LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 3.0

[JDRCRASH]

Indeed, I think thats why the Downtown Connecter will be so crucial to balancing the commuting options throughout Diwntown.

[Steve2726]

RTKL has updated their website-

http://www.rtkl.com/main/projects/projects.cfm

Of note are renders for the following projects:
-L.A. Live
-L.A. Central
-755 Tower (I am pretty sure that one is dead and replaced with the McGuire tower.)
-The Coliseum

[JDRCRASH]

Isn't the 755 Tower the one with the vertical hole near the rooftop?

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by Steve2726

RTKL has updated their website-

Of note are renders for the following projects:
-L.A. Central

I'm assuming the proj's site still is a parking lot with a construction barricade around it----& no one has said whether the part of the wall removed several wks ago has since been reinstalled----& that no forumer knows exactly what took place at the public hearing for LA central several days ago.

It would be a nice Xmas gift to the hood if evidence of actual work begins on the site before Jan 1.

Originally Posted by edluva

Citywatch's article illustrates the quandary we're in in not being able to get mass transit accessible to everyday folk.

However, to illustrate why a hood that's too shabby or edgy, or not nice enough, still holds ultimate sway is indicated by this:

Most Westside brokers haven't seen those tenants scouting downtown locations, however, St. John said. "If they are truly a Westside tenant, unless it is a very large cost-conscious tenant, they don't make the decision to go downtown," St. John said. "They go up and down the Westside."

Is the westwide easier to reach? Does it have better transit than DT? Does it have less traffic, less congestion than DT?

Now don't get me wrong. A lack of a better transit system in LA is totally ridiculous. The Red line, as one example, should have been extended down Wilshire yrs ago. However, to think that transportation is the ultimate determinant in whether LA will do well or not is way too simplistic. If it were as easy as that, DT would be kicking the westside's butt. And projs like this would be likelier to happen & easier to complete, at least before we're all senior citizens:

[DowntownCharlieBrown]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Isn't the 755 Tower the one with the vertical hole near the rooftop?

Yes, but my understanding is that it has been replaced by this:

Originally posted by citywatch
It (LA Central) would be a nice Xmas gift to the hood if evidence of actual work begins on the site before Jan 1.

It’s the only thing on my Christmas list… oh, and world peace.

[BrandonJXN]

^ I want an Audi S8 but world peace would be nice I guess.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by citywatch

Is the westwide easier to reach? Does it have better transit than DT? Does it have less traffic, less congestion than DT?

.... However, to think that transportation is the ultimate determinant in whether LA will do well or not is way too simplistic. If it were as easy as that, DT would be kicking the westside's butt.

I see what you're saying but still, the fact that the westside is doing well and DTLA bad has little to do with transit at all. It's a function of other issues - prosperity, perhaps by chance, decided to settle near the coast, and it predates any transit-related issue by decades.

With transit, you have to look at the big picture w/ regards to mobility - DTLA's fledgling transit system might as well not be there from this perspective being it's ineffective to begin with. The lack of transit in this case merely *ensures* that DTLA has no chance of improving, because it ensures that all this prosperity remains locked in the westside, OC, south bay, and other parts of the basin. So your theory that DTLA should be doing well with its (ineffectual) transit "network" doesn't apply. If we had NY's system, for instance, and DTLA remained a shithole, then you would have a point.

[ladowntowner]

Originally Posted by citywatch

However, alot of typical US native born ppl in LA with $$----white, latino, black or Asian-----& esp if they have kids, are still ending up in the burbs, or continue to favor hoods like SaMo instead of DT. Some of them even would rather be living up north, or in chicago, Seattle or NYC.

I agree with what you're saying about people favoring other hoods over DTLA. The reasons for this are many and run deep. I shall not get into them here. While some people may dig winters in Chicago or NYC, there's plenty of others who'd rather live somewhere, almost anywhere in SoCal for the very reason that we lack such extremes and are willing to put up with a multitude of other inconveniences for the privilege. We have some of the best weather in the 48 contiguous states - no news to any of us, right? And of course there are others who prefer the culture or "ambiance" of those other cities you mentioned and are willing to put up with the weather, or even enjoy it as part of the whole "experience". Different strokes, as they say.

And the reason I have a harder time thinking of LA as so packed with ppl is cuz (1) NYC is waaayyy more crowded than we are, (2) the Northeast of the US still has waaaayyy more ppl than the southwest, & (3) there are things about DTLA that don't seem so over populated to me.

For example, are the hood's movie theaters, stores, office bldgs, condos/apts, cultural bldgs----& I'm referring to the NICE places, NOT something like Raoul's roach motel, crazy Al's liquor store or Susie Skank's strip bar----always booming & full of life? And will filling out big new condo towers like parkfifth or Concerto be a snap in the next few yrs??

