HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1861  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 1:32 AM
citywatch citywatch is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 6,734
2 things: there can never be too many update photos of DT, & there can never be too many articles as good as this one:




Grocery Sales Exceed Expectations at Downtown Ralphs

Development: First supermarket in revitalized area hailed as success.

By Daniel Miller
Staff Reporter

It's official: the long-awaited downtown Ralphs supermarket is a hit.

When the store opened July 20 it was mobbed by downtown residents and workers who flocked to the store. And while the rush of the first week or so has slowed some, business is still booming at the supermarket, which is on the ground floor of the Market Lofts at Ninth and Flower streets.

Ralphs Grocery Co. does not make exact sales data available, but suggested that the South Park store is doing about $1 million in sales each week---an impressive figure in the supermarket business. Top stores in the chain are at the $1 million per week level and the downtown location "is among our top volume stores" in the 264-market chain, said Terry O'Neil, spokesman for Ralphs Grocery Co., a division of Cincinnati-based Kroger Co. Prior to the gala opening, Ralphs Grocery President Dave Hirz had predicted that weekly sales would be in the $500,000 range.

"We have to be cautious and typically we are conservative with our estimates, so we were conservative with this store," said O'Neil, who added it takes about two months for a store to operate at normal levels. "What we didn't expect was that not only are we drawing from people who live and work downtown but we are drawing people from surrounding communities. Originally it was the curiosity factor but not two months later."

Already, locals say that the neighborhood immediately surrounding the market has been enlivened. And the success has led downtown boosters to trumpet the area's continued renaissance and call for more grocery stores. Of course, it's unclear how the Ralphs would fare if its virtual monopoly ended and other stores opened. In fact, there are additional stores in the works, including one at the Related Cos.' massive Grand Avenue project and another at Moinian Group's residential project at the corner of Figueroa and 11th streets. Ralphs has already expressed interest in the Grand Avenue project. However, those stores would not open for at least a couple of years.

In the meantime, Hal Bastian, senior vice president and director of economic development for the Downtown Center Business Improvement District, said that when he talks to potential downtown investors, the Ralphs store is a strong selling point. "Investment bankers, retailers and restaurateurs are all very interested in how the Ralphs is doing," he said.

The 50,000-square-foot, high-end Ralphs Fresh Fare supermarket is in a condo building that includes 267 condominiums developed by CIM Group Inc. and Lee Homes Inc. The store has one of the chain's most expansive prepared food sections, including a sushi bar, salad bar, and weekly wine tastings at a wine bar, among other features.

According to a source familiar with the store, the prepared food section is doing about $100,000 a week in sales. Ralphs Grocery Co. does not disclose such data but O'Neil said that "it's up there" with the top stores. "When you go there in the lunch hour it is literally wall-to-wall with people," said O'Neil, adding that the store's 35-person staff in the service deli is the chain's largest.

Danielle Bower, a project manager for CB Richard Ellis Group Inc. who lives downtown, said she goes to the Ralphs weekly and though it's crowded, it's not unpleasant. "I absolutely love it. It is much more upscale than any other supermarket in the area. There is a Ralphs by USC and it is nowhere near the caliber of the Ralph's downtown," she said.

The store also has a catering department, a first for any Ralphs supermarket. With such strong prepared food business, the store is considering adding seating for customers who drop by for a meal. O'Neil said that the company is also considering adding delivery service for residents who live downtown. "We see a lot of growth for this store in the future, which is why we are looking for sites for our second, third, fourth store and more," he said. "We believe downtown can support more than one market."

The success of prepared food has had another consequence: shoppers are venturing out into the neighborhood to eat their meal. Carol Schatz, president of the Central City Association, said that the adjacent Grand Hope Park at the Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising campus is now filled with people who eat their lunch at the park.

"It doesn't always make any difference when you go, it is always busy and it has completely enlivened Ninth Street," she said. "The demand from the lunch crowd has been completely overwhelming and no matter how many chairs and tables they bring into the store, it isn't enough. People are going over to the (Fashion Institute) park, which was underutilized, and people are having lunch under the benches and trees. Who would have thunk it?'

John Given, the principal at CIM who handled the project, said the success of the store validates downtown in the midst of a rough real estate market. "It provides timely confirmation that whatever cyclical conditions or macroeconomic conditions are occurring, the downtown is an established neighborhood and investment district," Given said. "It will continue to be an important investment district."





