1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

USC - please tell me about the area

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Violinist, Aug 17, 2006.

  1. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Geez...it's not that bad. It is an island in a questionable area, but it's not like there are hookers and dealers all along the street as soon as you get off campus.

    You do need a car. Good part about LA is that it's a good place to get a used car. Most used cars are in much better condition for the model year than in any other part of the country - no snow or bad weather. (My sister's neighbor has a classic 70's Jag in mint condition. He parks it on the street.)

    The only upside to riding the bus is that you can work on your Spanish.

    Seconded. I lived near USC when I was a summer associate at a downtown firm, just after the Rodney King riots (when things were worse than they are now). It wasn't that bad. I used to run a lot at night, from down around the campus to up around Echo Park and back - never any problems. You use all the same cautions you'd use in any urban environement. It's not "the hood", although it can be rough and semi-industrial. But it's not Compton, for example. More sad, disturbing homeless people than AK-wielding gang members. As others have said, you don't need a car to get around campus per se, but you really do need a car living in LA.
     
  2. justdrop

    justdrop Member

    Messages:
    5
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    I just started school and live in an off-campus apartment, a short five minute walk away. I stayed up late every night by partying at frat row, going to University Village, finding a place to eat on Fig, and even walking to the parking center and I never felt that I was in danger. There are alot of campus security walking around and the school provides trams to transport students late at night.
     
  3. Violinist

    Violinist Senior member

    Messages:
    1,907
    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Thanks for all the information. I'm going there sometime in Novembre to check it out. I'm very excited to see this place.
     
  4. johnapril

    johnapril Senior member

    Messages:
    5,663
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    johnapril- Spudnuts is tasty, but was this burrito place Chanos? or the place right next door which is really good (probably newer than 93 though). I try to reserve Chano's for extremely drunken indulgences [​IMG]

    The burritto place was two doors down from Spudnuts in the same stripmall. They used to let you smoke there. What a great city.
     
  5. Manton

    Manton Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    41,568
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    In Hiding
    The apartment prices seem like a pleasant surprise. Way lower than what I was expecting in NYC.
    Until one comes to see New York City and State as vast, all powerful criminal conspiracies desinged to squeeze as much of your money as possible, through as many different avenues as possible, one does not really understand them.
     
  6. Garrett

    Garrett Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    55
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    I went to ucla four years without a car and did fine. I dont think I could do it as a grad though.
     
  7. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I went to ucla four years without a car and did fine. I dont think I could do it as a grad though.

    UCLA is a bit different than SC. Westwood Village offers a lot of stuff to do, and its fairly close to both Beverly Hills and the beach. Did you notice how many SC students were at Westwood Village?
     
  8. esquire.

    esquire. Senior member

    Messages:
    1,303
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Is there some type of relationship between a university and the surronding area where you're going to see higher or lower real estate prices?

    I would have thought that having a first class university would help to gentrify the surronding areas. Perhaps, its the opposite where the transienent cycle of the students destablizes it.

    Did UCLA and USC come first, or was their surronding neighborhood already established at that point?

    I was just passing through Palo Alto recently, and I didn't see anything particularly special about it. Does Stanford play a role in Palo Alto's sky rocketing real estate prices?
     
  9. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    My sense is that on balance having a major university is a boon, it's merely one factor in a very complex, dynamic marketplace.
    By way of example, I think housing prices in Palo Alto have more to do with the tech boom in that area that with the proximity of Stanford per se. However, the presence of Stanford certainly had at least some causal relationship with the area's becoming such a major center of gravity for the dot-com/tech industry.
     
  10. bachbeet

    bachbeet Senior member

    Messages:
    1,212
    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    First, Palo Alto is much nicer than LA. And some of the areas nearby are very ritzy w/ expensive large homes. Stanford is a much better school than USC. I even like UCLA more than USC.

    yes, the differences b/w the surrounding areas of USC/UCLA are different. A friend of mine lived near UCLA (while getting his Economics PhD) in the seventies for a very reasonable rent (apt near the 405 fwy). Yet, it was very near Bev Hills. So near, that when he was in a nearby market, he saw Suzanne Pleschette from the then popular Newhart show.

