Opinion: Population in city of Los Angeles can hits over 8 million?

[VansTripp]

If city of Los Angeles have been hit 8 million population then this city will beat NYC's record.

It was easy to hit 8 million in future. Just build 50+ floor modern condo, apartment and loft. It same as like Hong Kong does.

Was it is better to replace in South Los Angeles for remove the gangs, bad neighborhood and crime related. Good idea? Just my opinion about future.

[benji45]

You have to re read your post. I cant understand it. lol

[savvysearch]

If city of Los Angeles have been hit 8 million population then this city will beat NYC's record.

It was easy to hit 8 million in future. Just build 50+ floor modern condo, apartment and loft. It same as like Hong Kong does.

Was it is better to replace in South Los Angeles for remove the gangs, bad neighborhood and crime related. Good idea? Just my opinion about future.

Yeah, Los Angeles is larger than NYC in land and can handle even more than 8 million. But it depends on the people in LA wanting it or not. Many people already think there is too many people in LA. Of course you can't stop people coming in, but if you control housing, its possible to slow it down.

[TICONLA1]

OK i'll try to answer this with my opinion, first when LA's pop. hits 8 million , (i think between 2035 and 2055,) NYC pop. will be around 12 to 16 million, so in my opinion NYC will always be larger than LA.(unless some large natural disaster hit's NYC.) if you look at NYC growth pattern , only now (begining around 1990) are it's skyscraper developments moving off of manhatten into other boroughs on a large scale. i.e. qweens, brooklyn , NWNJ,. the buildable land area of LA far exceeds new york city which far exceeds hong kong. i believe the skyscraper development in los angeles will take place between, santa monica (WLA) and downtown, above the I 10 corridor. south central LA will see development but i don't think hirise for many years. i think LA will need another 50 years before skyscaper development becomes exclusive to the area i mentioned above.(which suck's becouse i'll be dead by then and not able to see it !!!!)

[VansTripp]

Yeah, Please check at http://socds.huduser.org/scripts/odbic.exe/census/totalpop.htm

Chicago, Phildephia, Detroit, Baitimore and Washington D.C. have loss population from 1950s. New York City have been loss population from 1970s to 1980s. Los Angeles isn't make it but... L.A. keep growing bigger and keep bigger.

That is true about land in Los Angeles was huge than NYC land. Land in Nashville was little bigger than Los Angeles.

All old office in Los Angeles need become into apartment, condo and loft that will help increase more population.

[California EU]

Love to see the population to keep rising.

[edsg25]

LA has unquestionably put a lot of money in its downtown core. I hardly refute the fact that that part of the city is far better than it used to be. But it is also hard to refute the fact tha LA, more so than virtually any US city, is not tied to one single core. There are many centers in LA proper and far more throughout the metro area.

So here's a major problem with 8,000,000: LA has 4 (red, green, blue, gold) transit lines. Three of these run downtown. LA would literally need to blanket the entire city with transit lines if 8,000,000 people lived there. These lines would not be spokes on a wheel as so many Angelenos don't work downtown. In other words, LA's rapid transit system would need to do what none in the US has ever been able to accomplish: connect neighborhood with neighborhood in a vast web, not neighborhood to downtown as is the case of most transit systems. Add this to the mix: with 8,000,000 that rapid transit system means subway, not light rail. To be effective, the trains would have to run below street level. Compare red line costs in LA to the other 3 lines and do the math. Staggering.

Does California and the West have water for 8,000,000 Angelenos? Would 8,000,000 Angelenos destroy the very open life style that drew people to LA in the first place. If Angelenos wanted that kind of tightly packed, highly urbanized California city, they'd be shopping in Union Square, working in a pyramid, watching home runs landing in the bay and living with a view on Russian Hill. Not a bad life style, but one I don't believe LA wanted for itself.

[SChristopher]

I think (I know) in land area LA can totally support that many people. However I think the reason people like LA is because it is not NYC, it is a sunny (LA-Urban) city. I dont think people want LA any more crowded than it is. I think to support more population there will have to be a substantial infrastructural upgrade. I believe much of the Mega Cities' population influx is coming from immigrants and not emigrants as of late. On top of it all there are natural situations unique to Los Angeles that I believe will level off the insane boom in 20th century LA.