^ I would guess the store, since it has created more competition in lunch & dinnertime business, has caused some of the existing restaurants to see a drop off in sales over the past 2 months. However, that can't be helped in the short run. It just means it's even more important that alot more new condo & apt bldgs be opened in the hood, so there's more demand created, with the addition of new customers, along with all the new supply, esp if Ralphs or Whole foods does open new stores in DT over the next several yrs.

Come to think of it, if Ralphs is doing as well as it is, do the folks at Trader Joes now feel kind of slow on the uptake for being so cautious??!!

Last edited by citywatch; Sep 17, 2007 at 1:47 AM.
     
     
  #1862  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 3:16 AM
LB Life07 LB Life07 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 106
I thought that this is an interesting article that was worth posting on the thread, I found this in the Long Beach Press Telegram...

Skyscrapers On The Rise
Architecture: Demand for tallest of buildings is still high despite earthquake, terrorist attack risks.
By Lisa Leff, Associated Press
Article Launched: 09/15/2007 09:50:33 PM PDT


A model of the proposed Transbay Terminal tower is shown in San Francisco on Friday. Plans for this and other skyscrapers would give San Francisco the three tallest buildings west of the Mississippi River.
(Ben Margot / Associated Press)SAN FRANCISCO - The rivalry between Los Angeles and San Francisco permeates life in California, infiltrating debates on everything from sports and weather to cuisine and water consumption. When it comes to competing for the West Coast's tallest building, though, few would expect this city to enter the fray, much less end up on top.

Yet here in the land of earthquakes and cafe culture, plans are unfolding for not just the loftiest skyscraper on the coast, but the three highest high-rises west of the Mississippi River. All are part of a proposed downtown neighborhood to be built around a regional bus and train terminal - a Grand Central Station of the West - that is being promoted as an environmentally sensible magnet for development.

"What it will mean for San Francisco to have its tallest building be the Transbay Terminal tower is a statement that our highest value is ecology," said Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, a local public policy think tank. "It will be this exclamation mark saying the most important location in our city is the transit center."

Six years after many architects and urban planners predicted the indelible images of Sept. 11, 2001, would stifle Americans' enthusiasm for iconic skyscrapers, San Francisco is not the only U.S. city where the landscape is moving up. Instead, fueled by high land costs, disenchantment with suburban sprawl and urban one-upmanship, the nation is experiencing its biggest high-rise construction boom in decades.

From Miami and Las Vegas to Chicago and New York, buildings that would either eclipse or stand spire-to-spire with the 1,250-foot-tall Empire State Building are

The Transbay Terminal tower, a model of which is shown here, would be the tallest skyscraper on the West Coast. It would be part of an environmentally friendly downtown neighborhood set to include a regional bus and train terminal.
(Ben Margot / Associated Press)promising to reshape skylines. The 1,200-to-1,375-foot-tall tower that is supposed to help finance and attract riders to San Francisco's new public transportation hub is one of 11 buildings nationwide either planned or under construction that, if completed, would make the list of the 20 tallest buildings in the United States.

"Many people thought 9-11 would sound the death knell for tall buildings, and it's been the opposite," said Antony Wood, executive director of the Chicago-based Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat. The collapse of the World Trade Center "probably induced the largest introspective analysis of the whole typology that has ever happened - is this a viable part of our cities or is it not? And like it or not, that has resulted in a resounding yes."

Compared to the high-rises that were erected in the 1970s, the new crop of super skyscrapers are more likely to be residential or government-supported expressions of civic or even national pride than symbols of corporate wealth, according to Wood. The 150-story, 2,000-foot-tall Chicago Spire rising near the shores of Lake Michigan, for example, would be both the tallest skyscraper in the U.S. and the world's tallest residential building.

"Tall buildings are being used to project a certain status for a city on a world stage. That's undoubtable," Wood said. "For a city to be taken seriously on a local or domestic or international scale, they want to be seen to be keeping up with the times, and tall buildings are part of that."

Planners, real estate agents and sociologists say the trend shows that Americans are willing to trust recent engineering advances conceived to help buildings stand up to earthquakes and terrorist attacks - and that their fascination with all things oversized outweighs their fears of disasters, both manmade and natural.

That especially became true as developing countries in the Middle East and Asia started putting up super-tall skyscrapers that made the World Trade Center look average in comparison.

