choice in logic questions, which is why two statements joined by “and” must both be true for the answer to be true.
@Derek:
The writer is saying that of the six statements, most are false. So it’s not attacking his arguments — he’s not making any. I’m pointing out that he’s phrasing things in a way that is unlikely to be “indisputably true” (his standard).
February 6th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
With regards to #2…
LA is actually one of the top 10 “Most Walkable” cities in the US, according to walkscore.com:
http://www.walkscore.com/rankings/most-walkable-cities.php
Obviously quite a bit less walkable than New York or San Francisco, but not bad compared with the rest of the country. (Which is not the best standard to use, of course, but we go for walks with the cities we have, not the cities we want, &c &c &c.)
February 7th, 2009 at 3:36 am
Marcus, that would be driving offensively, not defensively. Defensive Driving is when you wait longer at stop signs and stop slower just in case something crazy might happen. The offensive drivers being the “crazy”.
My biggest problem with other drivers is their constant need to tap on the brake every five seconds. Of course, it’s likely they have to do this because automatic transitions never slow you down. Three cheers for manual transmissions and down-shifting.
February 7th, 2009 at 5:26 am
Being an urban european the list of reasons why I would not move to L.A. – aside from the whole Visa-issue, the no-national-health-care, no-five-weeks-paid-vacation, no-paid-family-leave, yes-to-prop-8 and the fact that my career is doing just fine over here so why would I move somewhere where I would have to start from scratch – would definitely include the public transport thing. Seriously – I don’t even have a drivers license. People in London, Berlin, Paris, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Madrid and Rome don’t have drivers licenses. We have a metro card and we know how to hail a cab.
A few years ago I was on staff on a tv series and the studio we were shooting in was located in an industrial area outside the city. The writing staff came back from summer vacations three weeks earlier than everybody else and because this was in the middle of the before-mentioned “five weeks of paid vacation” the cantina on the lot was closed. Production had left us the keys for four cars so that we could drive somewhere to get lunch. But on the first day back when we all headed out to the parking lot at 12:30 we where struck by the realisation that out of 14 staff writers not one had a drivers license. Untill you can say the same thing for an L.A.-writer’s room, you can’t claim to have good public transport :-D
February 7th, 2009 at 6:58 am
L.A. once had a magnificent trolley system – the Red Car – with over a thousand miles of track, the largest in the world. But then the car, oil, and tire companies conspired to put it out of business. The scandal was popularized in the film WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT:
JUDGE DOOM
A few weeks ago I had the good providence to stumble upon a plan of the city council. A construction plan of epic proportions. We’re calling it a freeway.
EDDIE VALIANT
Freeway? What the hell’s a freeway?
JUDGE DOOM
Eight lanes of shimmering cement running from here to Pasadena. Smooth, safe, fast. Traffic jams will be a thing of the past.
It was also to be the third part of Robert Towne’s J.J. Gittes/L.A. trilogy, entitled CLOVERLEAF. Of course, CHINATOWN dealt with water corruption and THE TWO JAKES was about natural gas. Too bad they never made it.
February 7th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Two other myths (general American) two German English teachers I once knew made up… of course, they were totally ding dong!
American’s don’t have sidewalks. — ok,… sure…, HUH?!!!
American students don’t have rucksacks, because they could easily hide weapons in it. — ah, sure… and they all got arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger to carry their books. WTF!!!
I hate it when teachers try to actually teach you something, but in fact they know nothing about their subject!
February 7th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I’m sick of people talking crap on L.A. that have never lived there. I love the sprawling environment, I’ve never had trouble breathing, and yes the 405 usually sucks but there’s always a way to avoid traffic. Thank you for clarifying the tons of BS that is heaped on to this wonderful city.
February 7th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
I didn’t read all of the comments, but I did a search on the page for “rayner banham” and nobody mentioned him so let me be the first.
2 is indisputably false. In fact Los Angeles is one of the densest cities in the US. Anyone seriously interested in this topic should definitely read Rayner Banham’s “Los Angeles: The Architecture of Four Ecologies” to understand the structure of the city and why most of these ideas about L.A. are myths.
