HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3401  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2008, 8:17 PM
Echo Park Echo Park is offline
California goth
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: cardboard box on skid row
Posts: 1,745
how fast do those things travel? while a bit tacky i'm kinda fascinated with the views you'd get on that thing.
     
     
  #3402  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2008, 8:52 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,419
I've ridden the Palm Springs Tram and that goes about 10-15 mph. I don't like trams at all. They scare the hell out of me. Espically going over the cable towers.
__________________
Washed Out

Last edited by BrandonJXN; Jan 30, 2008 at 10:07 PM.
     
     
  #3403  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2008, 9:48 PM
LAsam LAsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeHundred View Post
I've ridden the Palm Springs Tram and that goes about 10-15 mpg. I don't like trams at all. They scare the hell out of me. Espically going over the cable towers.
Even scarier though is trying to get to Dodger Stadium on the day of a big game. Bring on the aerial tram!
     
     
  #3404  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2008, 10:12 PM
Echo Park Echo Park is offline
California goth
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: cardboard box on skid row
Posts: 1,745
Taking the red line to Union Station then riding tram up to chavez ravine to drop me off right on front of the stadium would be hella sweet.

lol@the hyperbole in today's Tim Rutten column.

I actaulyl have no problem with a hueg animated billboard at concerto. this is nothing compared to visual assualt of times square, shibuya or vegas strip. the only problem i have is the idea that flashy lights automatically make vibrant cities. at least the aforementioned districts have some substance to them.

----------------------------------

L.A.'s 'Blade Runner' plans
Will we allow the movie's nightmarish view of downtown to come true?
By TIM RUTTEN
January 30, 2008


Life imitates art in ways too strange to imagine.

Take, for example, two recent proposals for downtown redevelopment. Developer Sonny Astani wants to hang a 14-story animated billboard on the side of the condominium tower he's building at 9th and Figueroa, up the street from the Staples Center and the new Nokia Theatre, which already is shrouded in video billboards.

Astani needs city permission to light up his building and one he plans to build next door. One only can hope that somebody says no. There's a difference between something that excites and something that assaults -- like a 14-story commercial light show looming over a public thoroughfare.

The funny part is that Astani is frank about his inspiration: It's "Blade Runner," the 1982 film adaptation of Philip K. Dick's dystopia of a visually, environmentally and socially degraded urban future.

Go figure. Astani was a new immigrant from Iran when he first saw the film, and maybe memories of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's Tehran made even director Ridley Scott's Hobbesian vision of a future L.A. look good by comparison.

Meanwhile, a few blocks away -- over on Broadway -- another aspect of the "Blade Runner" archetype is being invoked, though apparently unwittingly. In this case, a partnership of city agencies and property owners proposes to spend $36.5 million to redevelop what was once the city's premier shopping and entertainment venue. A dozen of the palatial old vaudeville and film theaters that once made Broadway a regional destination still survive and would be restored for movies and live performances. New stores and restaurants would go in around them, and a Red Car-style trolley would carry people up and down the boulevard.

Sounds good -- until you look a little more closely at what's being proposed. One of the premises of the bleak urban future Dick imagined in the 1968 book, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" -- which inspired "Blade Runner" -- was that the poisoned Earth had been depopulated when all the "successful" people left for extraterrestrial colonies. Society's losers had crowded into the surviving urban areas.

In the film, those "losers" were represented as Asian, Latino and other non-European immigrants. It's a cheap, xenophobic thrill that lent the film some of its appeal in an era made anxious by mass immigration.

It's also an association that inescapably comes to mind when you read the "vision statement" for the proposed Broadway redevelopment. You can search it from top to bottom and never find the word "Latino." What makes that odd is that Broadway has been for decades one of L.A.'s most vibrant shopping streets, though one patronized almost exclusively by working-class Latino immigrants.

Apparently they're invisible to the street's aspiring redevelopers. The authors of this "vision" intone the phrases "eclectic cultural amenities" and "diverse retail options" like a kind of mantra. It is, of course, a euphemistic way of saying, we intend to obliterate Broadway's essentially Latino character -- which has persisted for far longer than the two-decade interlude of glitz in the 1920s and 1930s that the planners hope to revive.