    I attended Cal Poly, SLO. A beautiful area. Low crime (although prisons were nearby; one held, at that time, Huey Newton). More restaurants per capita than SF.

    Another better school is Berkeley. Nice surrounding "college" area which is also near some expensive homes. Great academic reputation too.
     
  11. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    First, Palo Alto is much nicer than LA. And some of the areas nearby are very ritzy w/ expensive large homes. Stanford is a much better school than USC. I even like UCLA more than USC.

    yes, the differences b/w the surrounding areas of USC/UCLA are different. A friend of mine lived near UCLA (while getting his Economics PhD) in the seventies for a very reasonable rent (apt near the 405 fwy). Yet, it was very near Bev Hills. So near, that when he was in a nearby market, he saw Suzanne Pleschette from the then popular Newhart show.

    I attended Cal Poly, SLO. A beautiful area. Low crime (although prisons were nearby; one held, at that time, Huey Newton). More restaurants per capita than SF.

    Another better school is Berkeley. Nice surrounding "college" area which is also near some expensive homes. Great academic reputation too.

    By "LA" you presumably mean "downtown LA". Qualitative judgments about whether LA or Palo Alto is "better" aside, there's no shortage of ritzy homes/areas in LA.
    Berkeley used to have a stellar academic reputation, but has been burdened over the last 15-20 years by its unfortunate association in the public mind with myself and a few of my college buddies . . .
     
  12. esquire.

    esquire. Senior member

    Messages:
    1,303
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    By way of example, I think housing prices in Palo Alto have more to do with the tech boom in that area that with the proximity of Stanford per se. However, the presence of Stanford certainly had at least some causal relationship with the area's becoming such a major center of gravity for the dot-com/tech industry.

    I was thinking of that too, but it seems that Palo Alto market prices rose more than other NoCal cities that would have also appreciated from the tech boom. The rising tide did not lift all the cities to the same crest.

    For example, why did Palo Alto become synonymous with affluence while Berkely became a symbol of a different sort even though both cities have two of the best universities in this country in their respective cities? Both Cal and Stanford grads were major contributors to Silicone Valley. I was thinking that Stanford helped drive up prices in Palo Alto by taking up so much land that it would limit supply and help drive up prices. But, that same phenomenon didn't occur with Berkely. Nor, does it really explain why Palo Alto became more desireable than its neighbors in the first place.

    I think its interesting how some cities become labeled with having 'good location' and how that builds on itself to make that city even more desireable. But, how do those cities get that 'good location' in the first place?
     
  13. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    I was thinking of that too, but it seems that Palo Alto market prices rose more than other NoCal cities that would have also appreciated from the tech boom. The rising tide did not lift all the cities to the same crest.

    For example, why did Palo Alto become synonymous with affluence while Berkely became a symbol of a different sort even though both cities have two of the best universities in this country in their respective cities? Both Cal and Stanford grads were major contributors to Silicone Valley. I was thinking that Stanford helped drive up prices in Palo Alto by taking up so much land that it would limit supply and help drive up prices. But, that same phenomenon didn't occur with Berkely. Nor, does it really explain why Palo Alto became more desireable than its neighbors in the first place.

    I think its interesting how some cities become labeled with having 'good location' and how that builds on itself to make that city even more desireable. But, how do those cities get that 'good location' in the first place?

    Well, Berkeley is a bit more urban, being next door to Oakland and all that. Palo Alto is kind of the boonies. Stanford has bought up a bunch of land, but there's quite a bit of suburbia around it (or at least there was pre-boom). While both Cal and Stanford grads contributed to the Silicon Valley phenomenon, there was a lot more real estate available in Palo Alto for people to locate their business in. There's a historical reason behind Standord's nickname "The Farm". And I suspect (don't really know) that as a well-endowed private university Stanford was better able to be entrepeneurial and "partner up" with tech start-ups, thus forging close ties with that community. Plus, in general - and this obviously is a broad generalization - Stanford students (and thus grads) probably come from wealthier, better-connected backgrounds and thus may have been better positioned to start their own businesses.
    Plus so many of us Cal grads had our spirits broken by so many ugly Big Games and had to flee the Bay Area and seek years of therapy before we could come to terms with our shame.
    Dammit, we had such high hopes for Russell White. But I'm ok with it now, I really am.
     