For starters, the city was definitely not built around cars, as is often believed. The overall structure of the city was outlined by railroad lines around the turn of the century. One westward out to the beach (basically Wilshire/ the 10), one running north and south through the Cahuenga pass (basically the 405) and once that structure was in place, the stuff in the middle all filled in (midtown, the valley, etc.). Then later these lines got filled in further with the red car lines which helped create other neighborhoods like Culver City. Actually, I’m pretty sure he says that there was an even earlier iteration of this basic structure before the trains, with the old missionary roads but I can’t remember. Anyway, read Banham’s book, as it’s great stuff. He made an excellent documentary on the subject as well http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1524953392810656786
I think the traffic question is a half-truth. The 405 is one of the most congested roads in the country I believe, but that doesn’t mean much for a lot of people who live and work in Los Angeles. I think the stats are heavily skewed by considering the greater metropolitan area and looking at the driving habits of commuters that live way out of town. Of course you’re going to face some of the worst traffic in the world if you live in Orange County and commute to Burbank or something like that.
February 7th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
LA traffic is a breeze. 17 minutes from Giggles’n Hugs to Hollywood… on a mildly rainy Saturday night. Beat that.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Traffic? What traffic? I live in my car, and let me tell you I know a thing or two about traffic in LA. There’s no traffic. Don’t let people scare you. 405 what? I drive a lot around town between 11pm and 5am, you know, doing my thing. No traffic. Just watch out for the trucks on the freeways, they’re like crazy. And the cops. And the crips, or whatever. I’ve got everything in my car, laptop, wireless internet, espresso machine (with milk foamer) and laser printer. A bunch of three-hole paper in my trunk. Don’t need anything else. Taking the bus? You’re kidding me? Don’t get me started on that.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
You can find a walkable corner of Los Angeles by Google-mapping the nearest Whole Foods. That company’s knack for planting stores within easy walking distance of residential neighborhoods is astonishing to me.
I’m going to assume Marcus’s post is a work of brilliant satire — cutting people off is driving defensively? Ha!
Interestingly, Marcus and John (not August)’s posts seem like opposite side of the same coin. J.N.A. dislikes the constant brake-tapping, and Marcus’s driving technique is exactly what causes brake-tapping.
My personal solution to both issues: Leave enough distance between me and the next car that I don’t need to brake as soon as traffic slows ahead of me. I know, I know, that sounds crazy. But my mechanic thought my brake shoes were about to wear through in the spring of 2008, and they’re still hanging in there. And my 24 mile commute (the last 7 on surface streets) takes a consistent 35 minutes. So what does that tell you?
February 8th, 2009 at 3:17 am
RE#2, I used to think 12K/yr lease estimates were a joke when I lived in Ohio, where I drove 30+miles each way from the burbs to downtown…in 20 minutes.
Now, having driven less than 6K a year (7 miles each way in 40 minutes for school/work), I have to say…it’s the traffic, not the distance.
And the smog only looks smoggy from the Getty and only feels awful when it’s really hot…not like I expected at all…and in my experience, normal in any large city not built right up against water, i.e a Great Lake.
February 8th, 2009 at 6:21 am
When I interned in the area in the late 90’s I got the chance to run around the LA area a bit, and found myself pleasantly surprised – at times. There are many beautiful neighborhoods just off main drags or freeways that you wouldn’t know about unless you had a reason to go to them – I did so to deliver or pick up scripts. LA has the same problem of sheer mass of people that you get with any major city – times 10. But the biggest problem I found, something atypical for say NY or Chicago, is the distance within the people. I found myself chuckling at its residents lack of social skills for the regular snubbing they gave one another. San Diego had a similar problem, but to a lesser degree. It’s a Southern California thing.
February 8th, 2009 at 9:09 am
I think every city has its fair share of negative myths. I know people who look at me aghast when I say that I use the subways when visiting Manhattan. I think they still believe that the subways are like THE TAKING OF PELHAM 1, 2, 3.
February 8th, 2009 at 9:49 am
You can talk about density all you want, but the fact is, you pretty much have to drive a car to get around L.A. I lived in Chicago for years and never had a car. For people who like city-living, L.A. doesn’t compare to New York, Chicago, Boston, Montreal, etc. It’s a completely different lifestyle; one that flies in the face of nearly every Jane Jacobs principle. John, you may drive less than 5,000 miles a year, but you also don’t commute to a daily 9 to 5. And 5,000 is a ton of miles to drive if you’ve lived in New York or Chicago.