The authors promise "a joint marketing authority ... to attract new patrons." Hmm. Wonder what language they'll speak?

You get to the heart of the matter when the authors cite the 1,195 lofts and condos currently being built along Broadway and the thousands more planned. "Broadway will, for the most part, offer services and amenities needed by downtown residents who want to enjoy some time away from their apartments," they write.

OK, now we're getting a little closer to what's going on. It isn't ethnic cleansing that's being proposed but the replacement of working-class families with affluent loft and condo dwellers. As already is true throughout the remarkably integrated revived downtown, some of these people will be Latinos -- but like their Anglo, African American and Asian neighbors, they'll all have platinum Amex cards.

The oddest part of all this is that the two city officials who have their name on this proposal -- Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and City Councilman Jose Huizar -- know better. The councilman not only immigrated from Zacatecas as a boy, he has a master's degree in planning from Princeton to go with his diploma from UCLA Law. They have to know that what's being proposed here is to displace the working-class Latino shoppers and the merchants who serve them from a street they've called their own for more than three decades. They're going to be replaced by more upscale merchants with more affluent patrons from whom the city can collect far more in sales taxes.

That may or may not be a good thing, but the people who propose it ought to be honest about it. They also ought to acknowledge that the people they're proposing to shove aside also need a place to shop and eat. Where, precisely, will that be?

[email protected]
     
     
  #3405  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2008, 11:01 PM
RuFFy's Avatar
RuFFy RuFFy is offline
FlyyyFALiiFe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 364
Echo Park: I read what you wrote yesterday or the day before about the "whites". While I didn't agree that it was because of the "whites" that Broadway will be revitalized, I DO agree that it's because there is money arriving from all sides to DT. That said, it makes sense that Broadway would not be revitalized until now when there is a base of people that might actually go to the theater or to shop there because they live there. However, had it not been for those shops that people so easily say there are a dime a dozen (and they are), I believe Broadway might not be there today.. AT ALL. And yea, nobody was moving in before, but people were shopping there. The street improvements are coming along WAY too late because while the improvements of the theaters weren't completely necessary before, the street improvements were. That's a shame. Had those shops not been there, where do you guys think Broadway would be today? Would it have survived?
     
     
  #3406  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 2:17 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJM19 View Post
Well, Broadway use to have lots of neon light. I think the theaters at least should try for some flair. I have no problem with most of the buildings doing just a classy normal lighting. I don't like the blue stair-way shape lighting on that last building.


source:http://www.geocities.com/los_angeles_coast/Broadway_at_night_Los_Angeles_1940s.jpg

If developers only managed to light up Broadway as much as it used to be, I think that it would look terrific. No need to over-do.
     
     
  #3407  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 2:19 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Echo Park View Post
how fast do those things travel? while a bit tacky i'm kinda fascinated with the views you'd get on that thing.
As great as a tram sounds, I can't get passed that part. Besides, I don't think that Dodger games alone warrant the construction of a tram.
     
     
  #3408  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 3:00 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,099
I was on a tram in Grand Teton Nat. Park, and it was traveling probably less than 10 miles an hour.

Colemonkee, do you think you could add that new Tower to Page #1?
__________________
Revelation 21:4

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Jan 31, 2008 at 3:19 AM.
     
     
  #3409  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 3:25 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
This SHOULD NOT be something that is exclusive to New York, Vegas, Dubai, Shanghai or Tokyo. In fact, they belong HERE. That's right, HERE. For all of our claim to be the Entertainment capital of the world, we sure as hell don't show it. What would truly capitalize that is if our city became the LED capital of the world, no doubt about it.

Is everyone forgetting that the first city in America to put up Neon signs is NOT, I repeat, NOT New York OR Vegas?
It's right here in Los Angeles....it's true.

