HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3001  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 2:53 AM
Doctorboffin Doctorboffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Frangelino View Post
I don't know. There is this http://brighamyen.com/2012/04/18/sas...n-downtown-la/. But I pray to God it's not what they are planning to build
Double the height, get rid of the Spanish revival, add maybe a clock tower or something like that and change the color and it would be okay. It would be nice in my opinion to have an older style midrise mall in that area to compliment the podium of the new tower going up near by, but I really hope they don't go with what they got.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3002  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:08 AM
San Frangelino's Avatar
San Frangelino San Frangelino is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 655


Is this image showing? Sorry, I am a bit of grandpa on this forum now..even though I'm only 35. Anyhow, I think this posting matters despite what some may say because it calls for the demolition of a low slung building on a significant portion of Broadway in DTLA. Again, they posted the building address wrong. The building this notice has posted on it is 223 West 4th st, not East 4th st. If you look closely, you can see where they tried to scribble it out.
__________________
I ♥ Manhattanization

Last edited by San Frangelino; Oct 7, 2016 at 3:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3003  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:23 AM
Doctorboffin Doctorboffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Frangelino View Post


Is this image showing? Sorry, I am a bit of grandpa on this forum now..even though I'm only 35. Anyhow, I think this posting matters despite what some may say because it calls for the demolition of a low slung building on a significant portion of Broadway in DTLA. Again, they posted the building address wrong. The building this notice has posted on it is 223 West 4th st, not East 4th st. If you look closely, you can see where they tried to scribble it out.
Yeah that's the image, but there is an old render from an article for what might be built. http://brighamyen.com/2012/04/18/sas...n-downtown-la/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3004  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:34 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,499
I don't know if this was posted yet, but it's news that will warm our hearts:

Quote:
Plan That Imagines Downtown’s Future Is Finally Ready

By Eddie Kim
October 3, 2016

DTLA - The Los Angeles Department of City Planning has for years been drafting a major revision of the Downtown Community Plan, which offers guidelines and mandates on land use, construction, neighborhood design, transportation and other key issues.

Finally, the details are ready to be released to the public. City Planning is conducting a week-long effort to showcase the new plan, with an open studio and panel discussions.

The open studio is in the Bradbury Building (304 S. Broadway, Suite #218) and runs from 9 a.m.-6 p.m. every day. It features presentation boards and activities allowing visitors to give feedback. A kick-off meeting from 5:30-9 p.m. on Monday, Oct. 3, will include a comprehensive overview of the plan and opportunities to ask questions to City Planning staff.

Other events at the Bradbury include a talk on neighborhood design and character hosted by the American Institute of Architects and the L.A. Conservancy (Wednesday from 6:30-9 p.m.) and the reveal of the city’s Re:Code L.A. plan, which is a revision to the massive and outdated general zoning code (Thursday from 6-9 p.m.). City Planning staff will be available for one-on-one talks on Saturday from 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

The revision of the Downtown Community Plan is overflowing with concepts ranging from sustainable growth of the housing and jobs market to goals for open and green space throughout the Central City.

Finding adequate space to fit in an additional estimated 125,000 residents, 70,000 housing units and 55,000 jobs between now and 2040 is a primary goal. To achieve that, the new plan suggests raising density limits in a major way in South Park, the Arts District and Fashion District, among other areas, and even creating project size minimums to prevent “under-development” on key plots.

The plan also prioritizes the use of development incentives to push Downtown’s role as a jobs hub, such as allowing people to build higher and denser in return for creating commercial and office space, or requiring a minimum number of job-producing spaces in a given neighborhood or area before approving new housing construction.

City Planning hopes to raise overall design and architecture standards. Options include mandating attractive facades on above-ground parking podiums, and removing common barriers for developers such as minimum parking requirements, which are often difficult to include in projects on small parcels. More design guidelines would protect the scale of “villages” like Little Tokyo and historic parts of the Arts District.

Other elements of the plan delve into open-space requirements and standards, and mobility issues, with one key aspect being the city Department of Transportation’s coming expansion of its Downtown DASH bus program.

More details on the open studio, community meetings and revised plan are at DTLA2040.org.
http://www.ladowntownnews.com/news/p...d60a0d643.html
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3005  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:44 AM
NativeOrange's Avatar
NativeOrange NativeOrange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Westminster/Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 332
^^I saw it posted on the DTLA Development page on FB. Definitely welcomed, but I'd like them to elaborate a bit more on plans for how they will implement greenspace and future parks. I know more info will come soon though.

Also on the FB page, someone posted a pic of the new Footlocker that replaced the former tenant of the Blue Jeans building. Looks like they restored the facade to its 1930's/1940's (?) tan/beige version instead of recreating the original early 20th century look. Noticed the light fixtures at the top and would be cool if they illuminated the window-less facade with changing color LED's or something.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3006  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:49 AM
Wally West Wally West is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by NativeOrange View Post
Also on the FB page, someone posted a pic of the new Footlocker that replaced the former tenant of the Blue Jeans building. Looks like they restored the facade to its 1930's/1940's (?) tan/beige version instead of recreating the original early 20th century look. Noticed the light fixtures at the top and would be cool if they illuminated the window-less facade with changing color LED's or something.
For the curious.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3007  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:55 AM
NativeOrange's Avatar
NativeOrange NativeOrange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Westminster/Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 332
^^Thanks.