That’s not to denigrate L.A. I would guess most Americans spend as much time in their cars as Angelenos, if not more. How many people commute into NYC from New Jersey? Most Americans live in suburbs that require at least as much driving as people do in L.A. And that’s why L.A. feels more like a giant, dense suburb. Yes, you have more walkable areas in L.A. than in Naperville. But it’s still a lot less walkable than San Francisco or Barcelona.
I think L.A. has a lot to offer. I like L.A. But I hate hate hate hate driving a car. It’s true that L.A. once had a great public transportation system. So did Detroit, but it sure doesn’t anymore. Hopefully these cities will get back to that. I’d much rather ride light rail than get behind the wheel. Have I mentioned that I hate driving a car?
My point, if I have one, is that people from Los Angeles might want to do a little less indignant defending of the sprawl and transit. And we urban dwellers who relocate to L.A. should do a little less bitching about the shitty public transportation to people at coffee shops, and instead bitch directly to our elected officials and demand that subway to the sea so we can get rid of our cars. That will also appease those of you who love their cars. When the rail is there, we won’t be on the roads with you.
February 8th, 2009 at 9:56 am
I’m not looking to knock L.A., for as many frustrating things there are about this city there are amazing perks (mainly the weather and living within 1 to 60 minutes of the ocean). A note about the air quality though. Saying that the air has improved from the 80s seems like a bit of a stretch. Here’s an ‘05 consensus from the American Lung Association on the cities/counties with the worst air. LA and counties around LA rank in the top 5 in several categories. It’s hard to claim improvement when you’re still the worst. http://lungaction.org/reports/sota05_cities.html I don’t know if anything has gotten better in the last 4 years, but LA is still the only city I make a descent into a yellow layer of air. I’ve never been to Denver so I can’t comment. I am from Detroit and can tell that the air isn’t this bad. It might be the one thing my hometown has on LA.
February 8th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
I’ve lived just outside of Toronto my entire lift, but I was shocked when I went to LA. Not only is the air much cleaner than Toronto, which has constant smog alerts, but the traffic isn’t as bad as I’ve heard. A 20km drive could take an hour, easily. (Sorry, I don’t know what that is in miles, but it’s not much.)
I’ve never tried the transit system when I was in LA, but I don’t imagine it’s any worse than Toronto’s constantly delayed and inefficient transit systems.
February 8th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Life…not lift.
February 8th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
1/2 truth
1/2 truth
myth
myth
myth
Absolutely true
February 9th, 2009 at 6:15 am
I’d like to point out that the drivers in L.A. are far more courteous and safer than those in the Raleigh/Cary/Durham area, a “family friendly” place. You can merge onto the freeways without having to stop or get honked at, and traffic really moves when the lights turn green.
L.A. traffic has a terrible rep, but it’s a cakewalk compared to the less “road scholarly” parts of the nation.
February 9th, 2009 at 9:28 am
John,
You used the DC public transit system as an example of a good one. However, the Metro system in DC is about as useful as the Monorail in Disney World. It will take you to Fantasyland and the World of Tomorrow, but if you need to get to church on Sunday or to an early flight at National Airport, you will be sadly out of luck. So, while you might have thought the DC Metro was good, you must not have lived there for long. If you visit and want to get from your hotel in Roslyn to the Smithsonian or the Supreme Court, you will enjoy a ride in a really clean train. But don’t try to live in the District without a car. And that’s why traffic in DC is probably much worse than in LA.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:09 am
Here;s an LA related myth… it never rains in California. Brrr.
February 9th, 2009 at 11:38 am
As someone who lives in Los Angeles without a car, I can tell you that the city is very accessible, so long as you take some care in where you live. Nine months ago, I shattered every bone in my leg and wound up on crutches for quite some time. Usually, I ride my bike around town (which works out great – LA is fantastic for cyclists). During the months following my injury, I was forced to use public transportation. While some trips took a little forethought, there was no point where I was stuck, or where the metro hours prevented me from getting to where I needed to go.
Now, I’m really starting to heal and am finally back on my bike. Every day, I bike from Sherman Oaks to my work in Northridge in the West Valley. Several times a week, I bike from work to Santa Monica or Hollywood. It’s easy, and when I get tired, all the busses and trains are bike-friendly.
Because of the weather, because the bus system is pretty comprehensive, and because of the speed of the rail lines we do have, I’d say that living in LA without a car is pretty comfortable.