[SChristopher]

HAHA...I just read eds response, I pretty much said the exact same thing. Moo

[goonsta]

8 Million by 2035? Thats undoubtably not going to happen. No large US cities grow that fast anymore. For that to happen, somehow LA would have to find a way to attract ALL growth into the central city. Today's boomtowns are all suburban and LA now has strong competition from dozens of cities offering that same lifestyle. I say 5 million by 2050. Americans are not yet that sold on the urban lifestly.

[and1mm]

5 million is very conservative. if the current population increases continue Los angeles Will be at by about 2015, 7 million by 2050. According to a 2003 estimate of the population of los angeles (3,819,951)there was over an 100,000 person increase in 3 years (3,694,820) since the last census. And the last census noted a 6% pop increase in the 90's. Also keep in mind that the 90's were riddled with bad press for los angeles. Beginning with the riot then earthquakes. and followed by el nino and OJ and everything else that was bad for LA. The 21st century on the other hand has not cast Los Angeles in such a bad light as a city. So I expect even more of an increase during this decade over the last. As for the project of 8 million in 50 yrs thats unreasonable. But whats reasonable is that fact that southern california could have more than 1/10 of americas population in 50 yrs.

Stick dat in ur pipe and smoke it new york and chicago. 1 out of every 10 americans could be come from the LA area from ventura to san diego santa monica to barstow.

[chicagogeorge]

^
Very hard to predict that far into the future. Plus, population growth fluctuates greatly by decade. Remember, L.A. grew by 125,000 during the 1970's, 300,000 during the 80's, and 225,000 in the 90's. I think L.A. (the city) will top off at 5-6 million, but the SCAG will continue to grow, passing Greater New York in about 30 years.

"Stick dat in ur pipe and smoke it new york and chicago. 1 out of every 10 americans could be come from the LA area from ventura to san diego santa monica to barstow."

Hey and1mm,

Have you ever heard of BoWash? The developing megalopolis on the east coast of over 60 million people?

[and1mm]

Never heard of it where is it @? IF my speculation as to where bowash is, that encompasses several states. Also people from various places in socal usually refer to where they are from as los angeles, to rid themselves of further questions(ala where is oxnard?). So I when I say dat about chicago and new york I mean the region contained in one specific identifiable area. Like Chicagoland, or new york metro area. Los Angeles Can effectively be called all of southern california depending uipon who you ask.

[LAuniverse]

There is NO way LA will reach 8 million - not in any of our lifetimes and no matter how young you are.

LA could conceivably top 5.5m by then if growth stays unchanged and even that 's debatable

[Louman]

Seriously, you wouldn't want LA to have the population of 8 mil if you don't like rampant traffic jams on EVERY freeway everyday and overcrowding.

[Azn_chi_boi]

60 million in BoWash? wow, I thought it was 45 million.

Pollution with about 3.7 million people living is bad, think of 8 million, you'll probably need a gas mask.

Population isnt everything, like I said somewhere. Like some cities such as like SF, Boston, STL, Miami, Chicago, (compare to NYC and LA)etc are small in population but are important to US, either tourist,economy, or history, while some cities are just sprawling cities and think population is everything, such as Jacksonville, Phoenix, Houston, Anchorage, Nashville, Kansas city, columbus, etc(cities just annex land to be bigger). Hope, LA wont be like those cities.

Population isnt everything.

If LA reach 8 million, LA really need to change its transits, and the freeways. Buildings that are newly built need to be carefully built, because LA is on an earthquake zone.

[LAuniverse]

LA has unquestionably put a lot of money in its downtown core. I hardly refute the fact that that part of the city is far better than it used to be. But it is also hard to refute the fact tha LA, more so than virtually any US city, is not tied to one single core. There are many centers in LA proper and far more throughout the metro area.

So here's a major problem with 8,000,000: LA has 4 (red, green, blue, gold) transit lines. Three of these run downtown. LA would literally need to blanket the entire city with transit lines if 8,000,000 people lived there. These lines would not be spokes on a wheel as so many Angelenos don't work downtown. In other words, LA's rapid transit system would need to do what none in the US has ever been able to accomplish: connect neighborhood with neighborhood in a vast web, not neighborhood to downtown as is the case of most transit systems. Add this to the mix: with 8,000,000 that rapid transit system means subway, not light rail. To be effective, the trains would have to run below street level. Compare red line costs in LA to the other 3 lines and do the math. Staggering.

