HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5561  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 3:20 AM
ladowntowner ladowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: DTLA
Posts: 441
^What exactly belongs in L.A., then, anyway? Relatively boring, boxy and flat topped glass towers? *yawn*

Regarding Pershing Square - Why would an uniform arrangement of trees be preferable over a more "random" arrangement? Might look nice from the air or a nearby tower, by what about the point at which a park is intended to be enjoyed - from within it? Might a more "organic" and "natural" layout for trees be nicer? The other points about pedestrian access and fountain size are well taken, but remember that image is essentially an historic postcard, most likely produced from an old black and white photo showing it, by and large, exactly as it once was and not a render of any proposed redesign. If only we were so lucky...
     
     
  #5562  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 4:26 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,652
If executed properly, it could pan out quite nicely. The right set of glass needs to be chosen and the parking podium concealed.
     
     
  #5563  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 4:36 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty View Post


"Years to complete?" What ever happened to the 12 to 2 plan that LA wanted to pass to speed along development? Anyone have any info on that?
Yeah I was wondering about that too. I recall that it would not move forward about till Winter or next spring, but I could be wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StethJeff View Post
That SLAB building looks like —. Doesn't belong in LA.
I'ts better than nothing, especially these days.....


Quote:
Originally Posted by ladowntowner View Post
^What exactly belongs in L.A., then, anyway? Relatively boring, boxy and flat topped glass towers? *yawn*
I definately agree with you there....we need some variety. While I like the kind of style that Ritz and L.A. Central are taking, something different can add beauty in the skyline.
     
     
  #5564  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 5:15 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladowntowner View Post
^What exactly belongs in L.A., then, anyway? Relatively boring, boxy and flat topped glass towers? *yawn*

Regarding Pershing Square - Why would an uniform arrangement of trees be preferable over a more "random" arrangement? Might look nice from the air or a nearby tower, by what about the point at which a park is intended to be enjoyed - from within it? Might a more "organic" and "natural" layout for trees be nicer? The other points about pedestrian access and fountain size are well taken, but remember that image is essentially an historic postcard, most likely produced from an old black and white photo showing it, by and large, exactly as it once was and not a render of any proposed redesign. If only we were so lucky...
I'm no architect and have no idea what those horizontal design elements are called, but all I know is that I largely hate them. They remind me too much of those two parking garages in Chicago. Either that or the balconies on rundown 1960's South American apartment buildings. LADWP is the only building I know that seems to pull them off.

In terms of the Pershing Square trees, they appear to be placed pretty haphazardly in that postcard. A tiny park like Pershing would look better with an approach similar to (the very overused) Bryant Park. That postcard has very little open space for something like an ice skating rink, outdoor concerts, etc.
     
     
  #5565  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 6:12 AM
RuFFy's Avatar
RuFFy RuFFy is offline
FlyyyFALiiFe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 364
Bryant Park is overused because it's what a park should be. A place with a lawn to do exercise, a place to sit in the shade, a place that's tranquil and a place where the community can come together. Park's aren't supposed to be a giant piece of art (err, —) over parking. Bryant Park draws people in because it's a wonderful safe escape to all the noise and excitement.
     
     
  #5566  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 9:57 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
^I think he meant the Bryant Park has become an "overused" example in the last few posts on this thread. I don't think Bryant Park is overused at all. I think it's a great example for an urban park study (as in this case) in the center of a bustling city, which is what Pershing Square could eventually become.

I also brought up Bryant Park as an example of what Pershing Square should emulate because I think there were too many references to Union Square in SF, only because of the visual similarities I suppose. However, after further investigation, one can see that having a park filled with lawns and trees is a much better option than more concrete in Downtown LA.

ALSO, there were references made about Pershing Square never playing the part of Union Square in Los Angeles because the location doesn't have designer boutiques. Although I am definitely in favor of having all designers in LA-proper (as opposed to Beverly Hills), I also know that Pershing Square can become absolutely wonderful without designer boutiques surrounding it (like Bryant Park).
     
     
  #5567  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 10:01 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladowntowner View Post
^What exactly belongs in L.A., then, anyway? Relatively boring, boxy and flat topped glass towers? *yawn*
^the exact reply given by hordes of angelenos over the decades who'd gladly justify — for taste so long as it wasn't "boring", yielding the architecturally moribund city we call home today. angelenos are generally tasteless and so we hail — as "creative" so long as there's pizazz.

ehhem, there are tasteful ways of avoiding glass boxes, and then there are tasteless ways. don't forget the latter, angelenos. you're collectively way too efficient at that.
     
