LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 6.0

[ocman]

Originally Posted by patriotizzy

That's no small claim to make. What makes you say this? I think LA is just getting a running start, DT will only keep growing from here, it is only natural in this day and age.

It’s a hunch, based on the level of activity at urbanize.la. The last 4 years, it seemed like a day would not go by without a new proposal or real estate deals. Now it seems weeks/months are going by without any proposals happening. And Urbanize.la I consider to be scarily on pulse, like the DTLA real estate version of TMZ. Developers are groundbreaking or finishing project, and that’s news but of deals that happened years ago.

We see a lot of hotel conversions of historic buildings and office/retail leases flooding into DTLA, but that’s a different type of boom from what I see on Urbanize during the real estate height a few years ago.

Maybe this retail boom will go full cycle and trigger another construction boom, but I’m sensing a palpable slowdown on the proposal/real estate side right now.

[ocman]

Originally Posted by bhunsberger

I feel DTLA just lacks that one big tourist draw, which is unfortunate. It doesn't have a Golden Gate bridge, Eiffel Tower, Space Needle, Times Square or anything like that. We need a Hollywood Sign, Walk of Fame, Griffith Observatory equivalent in Downtown. I suppose you could say the Walt Disney Hall is that, but meh. Maybe I am wrong and overlooking something? I would love to hear some ideas of that next big icon for LA that could be built in DTLA. I don't necessarily think a building would be it, but who knows - it could be.

The 6th Street Viaduct is the answer you’re looking for. If done well, that could be the start of LA’s Highline in NYC.

[blackcat23]

Originally Posted by ocman

And Urbanize.la I consider to be scarily on pulse, like the DTLA real estate version of TMZ.

Aw, shucks.

But yeah, your observation is accurate. There's less stuff being proposed, period. Partly because of where we are in "the cycle," but also because of outside factors. We had gasoline thrown on the fire several times in the past couple of years due to things like Measure S, Measure JJJ, and Linkage Fees, resulting in developers pulling the trigger early on entitlement applications to avoid rule changes that would have made their projects more expensive.

[liat91]

Originally Posted by wisheye

Maybe one other thing they can do is get the Golden Gate Bridge to move downtown.

And then finally maybe get one of the pyramids of Giza. Yeah I think that'll do it. Then we'll be as good as Philadelphia.

Taj Mahal
River Seine

[liat91]

They could also do some kind of grand entertainment museum.

[scania]

Originally Posted by pwright1

I don't think it needs any of that. As a downtown resident I think the growing Music Center crowd is growing in leaps and bounds. And when the Grand (Grand Avenue Project) is complete, the area will be an even bigger tourist destination. MOCA is expanding. The Music Center outdoor Plaza area is going thru a multi-million dollar renovation. Plus there will be a new rail stop a block away. Angel's Flight is quite popular which is perfect between California Plaza/the Music Center and Grand Central Market below on Hill St.
All this grit talk is crazy. If this means continuing to see all the beautiful historic buildings rot away right before our eyes, then grit has to go. The Adaptable Reuse Initiative is such a great thing, and many of the bldgs that have been restored and reused look totally breathtaking.
What I think downtown needs is a bonafide shopping district. In and around Broadway is where this is slowly coming to life. Acne, Aesop, COS, Theory, A.P.C, Van's, Apple, Paul Smith, BNKR, Mykita, Urban Outfitters, West Elm and the Jordan Flagship store are there or are opening soon, just to name a few. And when the Broadway Trade Center opens in about a year and a half, we will have a pretty cool downtown shopping district.

Agreed

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by ocman

It’s a hunch, based on the level of activity at urbanize.la. The last 4 years, it seemed like a day would not go by without a new proposal or real estate deals. Now it seems weeks/months are going by without any proposals happening. And Urbanize.la I consider to be scarily on pulse, like the DTLA real estate version of TMZ. Developers are groundbreaking or finishing project, and that’s news but of deals that happened years ago.

We see a lot of hotel conversions of historic buildings and office/retail leases flooding into DTLA, but that’s a different type of boom from what I see on Urbanize during the real estate height a few years ago.

Maybe this retail boom will go full cycle and trigger another construction boom, but I’m sensing a palpable slowdown on the proposal/real estate side right now.

Both L.A. & S.F. (& Vancouver & Seattle too) have seen a big slowdown in money from China for big developments (Oceanwide etc.). That money flow has indeed reversed. But L.A. has the Olympics coming up, so that could keep things humming. Also, both L.A. & S.F. also have big housing shortages, another bullish factor. So slowdown, maybe. But unless we have a big recession or a popping of the tech/stock bubble (possible), both L.A. & S.F. could continue building, especially if the Chinese money is replaced. I still see lots of proposals--e.g. the 64 story tower on South Fig. shown in renderings above. Apparently it will break ground soon. Grand Ave project has. Activity continues, maybe not the breakneck pace of the last few years, but it continues. DTLA & SF booms are like like Mark Twain--"reports of my demise have been greatly exagerrated". Downtown San Diego & Oakland continue to hum as well. Today the Federal Reserve said it was probably not going to raise rates for the next year or two, and might lower them. Housing the homeless and getting them off the streets of our cities is also a big need. People seeing tents in front of a condo tower are less inclined to buy, and the unsanitary conditions pose a public health risk.

