I've never lived in LA, but trust me I would be permanently based there if I could. Luckily i get to visit several times a year out of choice. I have lived in

I've never lived in LA, but trust me I would be permanently based there if I could. Luckily i get to visit several times a year out of choice. I have lived in London, and I work there lots also, living about 1 hour outside it on the train. Both have their pros and their cons. To say however that LA is lacking in urban identity comparing one to the other doesn't, for me, do either justice. The Spanish inspired architecture of areas like the Hollywood Hills, juxtaposed with the small but very well formed downtown LA area, which both has amazing modern architecture and some amazing vintage art deco buildings like the Oviatt building and it's amazing penthouse mean LA has some fantastic places to see. But yes, if you drive down certain streets you'll come across endless rows of nondescript bungalows on boring looking streets, and vast industrial estates which offer nothing to see at all - connected by a network of freeways (which everyone knows you should just avoid at certain times of the day if at all possible). Similarly, London, arguably a city many hundreds of years older than LA in the first place - also has some amazing culture and architecture - but wander up to the Wembley area and down some side streets and trust me, it's not exactly a world-class destination! Ever been to Staines? Both have things to offer. And certain people won't like one over the other. I myself don't particularly like San Francisco, and New York, impressive as it is, is a bit too much like London for my own tastes. Each to their own. But to say LA is featureless and lacking in urban identity makes me think you need to spend some serious time in that city, get to know the distinct neighbourhoods for a good week at a time, and really enjoy what the Angelinos take for granted.