LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 3.0

[LosAngelesBeauty]

I always thought the LAPD HQ was going to be a positive thing for the area as opposed to the claims that a park would automatically be a better option. It never made sense to me because I thought the building renderings were terrific and that people in support of a park in that area should be directing their energy toward the Grand Park proposed with the Grand Avenue Project, which would be STEPS AWAY from the Higgins. I am glad the LAPD HQ went through and the motor pool will be built in its current location with retail space at the bottom. It will fill in that deadzone where the Higgins Gallery used to be.

Does anyone know when the motor pool is going to be completed?

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by Downtown Los Angeles

how is that crown gonna look when its done on that AT&T building?

Because of its location further south from the rest of downtown's high rises, I wish the Transamerica tower would do something a bit more daring and spectacular. I wish it would include in its crown a few beams of light that would shoot into the sky akin to the Luxor pyramid in LV or even one of the office buildings in Long Beach. I forget which one, but there is a tall office building in Long Beach that has two beams of light that shoot into the sky at night where you can see from Pine Ave. I think it would add to that entertainment district vibe and really give people driving off the 10 freeway a striking view when they see LA Live and a few powerful beams of light shooting into the sky.

That would really give the crown a great look and help the give South Park an even more substantial feeling for the time being even though it doesn't have the bulk of high rises.

Plus can you imagine the view people have when they're driving on the 110 freeway northbound! As they are coming closer to downtown around USC, they just see a massive wall of light (at night obviously) and with Staples/LA Live illuminating the sky, the Transamerica beaming light into the sky could only help.

[BrandonJXN]

Here is a new rendering of the Beekman Tower in NYC. I'm posting this because I pray to the architecture gods that The Grand can look this good.

[Echo Park]

What does that have to do with LA development?

Regardless its a good example of a much more effective render. Almost every render I see is a faraway shot or an aerial shot, but up close and at street level really gives you the true impact of such a development and surely sells it better.

[BrandonJXN]

Both The Grand and Beekman are designed by Gehry.

[colemonkee]

Really the only similarity, other than the ubiquitous Gehry curves and of course being designed by the man himself, this tower is pretty different from the Grand. The Grand has an l-shaped massing (Beekman is y-shaped), no setbacks, and is primarily glass, where this is aluminum and glass. And the Beekman tower will be nearly twice as tall.

Though this rendering does give me high hopes for the Grand. If they can get some shovels in the dirt...

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty

I always thought the LAPD HQ was going to be a positive thing for the area as opposed to the claims that a park would automatically be a better option.

I am glad the LAPD HQ went through and the motor pool will be built in its current location with retail space at the bottom. It will fill in that deadzone where the Higgins Gallery used to be.

I recall all the yrs I'd drive by the two blocks where the Caltrans & the new LAPD bldg is located & see the big parking lots &, even worse, some small shack type of bldgs sitting at the corner of 1st & LA Sts & the corner of 1st & Main----all in the shadow of city hall---& think that really was sad. I'd also think of the guests in rms on the west side of the New Otani hotel looking out over all that & wonder if they'd be asking "isn't there a better part of town to stay in?!"

So I agree with you about those new bldgs being a positive thing for the hood, & long overdue.

BTW, I drove by the new LAPD bldg on Sat night & I can relate to colemonkee's description of it, & his pics showing what IMO is the bldg's very nice looking glass wall. It all seems kind of fancy, esp for what most ppl associate is the type of bldg that's typical for cops.

I also notice the portion of what was once a huge parking lot at the SW corner of 2nd & San Pedro Sts has been walled off. The new apt bldg going up directly south of there, owned by the same company that has the rights to build the Grand Ave proj, must have extended the site farther north over the past few wks. I believe it still was open for parking not too long ago.

However, I don't think that means the 2nd phase part of their proj, which would be a highrise at 2nd & San Pedro Sts, is gonna breakground anytime soon. They probably have increased the size of their construction site for storage & also to accomodate a new street they're installing directly north of the 1st phase apt bldg. Still nice to see less of a gap----meaning fewer acres of deadzone----in the hood.

And I was at the new Ralphs on 9th St & although it's what I expect of a Ralphs, although slightly nicer----but not as impressive as the new Whole Foods mkt in Pasadena (but I can do without its level of $$$----the reason for its nickname of "whole paycheck")----it was the number of customers in there that surprised me. It's amazing that while DT has a much smaller population on the weekends, when most daytimers & workers have taken off, the Ralphs nonetheless can be very busy.

I recall worrying a few yrs ago that the new Ralphs, in order to have decent sales per day, would need to do back flips to attract customers from the nearby hoods where alot of big families lived, inc those on the WIC program.

So the fact that concern ends up being unnecessary makes me laugh, & is just another sign that the hood is coming into its own.

[DowntownCharlieBrown]

Here's my two cents, since I believe I saw the same thing and had the same hopes that threehundred did when he made his post.



When I saw the first renderings of Beekman, I thought it looked interesting, some what of a mess, and I was confused about how it would actually look once built. With the way Gehry is discussed as a hit or miss architect, I wasn't holding high hopes for Beekman.




Now that the final (and realistic) renderings are in, I can clearly see how the early renderings have translated. It's like Gehry gives you a little, then when he has his final product, he drops it on you. In this case, it's a "hit". I love the look and can't wait to see it in person.