And if LA is so crowded, how come we still have so many deadzones? Why is it taking so long to get rid of all the parking lots, rundown small houses & warehouses & other gaps?

I was trying to say that the region is overpopulated in relation to it's natural resources, or carrying capacity. I never said it was too dense or "packed". You're confusing the terms "density" and "overpopulation" - they are not one in the same. The Northwest can naturally support larger populations than the Southwest. Historically and prehistorically this has always been true - well before the landing of Europeans on these shores, when the Native Americans lived in closer harmony with the land. The dense populations on the eastern seaboard encountered by the colonists were in stark contrast with the relatively sparse populations of the Southwest during the same time period. This is because the natives lived much closer to the carrying capacity of their particular region.

I agree that DTLA, in particular, unfortunately has way too many deadzones considering it's the heart of our nation's second city, and I'm all for their elimination. But rather than adding to our problems of increasing environmental degradation and resource depletion, which will surely result from encouraging ever more immigration and population increases by any means, I was suggesting that we should increase the density (without increasing population of the region as a whole) of the urban core and improve mass transit while ripping out the idiotic, inefficient, auto-centric fringe suburbs (of which many are already on their way to becoming foreclosed wastelands, anyway) and return the land to it's natural state or other more productive uses.

Now if JDRcrash said that the immigrant to LA who's illegal & poor will help make DT zoom, I'd understand someone asking "what's he smoking?!" But if he said that more ppl, immigrant or otherwise, moving to LA who are skilled, educated & full of potential to make $$, means the bldgs described in this story would have filled up a looong time ago, I'd have to say "well, DUH!!":

He did say it was irrelevant whether they were legal or illegal immigrants, but I think his precise meaning was lost in the translation from his brain to his fingertips and what resulted was somewhat unintelligible (at least to me). Maybe I'm just dense or slow that way and need it spelled out in plain, simple, grammatically correct English, following some semblance of a logical thought process. Dunno... but it seems I'm not alone, as you appear to have to speculate above about what he actually meant, too.

[Wright Concept]

I agree that DTLA, in particular, unfortunately has way too many deadzones considering it's the heart of our nation's second city, and I'm all for their elimination. But rather than adding to our problems of increasing environmental degradation and resource depletion, which will surely result from encouraging ever more immigration and population increases by any means, I was suggesting that we should increase the density (without increasing population of the region as a whole) of the urban core and improve mass transit while ripping out the idiotic, inefficient, auto-centric fringe suburbs (of which many are already on their way to becoming foreclosed wastelands, anyway) and return the land to it's natural state or other more productive uses."

Now with so many deadzones/lots and properties around downtown, What should be the strategy to fill these lots up? Build a handful of 25-30+ story buildings that all that it'll do will slow this process because there's too much supply and not enough demand or build smaller 5-8 story projects with amenities that helps the street even a series of 2-3 story "Sunstone"(a variation of the East Coast "Brown Stones") row houses with elevated entrances in the middle of downtown could do a lot to promote and speeding filling up those empty pockets and spaces. The reason for the smaller scale to start is that they're quicker to build and finance and it stimulates the added activity needed to promote more positive growth even during a recession.

Then when the "deadzones" start to shrink, the 25-30 story buildings will fit the context of what's going on and even those extra lots would prove to be sufficient grounds to add more parks/greenspace because the residential density matches the area and those residents provide the protection needed for a park to be successful.

[LAofAnaheim]

"without increasing population of the region as a whole" - what's wrong with that? Why can't the LA region add more people? Why is adding people in LA 'taboo'?

By adding more people to the LA region, we increase demand for transportation, housing, jobs, etc... Why is there a sudden demand for mass transit projects in LA? Or even a generally "okay" response w/ converting some of our HOV lanes to HOT lanes. It's b/c the region population has shot up. Now, if the population stayed constant, people would see no need more a mass transit system, and we'd still build humongous parking garages/lots to fulfill our auto-centric lifestyle.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by edluva

The lack of transit in this case merely *ensures* that DTLA has no chance of improving, because it ensures that all this prosperity remains locked in the westside, OC, south bay, and other parts of the basin. So your theory that DTLA should be doing well with its (ineffectual) transit "network" doesn't apply. If we had NY's system, for instance, and DTLA remained a shithole, then you would have a point.

You have to keep in mind that the origins of LA today were influenced by the huge rail network of the early 1900s known as the Red Car. Even before that system was being dismantled around the 1950s, DT already was feeling the effects of burbanization, as more & more ppl wanted to move as far away from the oldest parts of LA as possible.

I've read that Bunker Hill, originally where all the ppl with $$ in LA lived, started to fall apart as long ago as the 1920s, way before the Red car system lost its popularity.