I do recommend a bicycle. At the very least, it makes getting between bus lines a LOT easier. At the most, it’s completely feasible to get around in Los Angeles without adding to the power crunch. Take it from me – this city isn’t as wide as people think. Folks measure distance in travel times, and not in miles. There are times I’ve beaten the traffic with people power.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I think it’s funny when people say there’s not much traffic in LA compared to other cities. That getting anywhere is a breeze. I was born here, and I’ve lived most of my life here. Before writing professionally I was a PA for a bit, so I’ve definitely done my share of freeway surfing. Sure, making a film run to Burbank airport at 2 in the morning is a breeze. But making the morning commute from Woodland Hills to Century City takes about an hour and a half. And I’ve heard the number of drivers is set to double in the next couple of decades.
As for the smog issue, air quality SEEMS to have improved drastically from the old days, but the extraordinary spike in childhood asthma cases in the densest parts of the city make me wonder. Has the more visible pollution given way to less visible fine particulate pollution and given us a false sense of security?
February 9th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
As someone who grew up in LA in the 80s (Palos Verdes), and lived back there a few years ago (Koreatown), and who has also lived in several cities around the US plus in Europe – this is my take.
The orange haze from the 80s is gone. BUT my apartment in Koreatown was constantly covered with a layer of soot-like black grime. So there is still a LOT of crud in the air, it’s just not orange anymore.
Definitely sprawling, but only moderately low-density… and this is improving over time. Neighborhoods are getting more defined (in a good way) and downtown and adjacent areas becoming more self-sufficient. Compared to DFW, where I live now, it’s definitely got more going for it in terms of density, which I consider a good thing. A 30-40 mile work commute is not uncommon here, and the suburban areas are generally really generic, as they haven’t developed much neighborhood flavor.
More time stuck in traffic? I dunno. Depends on where you’re traveling and when. Most learn to adjust their schedules to avoid peak traffic times, and many employers offer work scheduling that takes that into account (like allowing people to come in at 7am or at 10am for an 8-hr shift) but when I was living in K-town and working in Pasadena, that short drive could take a very long time in the evening rush.
Angelenos love their cars. This is true. I see more classic and more souped up cars driving around LA than any other city I’ve lived in. But more miles altogether? Nah. I’m sure it takes more driving to get around DFW than it did in LA. I mostly stayed within a handful of neighborhoods, walked (gasp!really!) a lot, and found lots to entertain me. Well, when I was in K-town that is. Great location close to everything. Growing up in PV, well, getting anywhere meant driving over the hill. I actually took the bus from Rancho Palos Verdes to USC for a full semester before my parents relented and helped me get into a dorm room. Oi. So, I guess it depends on where you draw your circle and call it “LA” – how far you get into the suburbs. I’m sure people who live in the Valley drive a lot. Those in Hollywood, not so much.
Wouldn’t call the freeway system overbuilt. Seems about right for the area, and not so much more than many other metro areas.
Now as for the mass transit. Hm. It exists. With care and planning you can kinda get around. But it’s really pathetically inadequate. In Prague, I could leave a theater after midnight in one outlying area, and get a tram or subway back to an outlying area on the far side of the metroplex. I might have to wait 20 minutes, or even 30 on a Sunday. Getting around the heart of the city was effortless. Small towns like Boulder and Santa Cruz have great bus systems. Of the places I’ve lived, LA is only better than one: DFW. DFW has the most inadequate sorry-assed attempt at public transportation as any place I’ve lived. In LA, I could walk or ride a bike most places. In Dallas there are huge areas where it’s hard to get across the freeways if you’re not driving. It’s like coming across a rushing river in the middle of the urban jungle. You sometimes have to traverse the banks for miles to find a bridge.
February 10th, 2009 at 5:20 am
While I was growing up here in Bakersfield, My mother worked for the Broadway department store chain, and occasionally had to travel to the Broadway service building for training. This was located on Mission in downtown LA. I can remember waiting with my dad for my mom to finish her session. The smog was so thick you could see it coming through the AC vents. I can’t recall any time recent that it’s been that bad in LA.
The same with distances. It seems like it used to be worse and LA seemed more spread out. Now LA seems quite compact to me. Maybe I’m just more patient in my old age.