"Everybody can be forgiven for having reactions after 9-11 that they want to reconsider today," said Terence Riley of the Miami Art Museum, who as the architecture curator of New York's Museum of Modern Art put together a 2004 exhibit on skyscrapers.

"Many people who had opinions like that saw the push to invent ever more technologically sophisticated, ever more high, tall buildings pass away from the United States, or at least appear to," Riley said. "One of the things that really bothered people was that it was evident that other people in Taiwan and Malaysia were going to take off where we left off, and in the end of the day they weren't going to let terrorists be that successful."
     
     
  #1863  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 3:50 AM
suga suga is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 535
It doesn't always make any difference when you go, it is always busy and it has completely enlivened Ninth Street

I have noticed this big time. That intersection is totally activated now, despite the nearby empty lots and construction sites. It used to be very dead around there, and seems pretty happening now. There is also a big time synergy between FIDM and the Ralphs, which will be complemented once Merurelo's and concerto come online.
     
     
  #1864  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 4:30 AM
bobcat bobcat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,791
Thanks for the article, citywatch!

Certainly the Ralphs would not be as successful as it is had they gone with a run-of-the-mill type Ralphs store instead of the Fresh Faire. Off hand I can't even name the closest supermarket of comparable quality, so obviously the downtown store would draw its customers from a fairly large geographic area.

And it certainly explains why they are choosing to expand their hours. With the expected increase in residents and visitors over the next few years and a virtual monopoly in the area that store should continue raking in the dough.
     
     
  #1865  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 4:30 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 8,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlrobe View Post
It is great to see so many works going on downtown

Concerto, Hanover, Eleven, Ritz, Block8, Medalloin (I think), and Muerolos tower are all currently rising.

That is more than enough new high rises. I dont want to overbuild.

Key adaptive reuses have just started, are well underway, or near completion like Brockman, Chapman, Roosevelt, and like 10 other less profile ones.

This is plenty of units.

With grand ave pretty much gauranteed, all we need is LA central and park fifth. If those are built we will have an EXTREMELY healthy market. Plenty of units and capacity.

I love how a few theatres are coming on board for some culture. I think things are coming together. Now if all of those buildings reach full capcaity and there are businesses to walk to and from, I think downtown will be just fine.

There are plenty of nightlife and restaurant entreprenuers actively working in downtown.

I bet only 25% of the not yet built projects get built, but that is fine. the other 75% can wait and see how downtown develops. Maybe condos will not be needed in 2010. I am just glad that vital pieces of downtown are held by ACTIVE developes instead of 50 year old land owners that let it rot out. These developers will eventually develop when the time is right.

I think downtown is reasonably healthy. Not too much, not too little. The only thing I think downtown has too little of is 1) street engaging ground level retail 2) street improvement projects
Yeah we don't want to screw up and overheat like Miami and Las Vegas!
I like this boom, and I want it to continue!
I personally favor accelerating the development in Downtown Los Angeles even faster, but ONLY if we can sustain it over a steady pace.
But i'm not so sure about that "only 25% of projects getting built anytime soon" thing.

Thanks for the article LBLife07!
I like San Francisco.
But! Nowhere in that article does it mention the boom in Los Angeles. It only says the rivalry between the West Coast's two largest cities.
This tells me that MANY people across the country either aren't noticing us, or they just don't want to!

Come to think of it, I haven't seen Donald Trump propose ANYTHING for the City of Los Angeles. Whats up with that? Is it because of his shrinking shares?

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Sep 17, 2007 at 4:44 AM.
     
     
  #1866  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 4:45 AM
bobcat bobcat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,791
It's important to have a mix in the types of development, because having a balance makes the area economically stronger overall. With all the residential units opening up over the next few years, DTLA has more than enough at this time. I believe the next major wave of activity will be focus on tourism, as DTLA is poised to be the next major tourist hotspot what with the coming of LA Live and Grand Ave. This is already evident in the increase in convention bookings, and over the next few years I suspect we'll be seeing proposal for several large hotels and other tourism related projects.
     