     
  #5568  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 6:10 PM
Steve2726's Avatar
Steve2726 Steve2726 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 482
Trader Vic's Confirmed at L.A. Live

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/tr...9-179C-42DA-A7FB-3DD4010190B6}&dist=hppr

Trader Vic's at L.A. LIVE Signs Lease for L.A. LIVE's Last Available Space

Legendary Local Restaurant Joins Newly-Signed ROCK'N FISH and Other Well-Known Favorites within New Downtown Los Angeles Sports, Residential & Entertainment District Set for December Grand Opening LOS ANGELES, Sept 04,

2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Trader Vic's at L.A. LIVE, the newest addition to the legendary Polynesian restaurant chain, has leased the final space within L.A. LIVE, the four million square foot downtown Los Angeles sports, residential and entertainment district across from STAPLES Center, it was announced by AEG, developers of L.A. LIVE. Trader Vic's at L.A. LIVE is slated to open its doors to the public in 2009, according to The Valencia Group, the restaurant management group that owns the legendary destination.
     
     
  #5569  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 7:44 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100



L.A. considers selling rights for electronic billboards on Convention Center

Council committee approves agreement to let developer AEG post and sell advertisements along the 110 and 10 freeways. The city would get at least $2 million a year, plus a portion of profits.

By Phil Willon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 4, 2008

The Los Angeles Convention Center, for years a bland roadside afterthought for drivers creeping along the 110 and 10 freeways, could soon be plastered with mammoth signs peddling soft drinks and upcoming events at the convention center, Staples Center and Nokia Theatre under a proposal approved by a City Council committee Wednesday.

Under the agreement, the city would collect at least $2 million a year over the next decade by selling the signage rights to Anschutz Entertainment Group, owners of Staples Center. The agreement would bring steady revenue to the city at a time when the sluggish economy has forced budget cuts and fee hikes.


But the prospect of stripping more ads across the downtown cityscape and along two busy freeways has raised the ire of at least one critic, who says L.A. already is overwhelmed by gargantuan billboard images of Kobe Bryant, McDonald's hamburgers and other advertisements.

The agreement deals only with the business arrangement between Anschutz Entertainment, also known as AEG, and the city, and still must be considered by the full council. Issues related to the location and size of the signs that would adorn the convention center will be considered separately and must go before both the planning commission and the council for approval.

"In tough budget times, we in the city have to look for creative ways to raise revenue," said Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who chairs the Trade, Commerce and Tourism Committee that approved the agreement. "Do we want to increase fees, or do we want to get revenue from a source that's never existed before?"


Councilwoman Jan Perry, whose district includes downtown, said the signs wouldn't affect any residential neighborhoods, so "lights won't be flashing into people's bedrooms." The area surrounding the convention center and Staples Center already is designated as a sports and entertainment zone, she said.

Venice resident Dennis Hathaway, president of the Coalition to Ban Billboard Blight, said that erecting big signs on the vast walls of the convention center would be a distraction for drivers and would amount to another sensory assault on residents.

"The public spaces of the city, the visual landscape of the city, belongs to the people of the city. It's not just something for the city to sell off to advertisers," Hathaway said. "You can't drive anywhere, you can't walk around anywhere, you can't look anywhere without a commercial message in your face. This is a terrible, terrible trend."

City officials say that any proposal for signage on the convention center would be heavily scrutinized. AEG officials say the signs would stay in line with those already in the area.

"We are working on a plan that will be consistent with the existing signage at the sports and entertainment district, which has already been completed and approved," said AEG spokesman Michael Roth.

AEG is a subsidiary of Anschutz Co., whose founder and chairman is Denver multibillionaire Phil Anschutz. The sports and entertainment company is developing the $2.5-billion L.A. Live complex, which includes the Nokia Theatre and will feature movie theaters, restaurants and a luxury hotel across the street from Staples Center.

The agreement would give AEG exclusive rights to sell commercial advertising on signage outside of the convention center. Those signs, which AEG would erect and maintain, would include electronic displays, message boards and standard, static signs.

On the electronic displays, 25% of advertisements must be devoted to promoting events at the convention center, Staples Center or L.A. Live; 25% could be used for official "sponsors" at AEG facilities, such as soft drink companies or convention exhibitors; and AEG could sell the remaining 50% to commercial advertisers.

If the agreement is approved, AEG will initially pay the city $2 million a year, increasing that payment by 3% a year for a decade. The city also would receive 25% of AEG's first $5 million in net profits on the signs; 50% of the profits on the next $5 million; and 75% of the profits on the next $5 million. The city could extend the agreement for an additional 20 years.

Beer advertising would be allowed under the agreement, but ads for other alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, firearms or adult entertainment would be banned.

The city had agreed to provide signage rights to an AEG affiliate, the L.A. Arena Land Co., in 1998, but that agreement was delayed until the convention center area was more developed and financial arrangements could be worked out, said Pouria Abbassi, the convention center's general manager. Currently, the signage outside the center is minute, he said.

"We were looking to have a forum in which we could advertise and promote our events," he said.

The new signage would help attract more visitors to convention center events, and some of the proceeds could be used to improve the facility, he said.