So I then turned my attention to The Grand, and as I remember looking at the early renderings, I thought is looked interesting, somewhat of a mess, and was confused as to how the wavy glass will look in final form. However, we have recently received new renderings, and now the glass makes since to me, but the renderings still have a cartoonish look to them. So after seeing the new Beekman renderings, I too am upping my hopes that once we receive realistic renderings I can declare The Grand a "hit".

All pics: frank gehry renderings

[BrandonJXN]

^ You pretty much explained it. Looking at Beekman and how hesitant people were at first when they saw the revised rendering then seeing and reading the praise that it's been getting the past few days makes me hope that The Grand will do the same thing. Run on sentence. Both The Grand and Beekman are Gehry's first 2 skyscrapers. Both are landmark buildings. Both have Gehry's trademark knooks and crannies. Both work in their respective locations. I want to see The Grand get as much praise as Beekman. Renderings and upon completion.

[DJM19]

The tower was never what gave me pause about the Grand...its the base...it just seems messy. I anticipate a more realistic render, however.

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by Echo Park

What does that have to do with LA development?

Regardless its a good example of a much more effective render. Almost every render I see is a faraway shot or an aerial shot, but up close and at street level really gives you the true impact of such a development and surely sells it better.

He does have a point on how it isn't related to local development, ThreeHundred. Though I do think that I know what you are trying to get at, as I can see the slight resemblance between the two developments. The Beekman Place looks more creative.

[BrandonJXN]

^ Read mine and DowntownCharlieBrown's posts and you'll see how me posting that tower relates to downtown LA. It's both off and on topic.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty

Because of its location further south from the rest of downtown's high rises, I wish the Transamerica tower would do something a bit more daring and spectacular. I wish it would include in its crown a few beams of light that would shoot into the sky akin to the Luxor pyramid in LV or even one of the office buildings in Long Beach. I forget which one, but there is a tall office building in Long Beach that has two beams of light that shoot into the sky at night where you can see from Pine Ave. I think it would add to that entertainment district vibe and really give people driving off the 10 freeway a striking view when they see LA Live and a few powerful beams of light shooting into the sky.

That would really give the crown a great look and help the give South Park an even more substantial feeling for the time being even though it doesn't have the bulk of high rises.

Plus can you imagine the view people have when they're driving on the 110 freeway northbound! As they are coming closer to downtown around USC, they just see a massive wall of light (at night obviously) and with Staples/LA Live illuminating the sky, the Transamerica beaming light into the sky could only help.

Likewise, I wouldn't mind some added flair to the downtown highrises. However, I'd hate to see it resort to some sort of Luxor rip-off idea that belongs more in the Fantasmic show than in DTLA.

Lighted crowns and even the Concerto video screens I can handle, but unnecessary beams of light just seem a bit ridiculous and tacky IMO.

[BrandonJXN]

^ I agree and I love lights. But beams shooting up from the AT@T/SBC/Transamerica Center really sound like a tacky idea. I would rather have a nice bluish color under the crown.

And SSP needs a new server because I keep getting the 'white screen of death.'

I can't even post this because of high traffic.

[JDRCRASH]

^
No kidding. Even with an account, you're often still unable to access the forum.

Originally Posted by ThreeHundred

^ Read mine and DowntownCharlieBrown's posts and you'll see how me posting that tower relates to downtown LA. It's both off and on topic.

I'm not sure I fully understand what DowntownCharlieBrown meant when he said that it's cartoonish. But I like the rendering anyways, especially the recent concept shown at night.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

I don't think a beam of light would be tacky at all. Las Vegas doesn't automatically equate with tacky either. I think it's very appropriate for Luxor to have a beam of light on top of the pyramid. Nevertheless, the reason I thought about the beam of light was actually seeing that in Long Beach. Being on Pine Avenue and seeing those beams of light on the building was pretty cool. You might be surprised, but it felt very subtle. It wasn't like the beams of light actually stole the thunder from the city activity below, but it was just kind of cool to see two strong beams of light shoot up into the sky.

I think that would be similar if you were to install beams of light on the Transamerica building.

[RAlossi]

I still remember and love ThreeHundred's idea for red neon on the AON tower.

Oh, and whatever happened to that laser show/laser halo idea for Arco Plaza (now City National Plaza)?

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by RAlossi

I still remember and love ThreeHundred's idea for red neon on the AON tower.

Red Neon? That sounds pretty cool!

[DowntownCharlieBrown]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

^

I'm not sure I fully understand what DowntownCharlieBrown meant when he said that it's cartoonish. But I like the rendering anyways, especially the recent concept shown at night.

The Beekman rendering is "realistic". It looks like a photo. If you showed the rendering of the Beekman to the "average Joe", you could convince him that you took a picture of a building that existed.

The Grand rendering is "cartoonish" (don't confuse that by thinking I think the rendering looks silly like a cartoon") The more cartoonish (there has to be a better word) a rendering is, the less realistic looking are the colors, lighting, reflections, shadowing, etc. It's also not clear what materials are used and the less likely it will look like the final product. Therefore, the less likely one is able to say they like or don't like a building and will hold off judgment until they get a clearer rendering.

[JDRCRASH]

^
I see; so in order for one to make a true judgement, they need to see a rendering that looks as identical as when it's built as possible.