Does California and the West have water for 8,000,000 Angelenos? Would 8,000,000 Angelenos destroy the very open life style that drew people to LA in the first place. If Angelenos wanted that kind of tightly packed, highly urbanized California city, they'd be shopping in Union Square, working in a pyramid, watching home runs landing in the bay and living with a view on Russian Hill. Not a bad life style, but one I don't believe LA wanted for itself.


Interesting reply ed. But I don't necessarily think what LA wanted for itself is what LA would want for itself had it grown to 8 million. We're jumping the gun here. A city at 8 million would already have some form of mass transit enabling it to have managed it's growth begin with, much less to 5, 6, or 7 million or that LA wouldn't even exist to begin with.

Another thing is that yes, you're right that within the US and anglo-North America, there is no city modeled like LA - multi-centered. But that fact makes it too easy to overloook this one: that as a metro, the city of LA, and in particular it's golden triangle (the area within the imaginary triangle drawn between downtown, Hollywood, and Santa Monica) is the irrefutable core of the metro. Not everyone works downtown, but many many people work and live within this crowded triangle and this triangle holds the majority of LAs cultural point's of interest.

So I agree with you about following a different path for mass transit, but LA is not that different from Tokyo (especially) or London and it can do quite well with a transit network modeled as such. And that's exactly what's beginning to happen, only to the scale required for a city of 4 million and growing, not 8 million.

Will LA be able to handle 8 million? The question is given our historical context will LA, or any other city for that matter, be able to attract that many people? If so then the answer to the first question would be yes.

[SChristopher]

Stick dat in ur pipe and smoke it new york and chicago. 1 out of every 10 americans could be come from the LA area from ventura to san diego santa monica to barstow.

That is as big as some countries!

[digital_slash]

Just curious cauze I really don't know, but would the water situation in the west allow for L.A. to sustain such a large population? I know that you guys get your water from somewhere in Colorado (right?) and your state is part of a pact where you have to share it with all of California plus the sprawling burbs of Nevada, etc., etc. My question is how large can the population get in L.A. before the city (and the state) use up more then their share and the rest of the west demands the Federal Government step in?

[POLA]

if desalination plants can be made econimical, then this wouldn't be a problem. Good question tho. Blade Runner, here we come.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

i beleive LA only gets 5% of the water from the colorodo. the rest is from our own snow pack, the sierra. We have water and its not that seroius of a problem right now, however, with 6 million more moving to LA in the next 15 years, it can be.

[LAuniverse]

Why don't they build a huge reservoir to trap all that drainage? The flow through our basin rivers alone would provide enough water to fill a reservoir nevermind what could be drained from desert floods and such.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

defintley. way too much of our rain water does not drain into the ground, it just gets washed into the river and out to the ocean. we need more green space and less asphalt and concrete. Not only is it asthetically better, it is better for the enviornment and our water situation. We need medians and landscaping all over the city and unfourtunatley its not happening.

[LAuniverse]

Yah, all I hear is drought this, drought that. We aren't the wettest place in the world but we do get a good amount of rain. Build a damn dam or something! What does DWP expect, for us to put empty milk jugs on our driveways everytime it rains? Are we that dumb or is it impotent politicians as usual?

[POLA]

Also, wouldn't more standing water (from dams) allow for more water to seep into aquifers? I know that LA used to get it's water from artesian wells, so I imagine we still get a percentage from them now.

[M. Brown]

Never going to happen. LA is totally different than NYC. NYC is just a dense city plain and simple and can hold that many people and the people in NYC like living that dense.

[POLA]

^However, we are entering a new era (times are a chaning). With rising house costs and population increases, we can only hope and try to encourage LA to adapt to more dense living. Here's to the future, where anything is possible.

[M. Brown]

^ Yeah but I don't any other city will grow to the density of NYC because the times changed. I think more people want to live in the suburb than the city.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Actually, the trend here in LA is the opposite of that, because of a number of reasons, mainly traffic and commute time. Also, people are realizing that city life is a good way to live and transit is a viable option. The booming areas of LA are all infill, from the 22000 housing units in DT LA, to all the develpment in Long Beach and Holywood and also the transit friendly developments in Pasadena and along the Gold Line. LA is pretty much spread a far as it can go, with a few exceptions, and now developers are looking in, which will help promote transit, more walking, less car dependence, less polution, less sprawl and more density. It will be interesting to compare 2000 density numbers for Dt LA, Long Beach and Mid Wilshire to 2010 numbers. i expect them to go up significantly.