I don't even try to learn how to do basic functions like this with my phone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3008  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 4:03 AM
Valyrian Steel's Avatar
Valyrian Steel Valyrian Steel is offline
:o
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctorboffin View Post
Double the height, get rid of the Spanish revival, add maybe a clock tower or something like that and change the color and it would be okay. It would be nice in my opinion to have an older style midrise mall in that area to compliment the podium of the new tower going up near by, but I really hope they don't go with what they got.
I'd hate to see a mall there tbh. And that proposal looks like one of Palmer's eyesores.
__________________
IG
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3009  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 4:10 AM
Doctorboffin Doctorboffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valyrian Steel View Post
I'd hate to see a mall there tbh. And that proposal looks like one of Palmer's eyesores.
Eh what do I know. I was thinking something more like a department store like Nordstorm, but I have no clue what would be best. However I agree it looks like crap, I just want some more art deco, is that too much to ask?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3010  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 4:29 AM
NativeOrange's Avatar
NativeOrange NativeOrange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Westminster/Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 332
Speaking of 4th and Broadway, has HansonLA changed designs recently? The renderings on the site look different.

http://www.hansonla.com/broadway4th/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3011  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 4:30 AM
Jun's Avatar
Jun Jun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Van Nuys
Posts: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Frangelino View Post
I don't know. There is this http://brighamyen.com/2012/04/18/sas...n-downtown-la/. But I pray to God it's not what they are planning to build
Old. Sassony sold it to the same Chinese developers building next door.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3012  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 10:24 AM
CaliNative CaliNative is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 3,133
I have a dream...some visionary developer builds a new version of the Richfield Oil Art-Deco masterpiece (torn down in late '60s to make way for the ARCO plaza), but perhaps 50 or 60 stories, with the spire on top, lit up at night. With a spire, could easily hit 900'. That tower was something! Maybe on Pershing Square, or Broadway historic district? How about the Times-Mirror parcel? The 30 story tower announced is just too short--maybe they don't want to overshadow City Hall? OK--on Pershing Square or Broadway then. Project could be mixed use, residential/hotel/retail/office.

Last edited by CaliNative; Oct 7, 2016 at 10:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3013  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 11:13 AM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,406
^ 30 stories is perfectly fine anywhere in DTLA.
__________________
Washed Out
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3014  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 12:54 PM
Doctorboffin Doctorboffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandonJXN View Post
^ 30 stories is perfectly fine anywhere in DTLA.
I can think of a few locations where 30 stories would be a shame (Angels Knoll), but I don't think the Times site is one, in fact 30 is pretty impressive for there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3015  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 2:06 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,406
I found this rendering of the Pershing Square tower on the LA Times.


http://www.trbimg.com/img-57f6e1f4/t...to/750/750x422
__________________
Washed Out
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3016  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 2:13 PM
Doctorboffin Doctorboffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandonJXN View Post
I found this rendering of the Pershing Square tower on the LA Times.


http://www.trbimg.com/img-57f6e1f4/t...to/750/750x422
I don't know how I feel about this...

I guess my biggest issue is that I thought it was suppose to be L shaped, but instead it is a lot smaller. I hope that they don't leave the one side of the Persh completely empty...

As for the build itself, it is unique that is fore sure. I could see it maybe working, the rendering isn't that detailed, but man it is kind of crazy. I'll wait till we see another rending to judge. That being said it looks like it will be about 810-820 feet? Maybe the height of the Wells Fargo building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3017  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 2:43 PM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is offline
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 9,097
^ It's not that unique. It's very similar to 56 Leonard in NY. Which in my opinion is not a bad thing. I'd love to see how they pull this off structurally.
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3018  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:20 PM
cargocultpants cargocultpants is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 68
Downtown News' latest development update - http://www.ladowntownnews.com/develo...0a5514b1d.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3019  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:30 PM
Doctorboffin Doctorboffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by colemonkee View Post
^ It's not that unique. It's very similar to 56 Leonard in NY. Which in my opinion is not a bad thing. I'd love to see how they pull this off structurally.
Same floor count too. I like 56 Leonard, but I am not happy with how it turned out, too glass not metal enough. They also didn't make it as strange as it could have been.

On the other hand if this keeps the same floor plan and uses a lot of metal I think it could look great, I just was hoping for a more bulky tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3020  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2016, 3:57 PM
Wilcal Wilcal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Yucaipa--LA exurban wasteland
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by NativeOrange View Post
Speaking of 4th and Broadway, has HansonLA changed designs recently? The renderings on the site look different.

http://www.hansonla.com/broadway4th/
They most certainly did. The tower has changed for the better but at the expense of the lower portion which has seems to have lost all of its historic features. Too bad, if I remember correctly the 12 story structure had a very very late 1800's to early 1900's "Chicago" look to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:02 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.