     
  #1867  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 6:12 AM
edluva edluva is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,118
i really hope dtla won't become another dtsd. i do think it's very possible. dtla is pretty small, and "precious" in that it's the only swath of historic, truly urban architecture in the southland. and as i've pointed out in other replies, it's a little wealth bubble surrounded by seas of poverty - disconnected at many levels from the rest of the metro.

these three things, the small size, the insularity, and the scarcity, make dtla susceptible to the same type of self-conscious redevelopment that prevents a more gradual, organic revival from taking root and integrating it to the urban fabric. already recently there was talk of creating a little italy repelete with touristy gateway sign and all - there's this feeling that the 3 sq mile downtown is the center that our metro lacks, and with a complete ignorance of the role lab's "west central" plays, it accompanies the feeling that bringing people to dtla is a panacea for our weak sense of place. i'm scared that there will be eventually come a push to create a nightlife district and restaurant district unilaterally down a couple of streets. all talk of this being "our manhattan" or "our champs" amongst councilmen and developers demonstrates how little people in power understand about la's limitations, and how real this possibility is.

the neighborhoods south of the 10, mcarthur park/westlake, ccw, north chinatown, etc will probably remain in squalor, disconnected from the cbd at every meaningful level. look at sf and chicago's respective cbd's and tell me, aside from postcard-worthy views of their skylines, how at a functional level the relationship's btw their cbd's and their surrounding neighborhoods compare to that of la's?

for dtla to become a genuine urban center and not another pseudo-urban plaything for suburban yuppies, either of two things has to happen: 1. westlake/mcarthur/olympic become seamlessly integrated into the cbd/southpark from the west so that the cbd becomes a mere extension of the city (which is just another way of saying that dtla remains semi-impoverished and ungentrified) or 2. yuppie money gentrifies not only downtown, but also the entire super-dense stretch of guadalajangeles leading up to k-town, evicting about a million mexicans and turning it into a marshmellowy-white version sf or chicago. Which version of LA seems more likely?

I say neither. dtla will become a tourist trap resembling san diego much more than a "real city" such as SF or chicago, and the "west central" (i still hate that name) remains the de-facto center of our region.

Last edited by edluva; Sep 17, 2007 at 6:48 AM.
     
     
  #1868  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 6:52 AM
edluva edluva is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,118
wait, i forgot to add another alternative to integrating dtla into the rest of the world in a way ssp would approve of: bring the millions of uneducated, unskilled mexicans out of poverty and into the white-collar world (turn la's mexican's into "our italians") and then our cbd may be allowed to venture west towards westlake and become "our manhattan" without embarrassing too many vain people.
     
     
  #1869  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 2:08 PM
want2beaqui want2beaqui is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 22
Can someone help me out and tell me what is the project going on across the 101 from the cathedrial? It looks pretty whacky form what i see when i drive by and i have no idea what it is
     
     
  #1870  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 2:44 PM
funhaus's Avatar
funhaus funhaus is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by want2beaqui View Post
Can someone help me out and tell me what is the project going on across the 101 from the cathedrial? It looks pretty whacky form what i see when i drive by and i have no idea what it is
It's a high school for the arts, designed by Coop Himmelb(l)au. Here's another link.
     
     
  #1871  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 4:20 PM
Echo Park Echo Park is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
i really hope dtla won't become another dtsd. i do think it's very possible. dtla is pretty small, and "precious" in that it's the only swath of historic, truly urban architecture in the southland. and as i've pointed out in other replies, it's a little wealth bubble surrounded by seas of poverty - disconnected at many levels from the rest of the metro.

these three things, the small size, the insularity, and the scarcity, make dtla susceptible to the same type of self-conscious redevelopment that prevents a more gradual, organic revival from taking root and integrating it to the urban fabric. already recently there was talk of creating a little italy repelete with touristy gateway sign and all - there's this feeling that the 3 sq mile downtown is the center that our metro lacks, and with a complete ignorance of the role lab's "west central" plays, it accompanies the feeling that bringing people to dtla is a panacea for our weak sense of place. i'm scared that there will be eventually come a push to create a nightlife district and restaurant district unilaterally down a couple of streets. all talk of this being "our manhattan" or "our champs" amongst councilmen and developers demonstrates how little people in power understand about la's limitations, and how real this possibility is.

the neighborhoods south of the 10, mcarthur park/westlake, ccw, north chinatown, etc will probably remain in squalor, disconnected from the cbd at every meaningful level. look at sf and chicago's respective cbd's and tell me, aside from postcard-worthy views of their skylines, how at a functional level the relationship's btw their cbd's and their surrounding neighborhoods compare to that of la's?

for dtla to become a genuine urban center and not another pseudo-urban plaything for suburban yuppies, either of two things has to happen: 1. westlake/mcarthur/olympic become seamlessly integrated into the cbd/southpark from the west so that the cbd becomes a mere extension of the city (which is just another way of saying that dtla remains semi-impoverished and ungentrified) or 2. yuppie money gentrifies not only downtown, but also the entire super-dense stretch of guadalajangeles leading up to k-town, evicting about a million mexicans and turning it into a marshmellowy-white version sf or chicago. Which version of LA seems more likely?

