California Dreaming? 1 in 5 Americans want to live in Los Angeles, new survey says

[L41A]

Originally Posted by Segun

LA is a consideration, but I'm spoiled by having lush, shade-providing greenery in my immediate surroundings. It sounds petty, but it's real to me. The exotic appeal of Palm trees doesn't last long.

Plus, I like the seasons.

[ocman]

Of course loads of people want to live in LA if they had money. LA has everything.

[ChrisLA]

No seasons, and nothing but palm trees.

I actually think the exotic trees and landscapes make for some of the most beautiful scenery anywhere. I especially love the fact that the LA region is using more native plants, the colors are down right breathtaking. Don't get me wrong I love greenery too, but I found some areas of the country I visited trees are rather dull and boring looking. Atlanta was the exception

LA does has four seasons, it may not be as drastic as the eastern part of the country, but we definitely have them.

Los Angeles City-West San Fernando Valley
My neighborhood, notice not many palm tress here. Many of the valley's residential communities are full of tress that are not palms. Sherman Way is one of the few major streets in the SFV that are lined with tall palms





















Thousand Oaks:

[lio45]

Originally Posted by homebucket

The weather is also much nicer in LA. The ocean has a milding effect and there are a lot of microclimates. Some parts of coastal LA and SD can actually feel like the Bay Area. It doesn’t get nearly as hot in LA as it does Phoenix too. In LA you could live without AC. Can’t do that in Phoenix.

Originally Posted by craigs

I'm sure plenty of people who live outside the American Southwest understand there's at least one significant difference between the two cities: one of them benefits greatly from its location along the Pacific coast. That doesn't just mean that one has ocean beaches, it also means it also has a much, much milder climate due to the ocean influence. Try living in Phoenix without air conditioning like they do in Santa Monica and Venice Beach.

Originally Posted by AviationGuy

If you look at temperature averages for either Phoenix or Los Angeles, there's a vast difference between summer and winter. In L.A., the differences are smaller right on the coast due to the influence of the ocean. Either city can get chilly during the winter, but overall would appear moderate if one is from a place where winters are extreme.

True, but that distinction is lost on people from here (who aren't that "connected" to the realities of the U.S. Sunbelt). Both these cities get desirability points for being sunny and warm year-round. However, the one thing craigs mentions that IS known is that LA is on the ocean while Arizona is not (in other words, you might be able to sell people here an A/C-less house in Phoenix, but not an oceanfront one! )

Both LA and Phoenix benefit here from one perceived but incorrect advantage each: Phoenix doesn't lose points for its harsh and more continental climate (vs LA), and LA doesn't lose points for its not-that-usable beaches (vs Caribbean or FL).

So, it balances.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by ChrisLA

No seasons, and nothing but palm trees.

I actually think the exotic trees and landscapes make for some of the most beautiful scenery anywhere. I especially love the fact that the LA region is using more native plants, the colors are down right breathtaking. Don't get me wrong I love greenery too, but I found some areas of the country I visited trees are rather dull and boring looking. Atlanta was the exception

LA does has four seasons, it may not be as drastic as the eastern part of the country, but we definitely have them.

Los Angeles City-West San Fernando Valley
My neighborhood, notice not many palm tress here. Many of the valley's residential communities are full of tress that are not palms. Sherman Way is one of the few major streets in the SFV that are lined with tall palms

Wow, that pic at first sight really does not look like SoCal (to me).

[ChiSoxRox]

I'm the oddball who likes winter, so I likely have one of the more unique lists.

My interests are dense walkability, rail transport, historic architecture, and the peacefulness of a gentle snowfall.

So my list with money not being a factor:

1. Seattle (gorgeous location, Olympics and Cascades at hand)
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. New York (limitless money? aim for Chelsea)
5. San Francisco (the natural beauty outweighs the lack of winter)

With price taken into account:

1. Chicago
2. Minneapolis
3. Seattle
4. Philadelphia
5. New York (Queens or Hudson County)

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by lio45

What's amusing is that for us who aren't from the American Southwest, Los Angeles and Phoenix are extremely similar and even interchangeable. Anyone who wants to live in one (for whatever reasons) will also want to live in the other (for the exact same reasons), and vice versa.

Auto-centric, modern, sprawly, sunny year-round, dry year-round, no winters, land of boulevards and shopping malls and consumerism.

Coastal LA/OC is pretty distinct, IMO, and one of the most unique and desirable places on the planet. But almost all of inland LA/OC, to me, has more or less the same advantages/disadvantages of Phoenix. Sunny, dry, hot, new, Sunbelt, Mediterrean or Southwest-style everything. Of course there are demographic and built-form nuances, but from a non-Sunbelt perspective it's like detailing the differences between Brooklyn, Philly and DC rowhouses. If you're from San Diego or Denver, a 19th century eastern seaboard brownstone neighborhood is more or less the same.

Which is probably part of the reason there's such a dramatic swing in home prices. Right on the coast in Corona del Mar/Newport is around $5 million, 10 blocks inland the same home is $2.5 million, in Irvine two miles inland the same home is $1.25 million, and further inland the prices drop until you meet Phoenix prices. Places like Whittier and Corona and Yorba Linda feel like a slightly older version of Phoenix.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Sure but lets say LA became as affordable as Phoenix for some reason. The amount of people moving in would be off the charts.

Same as Hawaii, SF etc. It's the cost thats the issue. This isn't the only poll that shows LA high up if money wasn't a issue. It's not some outlier.

