Why has Hollywood, CA continued to stay so sketchy and gritty?

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

Yep, the real movers and shakers of the LA entertainment industry have almost never lived in Hollywood itself. Meanwhile, people with less money and mere ambitions have lived in Hollywood.

That's not true anymore. There's one building at Hollywood and Vine that is home to many social media stars, for one. The NY times had a article about this. They're very ambitious. With all the new condo and apartments going up, I think there will be more up and coming young actors doing the same. I don't think they look at Hollywood neighborhood the same way as previous generations did. Most of LA's new cool hotels are being built in Hollywood too.

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by soleri

I used to live in Phoenix until I moved to its polar opposite, Portland, a few years ago. When it comes to homelessness, they pursue the same strategy, which is to concentrate social services and shelters in their downtowns. On a certain level it does make sense but you're right that it's unfair. The rich will counter that they pay more in taxes so they deserve having tony enclaves free of the unsightly. The rich might be hypocrites but money has a persuasive logic all its own. NIMBYs are everywhere, however. The middle classes in Phoenix and Portland won't abide homeless shelters in their hoods either. Bottom line: unless we create a national strategy to mainstream the homeless with a guaranteed basic income, only those areas with the least political clout will end up paying the price.

Agree about the national strategy (though not the guaranteed basic income). In our local discussion about homeless, the very valid point is raised that it could be counter-productive to do much: if you are overly generous with benefits and support for the homeless you will create incentives for more homeless to come to your city which will eventually lead to to a death spiral for your homeless program as it will soon be swamped with so many seeking benefits that you can no longer support the program.

This fact is a major deterrent against the development of more comprehensive programs. A broader national effort with common principles and available benefits could avoid this problem.

Of course, that's not happening any time soon. Current federal efforts are more focused on making sure the 1% have enough money to cover off home no. 3 or 4, as opposed to helping the homeless.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by soleri

Bottom line: unless we create a national strategy to mainstream the homeless with a guaranteed basic income, only those areas with the least political clout will end up paying the price.

This is a terrible idea. Let's reward homelessness with free money?

Homeless people would use that money to buy more drugs and alcohol, they wouldn't suddenly become productive members of our society.

This might end the - in your face - homelessness, but only because they would O.D. sooner rather than later.

[Centropolis]

i need to do a tour of dirty hollywood bars before it's too late. i've never even been to the frolic room.

[dubu]

How are you supposed to be a productive member of society when the people you are working for are criminals? Unless you are working for a food card or something. People have jobs so they arnt boatd all day and becquse thwy want money.

Whoops sorry i was typing fast on my phone

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

This is a terrible idea. Let's reward homelessness with free money?

Homeless people would use that money to buy more drugs and alcohol, they wouldn't suddenly become productive members of our society.

This might end the - in your face - homelessness, but only because they would O.D. sooner rather than later.

yep -- the answer is to provide a wide variety of services as people are homeless for various reasons and also give courts more leeway to take action with mentally ill folks.

of course, that is an expensive and messy response and even then it isnt 'thee' answer because there isn't one. the fact is you can only compel people to follow mh treatment to a limited set extent.

of course an alternative is you always gentrify homeless and street people out or sic the cops on them and run them out. that's just a dodge though since it only moves the people somewhere else.

its a tough topic and $$$ to deal with, but much cheaper than jail.

hollywood sure isnt alone, when i was in florida recently i was reading how daytona beach continues to deal with this issue as well.

[creamcityleo79]

It's funny you ask this as the LA Times asked, basically, the opposite question just a few days ago...

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...021-story.html

How much has once-dreary Hollywood changed? Try $6,600 a month for a 2-bedroom apartment
By ROGER VINCENT

Monthly rents for a deluxe apartment tower called Argyle House opening next month start at $3,395 for a studio, $4,395 for a one-bedroom and $6,595 for two bedrooms.

The location? Not Beverly Hills, not Santa Monica, but the once-dreary intersection of Argyle Avenue and Yucca Street in Hollywood.

The lofty rents of the 18-story tower that will open next to the landmark Capitol Records Building are a telling sign of just how much the neighborhood has changed from its downtrodden days of a few decades ago.