That's probably the most coherent post I've ever read from you.
__________________
DTLA Rising
     
     
  #3410  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 3:33 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Affrojuice View Post
although this rendition looks too idealistic and 3rd st promenade like, it would still be great to see the Broadway corridor this busy and vibrant. I think the best thing in this pic though is the trolley car


I like a little grit in the city, but I would really like it if the powers-that-be could really guide the direction of Broadway toward that idealistic endeavor.
__________________
DTLA Rising
     
     
  #3411  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 3:39 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladowntowner View Post
Reliable energy is the foundation for our economic success, everything we have in our modern society is a result of, and exists solely because of energy. Once predictability of the aforementioned falters, the economy stumbles, then fails. I see this as evident and not enough has been done, up to this point in time, to mitigate the impact. This is the basis for my long-term pessimistic view of the economy at the regional, national and global levels. Of course I see and have mentioned special vulnerabilities our region has in light of depleting energy sources, in an effort to be as relevant as possible while discussing such matters here.
Well stated (again).
__________________
DTLA Rising
     
     
  #3412  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 3:46 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty View Post
That's probably the most coherent post I've ever read from you.
Thank you. I've been trying real hard to sum up everything in my posts in the most sensible way possible.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #3413  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 3:57 AM
Affrojuice Affrojuice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 47
the tram i rode in Portland was actually really fast. And was not tacky in any way. The view of downtown Portland from the tram was outstanding as well!
I think it could work for Dodger stadium, because you can have more than one tram running on the line at once, kind of like a chairlift at a ski resort. The tram i rode in portland was actually pretty big, and probably fit 75 to 100 people in one car. So running multiple trams at game time, could probably get the job done for the public transportation riders.
     
     
  #3414  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 4:20 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
A tram to Dodger Stadium isn't much of a tourist attraction considering it only goes to Dodger Stadium. Sure, the view is great, but so is the view from the Getty and from Griffith Observatory.
     
     
  #3415  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 4:33 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,099
Griffith Observatory is great for viewing a large portion of L.A.

The problem with Dodger Stadium is that it's facing the opposite direction, if you guys know what I mean. It's practically impossible to view the skyline from the seats.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #3416  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 4:39 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,543
I question the transit-effectiveness of a tram. Can it really carry thousands of baseball fans in a timely manner?
     
     
  #3417  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 4:41 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,099
NOT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO, NO, NO!!!!!!!!!!!!




park fifth not breaking ground as planned, after all

by Rich Alossi on January 30, 2008
After all of the controversy, guesswork and rebuttals surrounding Park Fifth and its funding status last year, Houk Development Company still contended that their 76-story Phase I residential skyscraper was set to break ground in the first quarter of 2008.

Since that time, a breathtaking $5 million sales center has opened, over 300 reservations have been signed, and progress has been made with permitting and planning.

Things are “looking up,” right?

Well maybe, but not for a while. Stephanie Holbrook, a spokesperson for the Park Fifth project, tells us today that groundbreaking has been pushed back to the third quarter of 2008.


Even with the significant delay, Holbrook asserts that the first tower is still on track to meet its 2010 completion.

Our experience tells us otherwise. Though, the developers’ continued broadcasting of the luxury development over an extensive marketing campaign is positive sign of their dedication to see it off the ground.

Park Fifth is the latest in a growing list of Downtown projects that have experienced setbacks due to rising construction costs, an unsteady housing market, and problems with financing: LA Central, 1027 Wilshire, South Figueroa, and the Grand Avenue Project are some of the more notable ones.

We’re waiting to hear back from Holbrook about the cause of the delay and will keep our fingers crossed for a third-quarter groundbreaking. The last thing we want to see is this iconic vision reincarnated in five years as a twin 15-story dud.

The project’s second phase, a 43-story tower that will be home to an unnamed five-star hotel, has no construction date set.

-$3 billion predicament: grand avenue project delayed
-south figueroa (formerly jardin) pushed back a year
-A Peek Inside the Park Fifth Sales Center (Blogdowntown)
-Rumor Mill: Park Fifth Project in Trouble? (Curbed)
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #3418  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 4:50 AM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,127
^^ Well, gee, aren't I surprised
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
     
     
  #3419  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 4:52 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,099
I don't get it; why don't these developers just say that they're projects aren't breaking ground till 2010 instead of making people wait?
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #3420  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2008, 5:26 AM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,419
^ Because their projects breaking ground in 2010 would force people to wait anyway.

I'm not surprised at all actually. I've taken heed of these sage words: Never expect a building to break ground when it says it will.
__________________
Washed Out
     
     
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 9:53 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

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