If I had a magic wand & could change ONE of only 2 things about LA today----either its transit system or the way LA is built----based on an assumption of what would have the most positive impact on the city, I'd transform the type of devlpt throughout & around DT. IOW, if we had a first class transit system but still had the same old hoods, with deadzones & all, I bet that wouldn't give as much a lift to LA as having the same transit system that we live with today (& which is piddly) but one that would be serving really nice hoods. Hoods without a ton of deadzones & fuglieness.

And you may ask why did old Bunker Hill, since it was supposedly a nice hood to begin with, fall apart over 70 yrs ago & before the car became king in LA? Even that hood wasn't as nice as it could have been, as old pics of it indicate there was alot of junk mixed in with some nice old mansions. IOW, DT has been stuck with too many deadzones since the beginning of time.

Originally Posted by ladowntowner

But rather than adding to our problems of increasing environmental degradation and resource depletion, which will surely result from encouraging ever more immigration and population increases by any means, I was suggesting that we should increase the density (without increasing population of the region as a whole) of the urban core and improve mass transit while ripping out the idiotic, inefficient, auto-centric fringe suburbs (of which many are already on their way to becoming foreclosed wastelands, anyway) and return the land to it's natural state or other more productive uses.

Most of the ppl from outside of LA or CA who are moving to LA are immigrants, with a huge majority of ppl from the US choosing to live elsewhere. In fact, if it weren't for immigration, LA's population would have dropped----perhaps by alot----assuming native born ppl, as what happens when there's a vacuum, wouldn't have made up the difference.

And "immigration" is too general a term. For instance, if most of the immigrants to LA are engineers, doctors, architects, dentists, accountants, fashion designers & artists, that's one thing. And if someone, in that case, has a problem with immigration, then that's another thing.

OTOH, if most of the immigrants to LA are uneducated & likely to remain that way, regardless----& worse of all end up adding to our problems with crime----that's another thing. And if someone, in that case, has a problem with immigration, then that's another thing too.

As for immigrants & DT, when I read that a lot of buyers of condos in some of the new highrises going up in Koreatown or a proj like Parkfifth are of Asian descent, & when alot of other ppl in LA, inc native born, still want to live in the burbs or hoods like SaMo or Pasadena, then I say the city isn't gonna move to the next level if it has to depend on native born ppl only.

BTW, I read that the city that has the largest population of Japanese outside of Japan is Sao Paolo in Brazil. Sao Paolo, its slums notwithstanding----& which has so many highrises you'd need a calculator to count them all----makes LA look like Barstow or Fresno, on a Monday night.


Sao Paolo, from wirednewyork.com

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

"without increasing population of the region as a whole" - what's wrong with that? Why can't the LA region add more people? Why is adding people in LA 'taboo'?

By adding more people to the LA region, we increase demand for transportation, housing, jobs, etc... Why is there a sudden demand for mass transit projects in LA? Or even a generally "okay" response w/ converting some of our HOV lanes to HOT lanes. It's b/c the region population has shot up. Now, if the population stayed constant, people would see no need more a mass transit system, and we'd still build humongous parking garages/lots to fulfill our auto-centric lifestyle.

Two words: Limited resources.

[DJM19]

LA has the jobs. Some bumpkin town may have a big lake full of water to keep people alive, but they will have nothing to live for without a job to sustain them.

[Quixote]

December 15, 2007


From Flickr, by fridayinla


From Flickr, by fridayinla

[RuFFy]

During my trip to LA I looked over at the skyline starting from before the 60/605 interchange.. down the 605 and then on the 105.. I was upset that my trip was so short and I didn't get a chance to visit downtown.. BUT I did see from the 105 a small 717 Olympic.. I remember downtown well and was able to find the new addition easily.. thanks westside life for that post and friday in la for taking the pic..

[Quixote]

December 15, 2007


From Flickr, by fridayinla

[SD_Phil]

^I know this was mentioned earlier but what retail is going in on the ground floor of 717 Olympic?

[JDRCRASH]

I would have thought that the facade of the ESPN West Coast HQ building along Figueroa was finished already.
But it looks as if Hanover is progressing well. Move-ins should start this spring.

[BrandonJXN]

Originally Posted by SD_Phil

^I know this was mentioned earlier but what retail is going in on the ground floor of 717 Olympic?

I'm sure there will be more but the only thing I've heard is a internet cafe.

[LAofAnaheim]

Are they widening Olympic blvd? It seems to me they have gutted a new lane on the westbound side of Olympic between Flower & Figueroa for 717 Olympic (Hanover). If it's for street parking, then that's great! Otherwise, if we created another lane for people just to speed and no parking, then our suburban auto policies are continuing............