I say neither. dtla will become a tourist trap resembling san diego much more than a "real city" such as SF or chicago, and the "west central" (i still hate that name) remains the de-facto center of our region.
I just visited the Gaslamp quarters for the first time on Saturday night and I don't ever EVER wish this upon downtown Los Angeles. Thankfully you don't see this concentration of bars and restraunts in DTLA yet and if there is to be something like that I can really only imagine it along Broadway. And when that nightmare scenario plays out I will be wishing for the days of old, when Broadway was lined with immigrant flea markets.
     
     
  #1872  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 4:59 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,420
Gaslamp is nice...I guess...but it seems like a multi block Dave & Busters. DTLA is better than that.
     
     
  #1873  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 6:34 PM
jlrobe jlrobe is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
i really hope dtla won't become another dtsd. i do think it's very possible. dtla is pretty small, and "precious" in that it's the only swath of historic, truly urban architecture in the southland. and as i've pointed out in other replies, it's a little wealth bubble surrounded by seas of poverty - disconnected at many levels from the rest of the metro.

these three things, the small size, the insularity, and the scarcity, make dtla susceptible to the same type of self-conscious redevelopment that prevents a more gradual, organic revival from taking root and integrating it to the urban fabric. already recently there was talk of creating a little italy repelete with touristy gateway sign and all - there's this feeling that the 3 sq mile downtown is the center that our metro lacks, and with a complete ignorance of the role lab's "west central" plays, it accompanies the feeling that bringing people to dtla is a panacea for our weak sense of place. i'm scared that there will be eventually come a push to create a nightlife district and restaurant district unilaterally down a couple of streets. all talk of this being "our manhattan" or "our champs" amongst councilmen and developers demonstrates how little people in power understand about la's limitations, and how real this possibility is.

the neighborhoods south of the 10, mcarthur park/westlake, ccw, north chinatown, etc will probably remain in squalor, disconnected from the cbd at every meaningful level. look at sf and chicago's respective cbd's and tell me, aside from postcard-worthy views of their skylines, how at a functional level the relationship's btw their cbd's and their surrounding neighborhoods compare to that of la's?

for dtla to become a genuine urban center and not another pseudo-urban plaything for suburban yuppies, either of two things has to happen: 1. westlake/mcarthur/olympic become seamlessly integrated into the cbd/southpark from the west so that the cbd becomes a mere extension of the city (which is just another way of saying that dtla remains semi-impoverished and ungentrified) or 2. yuppie money gentrifies not only downtown, but also the entire super-dense stretch of guadalajangeles leading up to k-town, evicting about a million mexicans and turning it into a marshmellowy-white version sf or chicago. Which version of LA seems more likely?

I say neither. dtla will become a tourist trap resembling san diego much more than a "real city" such as SF or chicago, and the "west central" (i still hate that name) remains the de-facto center of our region.

DTSD feels like a college town in an urban village setting. This is my view of san diego

La jolla = Newport Beach with a few more college kids
Mission Beach, West San Diego, Dowtown = Irvine with a little hermosa beach and 3rd st promenade action.
East San Diego = Sacramento


Even if DTLA WANTED to turn into this, it cant. I dont care if you invested billions, and evicted 100,000 poor people, LA will not turn into that.

LA live is San Diego-esque, but so is SF's metreon and Westfield Shopping center. So is chicago's navy pier. Every city has their big suburban draw. Even Manhattan. Its the nature of the beast.

Not to worry. There will only be one la live.

The question is, can DTLA be as energetic as DTSD? They will no doubt have different energies but at the moment DTSD is a very energetic village while DTLA is a very sleepy city.
     