California in general. If they built housing say Chinese style, just for the sake of conversation... folks would move there.

That's always been the crutch of many desirable locations, not enough housing.

Generally as a rule of thumb, a ton of supply to make housing affordable, and a good environment for businesses... and folks tend to come.

I mean from just an urban fantasy, I would love to see LA have three times the population, bullet trains, and resemble an American Tokyo... but these things remain in fantasy... but would be cool to see!!!

[DZH22]

I'd rather have winter than earthquakes or gargantuan forest fires. Knocking on wood as I say this but the Northeast for the most part seems to have less extreme weather and natural disasters than the rest of the country. Plus, winters on average have been getting milder. I call it "pockets weather" because I like the extra storage of having coat pockets. Air is 1000x more refreshing than in the hot summer months too. Winter is overblown while the summers are overrated and often have brutal, debilitating heat.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by DZH22

I'd rather have winter than earthquakes or gargantuan forest fires. Knocking on wood as I say this but the Northeast for the most part seems to have less extreme weather and natural disasters than the rest of the country.

Well in the future, we have to brace for the Florida refugees. I think in the future, places like Canada and the Northeast and the Northern states will become even more desirable. To escape the heat and malaria, folks will migrate North!!! We are on the path to mass flooding and irreversible climate change, and so... the power centers of the future will eventually change.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by DZH22

I'd rather have winter than earthquakes or gargantuan forest fires. Knocking on wood as I say this but the Northeast for the most part seems to have less extreme weather and natural disasters than the rest of the country. Plus, winters on average have been getting milder. I call it "pockets weather" because I like the extra storage of having coat pockets. Air is 1000x more refreshing than in the hot summer months too. Winter is overblown while the summers are overrated and often have brutal, debilitating heat.

I've experienced 2 real earthquakes in 10 years here and neither did any damage.
Big fires in the city of LA are very rare, I've only seen one in 10 years. Maybe a 2-3 days out of 365 you can't go outside of smoke from fires further north. I dont think this happened at all in 2022.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by DZH22

I'd rather have winter than earthquakes or gargantuan forest fires. Knocking on wood as I say this but the Northeast for the most part seems to have less extreme weather and natural disasters than the rest of the country. Plus, winters on average have been getting milder. I call it "pockets weather" because I like the extra storage of having coat pockets. Air is 1000x more refreshing than in the hot summer months too. Winter is overblown while the summers are overrated and often have brutal, debilitating heat.

Boston maybe, but we can get hurricanes just a little south of you in NYC. In fact, Sandy was one of the most expensive natural disasters in U.S. history.

[mhays]

I've experienced one major earthquake in Seattle in nearly 50 years here, knock on wood. My coworkers and I mostly laughed through it. Also one really bad year with wildfire smoke.

The smoke often blows east, so the Midwest can get it worse than we do.

[ChrisLA]

Originally Posted by ChiSoxRox

I'm the oddball who likes winter, so I likely have one of the more unique lists.

My interests are dense walkability, rail transport, historic architecture, and the peacefulness of a gentle snowfall.

So my list with money not being a factor:

1. Seattle (gorgeous location, Olympics and Cascades at hand)

I always find it interesting that people would consider it dense, from my experience Seattle overall is less dense and walkable than Los Angeles. The San Fernando Valley IMO is more dense than much of Seattle. I love this city and I think it’s quite beautiful. I also agree the downtown area was easy to get around and parts of the north end of the city was nice but head south and it’s almost rural.

[ChrisLA]

Originally Posted by lio45

Wow, that pic at first sight really does not look like SoCal (to me).

It is a block from where I live, it’s not anything like the north east but we have a fall season and certain trees change colors and the leaves die. Certain areas of the LA metro is more noticeable where there are less palm trees. A lot of the time leaves don’t start changing colors until late November like when I took this photo from my car.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by lio45

Wow, that pic at first sight really does not look like SoCal (to me).

I didn't think that either until I moved out here to the Bay Area (similar climate to LA) and was surprised to see so many trees here change foliage in the fall.

[LA21st]

LA's/California trees (not just palms) stay green throughout the winter as the rest of the country is brown and dead.

I didn't really know that until I came to LA for the winter the first time. I was living in Chicago at the time, and I took the gold line to Pasadena. Everything was really green.

[llamaorama]

I think if money was no object, LA vs Seattle would be a tough call.

I'd give Seattle a slight edge. It has more green and water. LA is so much more worldly but kind of rough.

Hell, even if money is an object I've considered moving to Seattle, I had a chance to move there once before but didn't go with it. I'd have to live in some less cool suburb though.

I wouldn't live in NYC. I don't really like the East Coast.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by chris08876

California in general. If they built housing say Chinese style, just for the sake of conversation... folks would move there.

No, they wouldn’t. That’s just fantasy.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by LA21st

LA's/California trees (not just palms) stay green throughout the winter as the rest of the country is brown and dead.

I didn't really know that until I came to LA for the winter the first time. I was living in Chicago at the time, and I took the gold line to Pasadena. Everything was really green.

Because, L.A. is heavily dependent on Northern California water. How many of the trees in the L.A. basin would survive without imported weather. L.A. is (obviously) a very dry area and without water from the north, L.A.’s tree canopy would look very different. Hell, we’re pivoting in Sacramento to plant trees that tolerate dry/drought conditions.