  14. esquire.

    esquire. Senior member

    Messages:
    1,303
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Dammit, we had such high hopes for Russell White. But I'm ok with it now, I really am.
    You sound disappointed with Russell White. What happened?
    Plus so many of us Cal grads had our spirits broken by so many ugly Big Games and had to flee the Bay Area and seek years of therapy before we could come to terms with our shame.
    Well, at least, you'll always have this: And, with Tedford coaching, Cal is going to be a major force in the Pac-10 for years.
     
  15. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    You sound disappointed with Russell White. What happened?



    Well, at least, you'll always have this:



    Plus, with Tedford, Cal is going to be a major force in the Pac-10 for years.

    LOL. I was joking about Russell White. When I was an undergrad, he was a prize recruit at tailback. One of the most highly-recruited running backs out of high school, the next Walter Payton/Jim Brown/O.J. Simpson (ok, bad example), etc. and touted as the essential first domino in a long-awaited resurgence by the Cal football program. Then, when he had to come in under "Prop 48" because his standardized test scores and/or high school grades were so poor that he otherwise would not be eligible, much handwringing ensued about the relative importance of athletics and academics. (To be fair to Mr. White, I recall it later was discovered that he suffered from dyslexia.) Needless to say, while he did turn out to be a very good player, it wasn't quite the dawning of the Cal Era in college football. (Not, of course, something than can fairly be laid at White's feet.)
    To be honest, I've always been more of a basketball fan than a football fan, so I 'm not the most reliable source for Cal football history. And Dave Butler (Cal) was a much better basketball player than his younger, tall brother Greg (Stanford). So there!
     
  16. esquire.

    esquire. Senior member

    Messages:
    1,303
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    LOL. I was joking about Russell White. When I was an undergrad, he was a prize recruit at tailback. One of the most highly-recruited running backs out of high school, the next Walter Payton/Jim Brown/O.J. Simpson (ok, bad example), etc. and touted as the essential first domino in a long-awaited resurgence by the Cal football program. Then, when he had to come in under "Prop 48" because his standardized test scores and/or high school grades were so poor that he otherwise would not be eligible, much handwringing ensued about the relative importance of athletics and academics.

    No wonder Cal's football program has lain dormant for so many years. There's not one major college football program that doesn't sacrifice academics to get the players it needs. Even the Ivy League schools do this even though they don't give out athletic scholarships.
     
  17. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    No wonder Cal's football program has lain dormant for so many years. There's not one major college football program that doesn't sacrifice academics to get the players it needs. Even the Ivy League schools do this even though they don't give out athletic scholarships.
    Actually, it happens at Cal, too.
     
  18. esquire.

    esquire. Senior member

    Messages:
    1,303
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Actually, it happens at Cal, too.
    That's what I meant to say. I was just pointing out that with all that handwringing and debate over the role of athletics in academia, the Cal sports program probably bowed down to departmental pressure and wasn't able to get the atheltes it needed to compete. They still recruited, but they couldn't get anybody as blatant as White again. (To be fair to White- after googling him up, he turns out to be what college athletics should be about. Rather than coming out early and getting drafted in the first round for major signing bonus money, his education was so important to him that he stayed four years and graduated even though it cost him millions of dollars when he ended up getting drafted in the third round the next year.) As much as Notre Dame pretends otherwise, it still sacrifices academics to recruit its football players.
     
  19. TrojanGarb

    TrojanGarb Senior member

    Messages:
    184
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006

    Did UCLA and USC come first, or was their surronding neighborhood already established at that point?


    Both USC and UCLA came before any neighborhoods were really established. USC was founded 1880, and basically grew with the city. UCLA was founded in 1919, but at a campus on Vermont Ave. closer to downtown. It moved to westwood in 1929. At the time westwood was basically farmland with little development.
    [​IMG]

    Back in the day, the West Adams district was the Beverly Hills of LA. Once fast cars and highways began to emerge, people began to move west. And the area was left to die. The university has enough influence to make the immediate area livable, but more than a few blocks away and it's up to socioeconomic forces beyond any one entity's control. Luckily the area is old of enough to be historic and there are signs of renewal.
    [​IMG]
     
  20. Garrett

    Garrett Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    55
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    wow, awesome pics
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by