     
  #1874  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 6:36 PM
jlrobe jlrobe is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
wait, i forgot to add another alternative to integrating dtla into the rest of the world in a way ssp would approve of: bring the millions of uneducated, unskilled mexicans out of poverty and into the white-collar world (turn la's mexican's into "our italians") and then our cbd may be allowed to venture west towards westlake and become "our manhattan" without embarrassing too many vain people.
That is extremely true. The Latinos hold the our future in their hands. We need to activate them as soon as possible.

Figueroa corridor redevelopment, city west redevelopment, and the east line exntetion are a start.
     
     
  #1875  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 6:39 PM
jlrobe jlrobe is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeHundred View Post
Gaslamp is nice...I guess...but it seems like a multi block Dave & Busters. DTLA is better than that.
It is basically irvine with some hermosa beach action. Maybe Irvine Spectrum meets The block at orange meets Hermosa Beach in a bunch of historic buildings.

Some people LOVE LOVE LOVE GASLAMP. I like it for what ti is, but I dont wish that on DTLA. I dont think it will happen.
     
     
  #1876  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 6:42 PM
Easy's Avatar
Easy Easy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,598
these three things, the small size, the insularity, and the scarcity, make dtla susceptible to the same type of self-conscious redevelopment that prevents a more gradual, organic revival from taking root and integrating it to the urban fabric.

DTLA needed a sudden jolt before any significant gradual, organic redevelopment could occur. It's reputation justified or not was in the toilet.

As far as the touristy, disneyfication of DTLA goes that's bound to happen. It's happening in all major cities around the world. Look at midtown Manhattan, esp. around Times Square. That doesn't mean that we can't still have great urban neighborhoods along with that.
     
     
  #1877  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 7:06 PM
LongBeachUrbanist's Avatar
LongBeachUrbanist LongBeachUrbanist is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
already recently there was talk of creating a little italy repelete with touristy gateway sign and all
Interestingly, L.A.'s Little Italy is the area that is now Chinatown. There are still a few remnants of Little Italy up North Broadway, including a cultural center. Little Joe's (now defunct) was part of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
all talk of this being "our manhattan" or "our champs" amongst councilmen and developers demonstrates how little people in power understand about la's limitations, and how real this possibility is.
I think this fact - that L.A. is distinct from NYC in its challenges - is critical. DTLA will become a great city when it develops real neighborhoods and streets that have a true sense of 'place'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
for dtla to become a genuine urban center and not another pseudo-urban plaything for suburban yuppies, either of two things has to happen: 1. westlake/mcarthur/olympic become seamlessly integrated into the cbd/southpark from the west so that the cbd becomes a mere extension of the city (which is just another way of saying that dtla remains semi-impoverished and ungentrified) or 2. yuppie money gentrifies not only downtown, but also the entire super-dense stretch of guadalajangeles leading up to k-town, evicting about a million mexicans and turning it into a marshmellowy-white version sf or chicago. Which version of LA seems more likely?
Connection to the surrounding neighborhoods is key. I think the push for an integrated Figueroa is part of this. (BTW, the MacArthur Park area is more Salvadoran than Mexican.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
I say neither. dtla will become a tourist trap resembling san diego much more than a "real city" such as SF or chicago, and the "west central" (i still hate that name) remains the de-facto center of our region.
As I've said before, I'm far less pessimistic than that. I feel like Angelenos are are gradually getting urbanized, and are learning about what it takes to build a great urban place. And I think this maturing process is just now beginning to result in urban-friendly policies.
     
     
  #1878  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 8:29 PM
LAMetroGuy's Avatar
LAMetroGuy LAMetroGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
wait, i forgot to add another alternative to integrating dtla into the rest of the world in a way ssp would approve of: bring the millions of uneducated, unskilled mexicans out of poverty and into the white-collar world (turn la's mexican's into "our italians") and then our cbd may be allowed to venture west towards westlake and become "our manhattan" without embarrassing too many vain people.
The only problem is that most Latino residents and around downtown and westlake are not Mexican!

     
     
  #1879  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2007, 10:17 PM
LongBeachUrbanist's Avatar
LongBeachUrbanist LongBeachUrbanist is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,578
^ Exactly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LongBeachUrbanist View Post
(BTW, the MacArthur Park area is more Salvadoran than Mexican.)
     
     
  #1880  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2007, 3:31 AM
suga suga is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 535
Edluva is on fire! That was well put!
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:29 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.