February 10th, 2009 at 7:39 am
@Mike Bell
Native Californians, and those who’ve been in L.A. a long time, do seem to be much more patient about traffic. Those of us who’ve been there less than five years are way less patient. I’ve noticed this in talking to other transplants, and from seeing frustrated faces in traffic, and then noticing out-of-state plates on their cars. I’ve noticed the same thing in the Bay Area, though if you live in San Francisco, it’s mute since you don’t need a car in the city.
Part of that might just be that those who’ve been here longer know the roads better and can get around traffic a little easier. Or maybe they’ve been beaten into submission and just accept it. I have a friend who says it takes five years to fall in love with living in L.A. To me, that’s not falling in love, that’s just how long it takes to build up a solid network of friends and colleagues to the point where you accept the place as home. It took me five minutes to fall in love with living in Chicago. L.A.? We’ll see.
February 10th, 2009 at 8:40 am
Fred, I agree that there are significant limitations to the DC Metro. However, I’ve lived for 10 years in the District without a car.
I always thought some people’s objection to living in LA had more to do with the people and culture instead of transportation shortcomings. I say this as a general observation, not having lived in LA, nor having any particular aversion to doing so.
February 11th, 2009 at 12:34 am
Fred, having grown up in DC, the Metro is great and the traffic comes from the people who commute into the city. The city in itself is tiny (less than ten squared miles) and incredible walkable (you don’t need a car) but swells everyday with the Maryland and Virginia residents who work in the district. The Metro is great and continues to improve in areas it services. Now, if you meant “DC Metro Area,” then, yes, there are people who decided to live in the suburbs far from where they work so they don’t have to pay high property taxes or live in a city where you have no federal rights… but that’s besides the point, which is that the DC Metro is quick, clean and services much of the city.
On the other hand, living in LA requires you to own a car or be willing to bike a lot (I have a friend who bikes over the mountains all the time, but I couldn’t do that .) I haven’t found the drivers here to be terrible nor the driving to be unbearable if you are willing to take a side street once in a while. That being said, the public transportation here just isn’t as good as other major cities that are far more geographically dense, such as those on the East Coast. There’s a subway here, but I’ve never been on it. There are buses, but they take too long.
LA isn’t terrible. I think Mr. August’s comment that “…you’re not required to go everywhere…” is a refreshing one, but I do still need to go from Culver to get my fish tacos in Silverlake, and maybe one day I can get on a subway car and sit for an hour to get there, but until then I’ll be chugging along with everyone else on the freeway.
February 11th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
I skimmed the comments, so forgive me if someone already said this: Who Cares? Does L.A. have more traffic and less air quality than my home town of Tallahassee, FL? Of course it does, but who cares? In deciding whether to move to L.A. for your career, I can’t imagine what air quality and traffic have to do with it. One makes trade-offs in life, so the real question for anyone to weigh is whether the pros outweigh the cons. For some people the answer is yes; for others it’s no. Of the people I know who answered no, none of them cited traffic or air quality as a factor. They did, however, cite the culture of Hollywood. At the end of the day, it comes down to what you want your life to be. If being very successful in this business is so important to you that it overshadows everything else, L.A. is probably a good bet. If it’s important, but not everything (and you want, say, the kind of lifestyle that you can’t have here), then maybe you live somewhere else and accept the corresponding career trade-offs, whatever they may end up being.
As for the traffic, there are a couple of work arounds. 1) Live in a central location 2) if you work in features and long-form television, schedule meetings so that you aren’t driving at rush hour (surprisingly easy to do). I do both of those things and haven’t found the traffic to be much of a problem, save for the occasional odd experience.
February 11th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
one more thing: gangbangers. it seems that the whole city is full of violent gangs and you cannot go out at nights because bunch of gangs come right away and waste you or rob, if you´re lucky, immediately. is it myth?
February 12th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
@mankiboi, No, that part is true. I was robbed just last night and again this morning.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Our gangs can beat up your gangs…
February 12th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
I was robbed four times on my way home from Trader Joe’s.
February 13th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Me too.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
As for mass transit— it’s there and it’s used quite a bit. It just isn’t used by anyone who can afford a car.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Try actually WALKING in Los Angeles. I lived there for a year and took up walking for exercise, eventually walking up to five miles a day. I developed a persistent hacking cough that I finally got over about a month after moving away.