Entertainment companies that once abandoned the neighborhood are returning in force, and bringing with them a yen for posh housing, developers hope.

Among the latest to set up shop there are streaming powerhouse Netflix and major Viacom Inc. brands including MTV, Comedy Central, BET, VH1, Spike and TV Land.

Such employers drive new demand for housing, according to local business leaders who expect the population of Hollywood to more than double between 2010 and 2020...

[mrnyc]

^ haha ok so there we have our answer -- its to be gentrifying the undesirables out.

as if we could not have guessed!

move along you, move along ....

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by destroycreate

What reasons led Hollywood, CA to become so grungy and sketchy? Given it's glorious past, you'd think it'd have experienced some sort of resurgence way sooner than it has. I know now that luxury condos have been going up left and right, but still, it's not nearly as nice as other parts of LA. It's dense, walkable, connected well via transit and has the bones to really be a chic urban destination. Is there a reason why it has remained so rough around the edges?

I don't even think Hollywood is all that gritty. Or maybe I'm just used to it? It's definitely way better now than it was back in the 1980s.

And, Hollywood is more than just Hollywood Blvd. and the few blocks north and south of it. Hollywood is actually a big area, and includes Melrose Avenue, including the stretch from at least Fairfax to La Brea (and points east of course, to Paramount Studios). I never thought the Melrose area from Fairfax to La Brea was ever seedy or gritty, it was always funky and fun, though it's not as cutting edge and trendy as it was in the 1980s.

It's funny to me that I should read this OP, as just this Sunday I was in Thai Town on Hollywood Boulevard for the Songkran (Thai New Year) Festival. I didn't find it gritty, unsafe or sketchy at all, in fact I'm in Thai Town often for their great authentic Thai food. And I can take the Metro Rail there.

If you do smell urine, it's often the drunkards coming out of the nightclubs all wasted and peeing and ralphing on the sidewalk. And many of them are the transplants!

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I don't even think Hollywood is all that gritty. Or maybe I'm just used to it? It's definitely way better now than it was back in the 1980s.

And, Hollywood is more than just Hollywood Blvd. and the few blocks north and south of it. Hollywood is actually a big area, and includes Melrose Avenue, including the stretch from at least Fairfax to La Brea (and points east of course, to Paramount Studios). I never thought the Melrose area from Fairfax to La Brea was ever seedy or gritty, it was always funky and fun, though it's not as cutting edge and trendy as it was in the 1980s.

It's funny to me that I should read this OP, as just this Sunday I was in Thai Town on Hollywood Boulevard for the Songkran (Thai New Year) Festival. I didn't find it gritty, unsafe or sketchy at all, in fact I'm in Thai Town often for their great authentic Thai food. And I can take the Metro Rail there.

If you do smell urine, it's often the drunkards coming out of the nightclubs all wasted and peeing and ralphing on the sidewalk. And many of them are the transplants!

I've tried to tell the same thing to certain posters here. Hollywood is a huge neighborhood. I've always considered Melrose Hollywood's main retail street.

Entertainment companies are also reviving the La Brea/Santa Monica corridor, although that's partly West Hollywood too.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by destroycreate

Interesting. I'm from SoCal so I guess my perspective of grit is different, but I find the backstreets of everything south of Hollywood Blvd pretty seedy looking.

But aren't you from San Diego? San Diego is nice and all, and I don't know how old you are, but for many decades, San Diego felt like an overgrown small town (even native San Diegans my age would say that), so I can see how someone who grew up in San Diego might think that Hollywood is gritty.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by ozone

Hollywood was never as glamorous as people imagine. It was largely a working class town full of underemployed would-be actors, and a lot of ordinary underpaid behind the scene employees in the film industry. The stars lived in the Hollywood Hills and Beverly Hills.

