LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[Wilcal]

Does anyone know about the revisions being made to the downtown zoning process? How long will this take? At what point will there be community input (if at all)? How long will it be to the point of implementation? It is troubling when concerning downtown development, the planning department is taking "baby steps" when the investment community (and the community of its citizens) is requiring bold and progressive action. With this approaching building boom, it seems as if the planning department has been "caught with its pants down." There is little excuse for this zoning revision not being done years ago. There is currently, and at least for a few more years, a great deal of lost opportunity.

[Eightball]

Originally Posted by ThomJames

I really disagree with these opinions of the "7 story- crap" boxes. Cities such as Tokyo, London or Paris, really have relatively few high-rise residential buildings, yet they are still extremely dense...

Most of the residential construction done in San Francisco, in the 90's and early 2000's in the SOMA area was buildings like this. As the area has greatly transformed, now most of the construction is high-rise, ultra high rise.

I think we should concentrate on filling up the parking lots first, so that we have connected neighborhoods. I too would like some high-rises included in that mix, but there are already several under construction, including 9th and Olive, of which I watch the construction everyday from my window. Down the road, if downtown real-estate is so valuable, probably some of the crap boxes will be torn down to make way for even more high-rises.
...

Excellent thoughts and comparison with SOMA.

[alki]

Originally Posted by brudy

While I agree with everything you said, it still comes back to the developer. Related is building a 19 story deal, Onni isn't short, etc. Developers are making it work for them. I think the difference is HUGE profits vs profit. And nothing in the code is making them design completely boring buildings with stucco.

Yes, but those units that Onni is bldg may well require higher rents to make a profit due to higher construction costs. Demand for that market niche may only be so big. When other developers see Onni and others build for that market niche, they fear that the niche will become satiated. They will back off and go for the market niche that has lesser rents but greater demand, helping to insure the project's success.

Everyone forgets that in 2008 a lot of developers got burned by the great recession. Projects under construction then failed. Of course that's the risk a developer agrees to undertake when they build but every developer is going to work his butt off to minimize that risk........and you can't blame them.

The DTLA residential market is a very new market without a lot of history to it.........and Angelenos are not nothing if not fickled. The market will have to walk before it can run.

[alki]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Why is everybody here on a "blame the developer" mentality? Maybe you should think about how the City Planning is so out of whack working with a 1946 zoning code. That's where the anger should be, not at the developers. A developer wants to make money, like any sane person. But they have to work within certain regulations, otherwise, they'll be sued for millions. They're not dumb, they're people. If they could build taller buildings and make huge profits, they would. But here are the most prevalent problems that need to be addressed with zoning to make high-rise development more competitive:

1 - There is a big difference in design structures from 7 stories and below compared to 7 stories and above. I think that relates to steel frames needed for earthquake protection. Although safetly is always first, this could be a huge deterrant for expenditures for a developer. Maybe efficiencies in construction can be sought here with new technologies (i.e. how Wilshire Grand will NOT have a helipad due to better elevator technology).

Good point. Where I live, developers are starting to use modular construction when building mid rise bldgs to offset higher land costs.

2 - Parking variance. This is absolutely no reason we should continue to have high parking minimums in downtown LA. This is something reserved for non-transit friendly areas. This is a huge cost to the developer, and with everybody's fear of paying for parking, unfortunately, has to provide this to little to no cost to tenants or customers. A humongous sunk cost. Look at the revitalized neighborhood of the Old Bank District. Adaptive Reuse didn't require new parking and you see how that neighborhood gentrified in 10 years? Parking is not a need anymore, it's a desire. And people should pay market price. If they say "nobody will come without parking", well why isn't the Valley and OC more hot commodities than downtown LA?

Problem is you can legislate all you want but if the consumer wants parking, the developer will build parking.

3 - The density bonus needs to be bolstered. I don't know what it's at right now, but give developers flexibility to add more units/retail space. I think downtown LA's FAR (Floor to Area) ratio is considered low for a big city and needs to become more similar to SF or NY.