[bhunsberger]

Originally Posted by CaliNative

Housing the homeless and getting them off the streets of our cities is also a big need. People seeing tents in front of a condo tower are less inclined to buy, and the unsanitary conditions pose a public health risk.

Yes, the homeless issue needs to be addressed swiftly and in a manner that might not be so politically correct. It's not fair to their wellbeing, or the growing community in downtown. City leaders and activists can talk housing all day long, but the truth is there will probably never be enough, let alone fast enough. If you think otherwise, you're dreaming. Let's be honest here - even if these people were housed many still need in depth services and should not be a burden on the public with some of the behavior that goes on. I'm sure many will disagree and may even think I am a horrible person for thinking this but I have always thought there is plenty of land in the high desert that the city could utilize and create housing, whether it be tiny homes or apartments.

[Tiorted9]

Originally Posted by bhunsberger

Yes, the homeless issue needs to be addressed swiftly and in a manner that might not be so politically correct. It's not fair to their wellbeing, or the growing community in downtown. City leaders and activists can talk housing all day long, but the truth is there will probably never be enough, let alone fast enough. If you think otherwise, you're dreaming. Let's be honest here - even if these people were housed many still need in depth services and should not be a burden on the public with some of the behavior that goes on. I'm sure many will disagree and may even think I am a horrible person for thinking this but I have always thought there is plenty of land in the high desert that the city could utilize and create housing, whether it be tiny homes or apartments.

You're NOT a horrible person. All ideas to improve the lives of the homeless and DTLA livability are worth exploring

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by bhunsberger

Yes, the homeless issue needs to be addressed swiftly and in a manner that might not be so politically correct.

I think this is one city mentioned in a few recent posts. Although the video may seem OT, it does deal with issues that, if not resolved, are going to eventually wreck dtla, inc its liveability, devlpt & value of improvements. It's a forewarning....



• Video Link


Most of this other vid can be fast forwarded through....not exactly the best edited piece. I'm including it to keep this post somewhat OT... and for positive balance. Her vid is directed mainly at millennials into social media & makeup & shopping tips. But it does show glimpses of some of the major new apt-condo bldgs in dt.

Think of how the apts she and her BF were touring didn't exist in dt all that many yrs ago. That's why in some crucial ways, dtla is better today than it has ever been, even before it started collapsing 40, 50 to 70 yrs ago.


• Video Link

[Blesha13]

So it looks like Oceanwide has FINALLY resumed according to happeningdtla's post on Instagram. On the post, you can see they're installing the parapet on the middle tower. On a side not, the cladding on Tower 4 on Metropolis has been going up since last week.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by Blesha13

So it looks like Oceanwide has FINALLY resumed according to happeningdtla's post on Instagram. On the post, you can see they're installing the parapet on the middle tower. On a side not, the cladding on Tower 4 on Metropolis has been going up since last week.

That's a huge relief! Was getting worried this project was going to be stuck for a long time.

[scania]

Originally Posted by Blesha13

So it looks like Oceanwide has FINALLY resumed according to happeningdtla's post on Instagram. On the post, you can see they're installing the parapet on the middle tower. On a side not, the cladding on Tower 4 on Metropolis has been going up since last week.

I was at Broken Shaker last night and someone there was saying work had resumed.

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by bhunsberger

Yes, the homeless issue needs to be addressed swiftly and in a manner that might not be so politically correct. It's not fair to their wellbeing, or the growing community in downtown. City leaders and activists can talk housing all day long, but the truth is there will probably never be enough, let alone fast enough. If you think otherwise, you're dreaming. Let's be honest here - even if these people were housed many still need in depth services and should not be a burden on the public with some of the behavior that goes on. I'm sure many will disagree and may even think I am a horrible person for thinking this but I have always thought there is plenty of land in the high desert that the city could utilize and create housing, whether it be tiny homes or apartments.

What if they don't want to go live out in the desert in the middle of nowhere? The homeless can't be forced to move if they haven't broken any laws. It is not a crime to be homeless and poor. Why not build high density housing in the city for the homeless? Room for lots of housing and shelters on land used as parking lots. L.A. probably could hold 7 million people at least with higher density housing. Downtown area alone probably could hold 400,000 in the long run, maybe more.