Actually, in the very early years of the movie industry (the Silent period through the 1920s), many stars and directors did live in Hollywood. As Beverly Hills developed, many movie stars and directors started moving there too, because it was newer, close to work and... it allowed Jews to live there. Many in the Hollywood film industry were Jews (and still are), and Beverly Hills had no racial covenants against them. Bel Air did (and were generally against people from the film industry anyway back then, being that film wasn't considered a real art form in the early 1900s, and film people in that period were generally looked down upon by the "upper crust"), so that's why many started moving to Beverly Hills. Plus, when Beverly Hills started out as a new development, real estate sales were very slow, so that's why they also wanted to appeal to the new money/film industry crowd, so that they could sell a lot of lots.

This is why Hollywood and Vine was considered a popular intersection in the early years of the movie industry, because that now historic stretch of Hollywood Boulevard was where a lot of film people did congregate and do their shopping, before Rodeo Drive ever became a thing.

And with TV production still basically in and around Hollywood, you see a lot of TV people around, like at the Farmers Market (right by CBS Television City); many TV people also live on the other side of the hills in Studio City and Sherman Oaks (which makes sense, it's close to their jobs), so you'll see them on Ventura Boulevard at restaurants. Years ago, I would see the guy from Will & Grace on Ventura (I only occasionally eat on Ventura Blvd. hehe).

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Honestly right now is the first time since the literal 1920s that entertainment companies are moving to Hollywood (besides Paramount).

And of course Paramount never left Hollywood.

[Prahaboheme]

I live at Hollywood and Argyle. In my .25 mile radius, I have access to the metro red line, Trader Joe's, Equinox, Barry's bootcamp, the Fonda, Palladium & Pantages theatres, the Selma Ave bars / hotels, restaurant row in Franklin Village, and the list goes way on.
And yes, I also have access to some vintage Hollywood places like the frolic (which still has the cheapest drinks in town).

Hollywood is not really sketchy at all. MacArthur Park on the other hand...

[LA21st]

^

Agreed. I'm iin Hollywood at least once a week and love the Hollywood and Vine area. The Farmers Market on the weekend is outstanding.
I dont get the sketchy comments unless you're from some type of suburban area or something. I think it's a fun area.

I generally stay away from macarthur park. It's vibrant, dense and urban, but it doesn't feel quite right. I hope it gets cleaned up in a few years, cause it does have some nice bones.
Same for Skid Row. As gross as it is, there's alot of old buildings that could be reborn as something else.

[Prahaboheme]

Agree to your comments about MacArthur Park / Westlake. It does have some of the most beautiful buildings in the city and some of the highest density per capita. Despite the social and economic woes (not to mention gang turf wars), it is certainly vibrant and fun to wander around.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by LA21st

^

Agreed. I'm iin Hollywood at least once a week and love the Hollywood and Vine area.
I dont get the sketchy comments unless you're from some type of suburban area or something. I think it's a fun area.

I generally stay away from macarthur park. It's vibrant, dense and urban, but it doesn't feel quite right. I hope it gets cleaned up in a few years, cause it does have some nice bones.
Same for Skid Row. As gross as it is, there's alot of old buildings that could be reborn as something else.

You'd think the area is as shifty as 42nd St (in NY) was during the 70's. Hollywood is a funky eclectic area.

[LA21st]

True.
It's weird but that's what I like about it. I never feel unsafe there. The Walk of Fame is a tourist trap, and I usually like it or despise it on what my mood is. I pass through there on the way to Runyon Canyon from the Hollywood/Highland stop.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by LA21st

True.
It's weird but that's what I like about it. I never feel unsafe there. The Walk of Fame is a tourist trap, and I usually like it or despise it on what my mood is. I pass through there on the way to Runyon Canyon from the Hollywood/Highland stop.

Same here. Other than the hoards of tourists it's rather down to earth and not too pretentious. I'd hate to see that disappear.

[Capsule F]

I remember when I visited LA for the first time around 5 years ago I also was taken aback at how slummy Hollywood appeared. I live in Philly, so naturally I am used to grit, but perception truly did not meet reality here. The mall was half empty, parking lots everywhere, and the standouts appeared to be Scientology buildings.

I'm sure it has changed recently, but I was surprised when I visited.

[LA21st]

Yes, alot of parking lots have bit the dust in 5 years. It's becoming more and more of a mixed use neighborhood (housing/hotels/offices).