4 - No more than 1 parking entrance for a building, so we can maximize retail units at the bottom floors. Hopefully that cuts some cost for developers.

I'm sure there are a lot more things we can think about changing to helping developers build the right projects. But, seriously, it's a problem with City Planning and zoning. Going around and blaming developers for making money, when we ourselves want to make money, is kinda hypocritical.

That's my 3 cents.

I agree. Good suggestions. I think as more developers enter the DTLA housing market they will get more creative.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by alki

Problem is you can legislate all you want but if the consumer wants parking, the developer will build parking.

That's the problem. People think that others want parking, when in truth, not everybody wants/needs parking.

Case in point: Adaptive Reuse with the Old Bank District

There was also Chinatown Metro apartments that opened recently with no parking and it pretty much sold out.

So, that's more of a myth. If people want parking, 60% of downtown LA is dedicated to the automobile, which is sickening for an urban environment. LA is changing, and the zoning needs to reflect that.

[alki]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

That's the problem. People think that others want parking, when in truth, not everybody wants/needs parking.

Case in point: Adaptive Reuse with the Old Bank District

There was also Chinatown Metro apartments that opened recently with no parking and it pretty much sold out.

So, that's more of a myth. If people want parking, 60% of downtown LA is dedicated to the automobile, which is sickening for an urban environment. LA is changing, and the zoning needs to reflect that.

I did apt bldg rehabs in Hollywood in the 90s..........the only way I could get away with no parking is charging lower rents than new construction with parking..........considerably lower. Maybe things have changed in the last 15 years in LA. However, I wouldn't risk it even in a market like NYC if I wanted to charge top of the market rents.

[SD_Phil]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

That's the problem. People think that others want parking, when in truth, not everybody wants/needs parking.

Case in point: Adaptive Reuse with the Old Bank District

There was also Chinatown Metro apartments that opened recently with no parking and it pretty much sold out.

So, that's more of a myth. If people want parking, 60% of downtown LA is dedicated to the automobile, which is sickening for an urban environment. LA is changing, and the zoning needs to reflect that.

People want parking, especially in new construction. I think to deny this is a failure to accept reality. I think the push needs to be in reducing the number of spaces/unit developers feel they need to build.

2:1 is crazy, 1.5:1 is better, and something like 1:1 or even .75:1 would result in basically what I think most of us actually want.

[Muji]

Originally Posted by alki

I did apt bldg rehabs in Hollywood in the 90s..........the only way I could get away with no parking is charging lower rents than new construction with parking..........considerably lower. Maybe things have changed in the last 15 years in LA. However, I wouldn't risk it even in a market like NYC if I wanted to charge top of the market rents.

I can understand your skepticism, but I would say that things have indeed changed considerably. These days, most new households in the city are far less car-dependent than they used to be (some data here), with a growing share of car-free people as well. Plus, downtown and its adjacent areas are probably the most attractive neighborhoods for the car-free and car-light, so there is no reason we shouldn't capitalize on that to the best that we can.

[brudy]

My anecdotal experience downtown is that parking is considered a luxury, not an expectation. It's certainly not stopping many of the historic conversions without parking from being almost full all the time. Some of these buildings do give discounts on nearby parking. I know many people who live downtown without a car, or if they're couples, have one car between them. We have only one car for the two of us. One of the reasons people choose to live downtown is that you can be car-free or car-lite. As the metro expands, car dependency will become less and less. Parking minimums now should be designed to keep cars at a minimum, with an eye to the future.

[blackcat23]

Originally Posted by SD_Phil

People want parking, especially in new construction. I think to deny this is a failure to accept reality. I think the push needs to be in reducing the number of spaces/unit developers feel they need to build.

2:1 is crazy, 1.5:1 is better, and something like 1:1 or even .75:1 would result in basically what I think most of us actually want.