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by Blesha13

So it looks like Oceanwide has FINALLY resumed according to happeningdtla's post on Instagram. On the post, you can see they're installing the parapet on the middle tower. On a side not, the cladding on Tower 4 on Metropolis has been going up since last week.

Good news indeed.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by citywatch

I think this is one city mentioned in a few recent posts. Although the video may seem OT, it does deal with issues that, if not resolved, are going to eventually wreck dtla, inc its liveability, devlpt & value of improvements. It's a forewarning....



• Video Link

Wow! What a great share! This video explains a lot about the problems we are having in L.A. and the possibilities that can be created within the example in Rhode Island. Thank you for posting this.

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by CaliNative

What if they don't want to go live out in the desert in the middle of nowhere? The homeless can't be forced to move if they haven't broken any laws. It is not a crime to be homeless and poor. Why not build high density housing in the city for the homeless? Room for lots of housing and shelters on land used as parking lots. L.A. probably could hold 7 million people at least with higher density housing. Downtown area alone probably could hold 400,000 in the long run, maybe more.

As someone who works with the mentally ill and homeless regularly. High density housing for the homeless is a horrible idea. Say we build a bunch of Onni style towers downtown and fill them with the homeless, or build 8th and grand/palmer style monoliths and fill them with the homeless, they would easily turn into the highest crime ridden areas of the city, cops would literally be parked outside because of the amount of calls they would receive daily. High density housing just for the homeless isn't the answer. Cramming mentally ill people in with drug users and than on top of that adding families into the mix for the sake of getting them off the streets would lead to a host of problems. The three need to be handled separately. Get the mentally ill into mental health facilities, drug users into rehabs and families the emergency assistance they need. The only way to get rid of Skid Row. And disperse the services through out the county and region instead of concentrating them all around DTLA and Long Beach. Long Beach has quietly started getting rid of their homeless services and pushing the homeless back towards LA.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by caligrad

As someone who works with the mentally ill and homeless regularly. High density housing for the homeless is a horrible idea. Say we build a bunch of Onni style towers downtown and fill them with the homeless, or build 8th and grand/palmer style monoliths and fill them with the homeless, they would easily turn into the highest crime ridden areas of the city, cops would literally be parked outside because of the amount of calls they would receive daily. High density housing just for the homeless isn't the answer. Cramming mentally ill people in with drug users and than on top of that adding families into the mix for the sake of getting them off the streets would lead to a host of problems. The three need to be handled separately. Get the mentally ill into mental health facilities, drug users into rehabs and families the emergency assistance they need. The only way to get rid of Skid Row. And disperse the services through out the county and region instead of concentrating them all around DTLA and Long Beach. Long Beach has quietly started getting rid of their homeless services and pushing the homeless back towards LA.

This is a great post, and aligns closely with how I feel regarding the homeless issue. You should run for office!

[bhunsberger]

Skid row and homelessness in the city has been an issue for how long now? Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems the city does a whole lot of lip service but hasn’t really made any substantial impact. It seems to be getting worse! 1 step forward, 3 steps back. I hear you when you say it’s not a crime to be homeless and they can’t be forced to move. This is where the politically correct issue comes in. There is honestly no logical reason to deny housing and stability in high desert to be homeless on the streets of LA. If there is, they don’t want housing or help THAT bad. I’m not saying it has to be permanent, it could be used as a stepping stone to getting back on their feet. It could end up being a great use to the city going forward. Let’s not kid ourselves, while the homeless will always deserve dignity and respect, most of them are not just people down on their luck like many people say. It’s clear there is mental health and/or drug problem that plagued many of them. Will they ever be able to get a job, and hold a job? Is the city just going to give them a free ride for the rest of their life in apartments all throughout the city while everyone else struggles to make ends meet just to live here? It’s a very complicated situation for sure with lots of opinions. I just hope a solution comes soon that would drastically cut or end homelessness, but it doesn’t seem like one ever will, and I’m a glass half full kinda guy.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by CaliNative

What if they don't want to go live out in the desert in the middle of nowhere? The homeless can't be forced to move if they haven't broken any laws. It is not a crime to be homeless and poor. Why not build high density housing in the city for the homeless? Room for lots of housing and shelters on land used as parking lots. L.A. probably could hold 7 million people at least with higher density housing. Downtown area alone probably could hold 400,000 in the long run, maybe more.

Agreed that we need lots more housing. As for the rest, replace "homeless" with "addicted". Too often people, especially our politicians conflate homelessness and addiction. The people living on the streets and in tents are overwhelmingly addicts, mentally ill, or both. Building more housing will never solve their issue because the problem for them is drug addiction, not rising rents. You could build 10 free houses for each of them and the crisis would still be there. Our local politicians want us to believe that this crisis is a failure of capitalism when it's really a failure of drug policies and public/governmental reaction to the drug epidemic.