New York represents the very model of the global city. In such a city, combining the command centers in a city center is extremely important. Faced with this model, Los Angeles appears as an anti-model focusing primarily on the "suburbs".
Will Los Angeles be the model city of the 21st century? This is not the opinion of Cynthia Ghorra-Gobin, who reminds us that Los Angeles has never thought of itself as a city (recalling the lack of skyscrapers until 1970). Is Los Angeles, the Sun Belt City, the anti-model of New York, the Frost Belt City?
Los Angeles is organized around its "suburbia", rather than around the center because it has no clear center. Is this the only difference between New York and Los Angeles?
We try to answer this question by first examining urban development in both cities and subsequently the consequences of these differences.
Tags: Los Angeles, New York's anti-model, Los Angeles as model city of 21st century, Cynthia Ghorra-Gobin
[...] Moreover, the development of transportation in Los Angeles did not happen at all in the same way as in New York. In New York, transportation abounded very quickly because of the very high population density. While the subway is far from being efficient, New York has a large bus network. Transportation in New York also played a role in the urbanization of the city, playing a pull factor in real estate. Los Angeles is in order here as an anti-New York model, because the density of population on average is low (although some areas of the city are densely populated) this can lead to a failure of transport to be effective. [...]
[...] However, do not believe that Los Angeles is an example of integration. While Los Angeles is a city with mostly minorities (Minority-majority city), the white minority ( against of white Hispanics), the rich districts (Brentwood, Westwood, Beverly Hills, Inglewood) are mostly white while poor neighborhoods (South Central, East Los Angeles) contain more immigrant populations. In it, Los Angeles is no different from New York where poor neighborhoods are black neighborhoods (Bronx, Harlem . Los Angeles also had two revolts in 1965 and 1992, the first for the recognition of black political and second for multi-ethnicity, highlighting the rivalry on the labor market between old and new immigrants. [...]
[...] We must first note the origins of these two cities. The Dutch set up a trading post at the place they call "New Amsterdam" in 1624 (The town was renamed New York when it became British in 1664) while Los Angeles has only 1,600 residents when the city falls in the Union in 1850. Developments in these two cities are different, even if the two now form the two most important ports of the United States. New York is primarily a docking port for European immigrants who settle in the United States. [...]
[...] To this we must add the 1965 law on historic preservation of certain buildings and we understand that the development of the city is very controlled, which is not the case in Los Angeles. New York is thus organized around a densely populated city center and that is unique. In fact, Manhattan is a city that is more similar to cities like Tokyo or Hong Kong rather than other U.S. cities. At this vertical city today it opposes the horizontal city, represented by Brooklyn and that is precisely the model of Los Angeles. [...]
[...] Another difference that separates Los Angeles from New York is the place of service for the elderly, importantly in the health sector in Los Angeles (site of the Sun Belt attractive for the elderly). Still, Los Angeles keeps in touch with the East Coast and particularly with the New York Stock Exchange through Wall Street; this is an effect of the absence of significant CBD. Los Angeles stands out as an anti-cultural model in New York representing a new trend in architecture and art (As there is little celebrated the Pompidou center). Oppose a culture of consumption conveyed by car (Los Angeles) to a culture more "European" and pedestrian (New York). [...]
Online readingwith our online reader
Content validatedby our reading committee