[Palal]

PLEASE, Proof-read your titles!!!!!
Population in city of Los Angeles can hits over 8 million?

What you said is that the population of LA's prison is over 8 million!

[chicagogeorge]

^
WTF?

[POLA]

yeah, not sure I got that either

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

????

[Cherguevara]

I don't know much about Los Angeles (being as I am, from England) or indeed the oil or water industries, but I suspect that global warming/peak oil will have serious consequences for areas like S. Cal. Does anyone know of any ways in which preparations are being made to deal with the potential consequences of water/oil shortages in the most car centred city on earth?

Never mind growth, will Los Angeles even survive the changes that are coming, and if so in what form?

[timquinn]

I can think of some ways Los Angeles could accomodate 8 million people.

1.) As far as commuting and mass transit there is a very cheap solution that really is in the works. That would be people walking to work. This will not be a matter of choice but necessity. We now have high rise living in close proximity to high rise working. Voila, no more car, no more parking, no more insurance, no more ouch-sized gasoline purchases. It makes the high rents seem like a deal. You will also notice many of these projects are being required to include 'affordable' units. Any guess who will live there? The help.

2.) Think Calcutta, think Mexico City. Globalization means leveling the playing field. Quality of life goes up for the middle class in China, India, Korea. Quality of life decines for 1st worlders, that's us. In Europe you buy milk in little containers and at home you put it into your tiny fridge. We could learn to economize and minimize without it really hurting all that much. We will think of it as the new urban life style and, in fact, feel superior about it. Treading more lightly on the earth and all that. The $1 bottle of water will be the 21st century equivalent of 25 cent gasoline, remember when . . .

I'm not being negative here, it will be a vibrant, creative, new city. And it will resemble in many ways a third world city, too.

But don't blink, you'll miss something

Tim Quinn

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

I don't know much about Los Angeles (being as I am, from England) or indeed the oil or water industries, but I suspect that global warming/peak oil will have serious consequences for areas like S. Cal. Does anyone know of any ways in which preparations are being made to deal with the potential consequences of water/oil shortages in the most car centred city on earth?

Never mind growth, will Los Angeles even survive the changes that are coming, and if so in what form?

For Oil, there is not much that can be done about that directly, however, LA is the American capital (maybe worlds) of hybrid and electric cars. Those are becoming viable options as is the ever expanding rail network in LA, with the new expo line from Downtown to Santa Monica, a gold line extension from Downtown to East LA, the Gold line extension in the san Gabriel Valley scheduled for completion in 2012 and there is new vigor and enthusiasm that the red line will be extended down wilshire to the ocean, serving millions along the way (this could be one of the most heavily used lines in the world upon its completion, as it goes through LA's densest part, along with Beverly Hills, UCLA, and about 15 Museums, as well as reaching the ocean. Also, dense development and better land use are being encouraged as is city living in downtown, Hollywood, pasadena, Long Beach and the wilshire corridor, all rail accessible and in the heart of the city.

Well, for water, there are talks of desalination of ocean water, which is expensive, but obviously, there is a abundant amount of ocean water at our door step. LA is not in a water shortage, nor has it been in a while. We get most of out water from Central and Northern California, from the Sierra Nevada Mountains, which recieve rediculous amounts of snow, some spots get to over a 1000 inches a year.

LA's pop is still growing at a tremendous pace, with LA City now about 30,000 away from 4 million (will pass later this year), and LA county at 10,200,000.

[Caliguy2005]

Los Angeles definately needs more infill development and skyscrapers to accomodate the population growth.

[POLA]

we're headed in the right direction.

[Caliguy2005]

City of Los Angeles approaching 4 Million,Los Angeles County 10.2 Million,The Greater Los Angeles Area(5 County Region) approaching 18 Million.

We need more Housing,especially Residential Skyscrapers to accomodate this growth...it's always best to plan ahead,not wait until the problem becomes unmanageable.

[redspork02]

Going up up up up.

[POLA]

Wooohooo! LA expected to surpase four million this year!