There are actually a few new proposals coming out with reduced parking components. The Onyx development next to Pico station will have 328 residential parking spaces for 419 units, a .78:1 ratio. And that was because the developer used the adjacent rail station to lobby the city for less parking than normal.

The others proposals I've seen usually have a 1:1 ratio. All located within walking distance of a Metro station.

So there are some developers who have noticed you can build multi-family residential without exorbitant parking accommodations. Mostly smaller scale developments right now, but they're starting to pop up in greater frequency.

To the city's credit, we are starting to see some positive changes. The Cornfield neighborhood northeast of downtown now has no parking requirement at all.

[Zgolden]

So after a good year of inactivity, I returned to visit Downtown after finally coming back from Minnesota and walk around.


This is whatever they're building south of the convention center. Don't actually know what that is, but it's nice to see development spread south.


Pretty much done over here.


Some trucks rolling around in the pit down there; it's such a big site, it reminds me of the early days of the WTC.


Backside of the Broad.


Hall O' Justice renovation.


Jia, almost done.


Bonus picture.

Look forward to going back soon and completing the circuit.

[Easy]

Thanks for the update!

[WonderlandPark]

Aerial shot of Downtown L.A., cropped large size

Just flew in from SEA to LAX. Nice clear day for a good downtown pic. Hope to see the skyline change in the next few years and some more empty lots go bye bye.

Seattle is really kickin' it right now, one question, why are their 5-8 story buildings done mostly in concrete? Seattle is like wood central. The quality of the work up there is just so much better than here in stucco land, metal paneling, nice trim pieces, color, fit and finish is just such a step up. (not talking our highrises, but our stucco blight and Orsini junk)

[alki]

Originally Posted by Muji

I can understand your skepticism, but I would say that things have indeed changed considerably. These days, most new households in the city are far less car-dependent than they used to be (some data here), with a growing share of car-free people as well. Plus, downtown and its adjacent areas are probably the most attractive neighborhoods for the car-free and car-light, so there is no reason we shouldn't capitalize on that to the best that we can.

Good to see LA is heading in the right direction. Thanks for the link.

[Mystic Crusader]

Originally Posted by WonderlandPark

Aerial shot of Downtown L.A., cropped large size

Just flew in from SEA to LAX. Nice clear day for a good downtown pic. Hope to see the skyline change in the next few years and some more empty lots go bye bye.

Seattle is really kickin' it right now, one question, why are their 5-8 story buildings done mostly in concrete? Seattle is like wood central. The quality of the work up there is just so much better than here in stucco land, metal paneling, nice trim pieces, color, fit and finish is just such a step up. (not talking our highrises, but our stucco blight and Orsini junk)

Great shot!

[WonderlandPark]

thx. it was really clear today. I have many other shots where you can just barely make out DTLA. Even Glendale shows well.

[StethJeff]

How the heck did you line up Brand perfectly like that?

[pdxstreetcar]

I'm planning a pleasure trip to downtown LA. I want to stay at the Ace Hotel and go to Clifton's Cafeteria (among many other things), anyone know when these will open? Thanks.

[ThomJames]

Originally Posted by pdxstreetcar

I'm planning a pleasure trip to downtown LA. I want to stay at the Ace Hotel and go to Clifton's Cafeteria (among many other things), anyone know when these will open? Thanks.

The Ace hotel is scheduled to open in the first half of 2014. As far as Clifton's goes, who know. Major restaurant construction takes 3-4 years in DTLA, and the whole building is going through a major transformation.

[LA/OCman]

Speaking of South Broadway, another LA designer is opening a space near the Ace Hotel. Daniel Patrick is taking over a 2,000 square foot space. It is starting to get interesting seeing independent retail locations along with chains like Ross and Urban Outfitters....

http://la.racked.com/archives/2013/09/05..._leathers_drapey_duds_coming_to_dtla.php