[email protected]
     
     
  #5570  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 9:27 PM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
^the exact reply given by hordes of angelenos over the decades who'd gladly justify — for taste so long as it wasn't "boring", yielding the architecturally moribund city we call home today. angelenos are generally tasteless and so we hail — as "creative" so long as there's pizazz.

ehhem, there are tasteful ways of avoiding glass boxes, and then there are tasteless ways. don't forget the latter, angelenos. you're collectively way too efficient at that.
Thank You.
     
     
  #5571  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 10:28 PM
DowntownGymRat's Avatar
DowntownGymRat DowntownGymRat is offline
Wooooooo Pig Sooie!!!!
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 56
Union Square and Bryant Park thrive because of the enormous density of people, stores, hotels and apartments surrounding them - not necessarily the places themselves. Pershing Square won't reach that type of success until after Park Fifth has it's Grand Opening. In other words, we got some waiting to do.

The one spot in downtown that confuses me the most is the area across from the 7+Fig mall. With it's location being steps away from the Red Line, LA Live, Ralphs, and 2 shopping malls, why is it still deserted?
     
     
  #5572  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2008, 11:32 PM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,543
Call me selfish but i'm definitely hoping that Pershing square doesn't succeed while in its current form. I don't want the city thinking that just because people use the park means its the park we deserve there.
     
     
  #5573  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2008, 2:22 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
^ I agree DJM19.

It reminds me of a debate I got into on blogdowntown with someone who was adamant about pushing the idea that installing some outdoor gym equipment was a good idea for the interim (until Park Fifth breaks ground with major revamping to Pershing Square). I completely disagreed with that argument because not only would the equipment become just another wasteful project catering to the homeless that frequent the park, but it would give ill-informed Angelenos (most of us unfortunately) a false-sense of progress and that we can settle for less on an unacceptable Pershing Square in its current state.

I applauded Jan Perry's stance on refusing to allow Parks and Recs to spend $190,000 on gym equipment that would sit there not only unused by the downtown resident population, but becoming symbols of shame and how pathetic our public spaces really are. That we couldn't figure out how to do anything better to Pershing Square than this —?

I say, put that $190K into a pot called the "Tear Down the Walls Around Pershing Square Fund."
     
     
  #5574  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2008, 2:57 AM
dktshb's Avatar
dktshb dktshb is offline
Environmental Sabotage
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco/ Los Angeles/ Tahoe
Posts: 5,145
The building of the underground parking below Pershing Square doomed it. So long as that parkinglot is there requiring the car ramps to enter and exit it, the park, regardless of what is done to improve it, will still be offputting creating physical and visual barriers making people less inclined to use it.
     
     
  #5575  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2008, 3:59 AM
RuFFy's Avatar
RuFFy RuFFy is offline
FlyyyFALiiFe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 364
I was imagining New Years at LA Live. I imagine some sort of event will be held there. Putting it all together I imagined Angelino's are going to have a place to go that looks like on TV. That's not to say that LA New Years parties aren't already great, it's just another experience that otherwise wouldn't have been available. However, I hope a New Years at LA Live isn't as miserable as a New Years at Times Square, if you know what I mean. I'm eager to see it completed.
     
     
  #5576  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2008, 5:19 AM
ladowntowner ladowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: DTLA
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by dktshb View Post
The building of the underground parking below Pershing Square doomed it. So long as that parkinglot is there requiring the car ramps to enter and exit it, the park, regardless of what is done to improve it, will still be offputting creating physical and visual barriers making people less inclined to use it.
Please be reminded that San Fransisco's Union Square also has a parking garage beneath it, yet many people here have been singing it's praises. It does, however have it's ramps configured in such a way so as to minimize disruption to pedestrians, sight lines, etc. whereas Pershing Square seemingly has them configured in a manner to accomplish exactly the opposite. The garage itself doesn't doom it, just it's execution.
     
     
  #5577  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2008, 7:11 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
^ Yeah, the issue was discussed just a few posts above. It's about reconfiguring the ramps to be at 90 degrees with the street. Parking underneath doesn't destroy the area, it actually increases its viability in a car-addicted society (if executed correctly of course).
     
     
  #5578  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2008, 10:51 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,652


Reconfigured 1111 Wilshire Project Listed for Sale

By Stephen Friday
September 5, 2008

Expected as a follow up to its 201-unit GLO project, developer Holland Partners wowed City West residents in 2006 with plans to erect a 52-story residential/boutique hotel tower on the opposite corner of Wilshire and Bixel.

Now, like the visions of most builders in a sagging economy, ambitions have been scaled back to a more attainable level — at least, they hope, in the eyes of a new taker.

New information released by real estate company Moran & Company listing the proposed development — known simply as 1111 Wilshire — for sale, indicates the hotel component has been dropped altogether, leaving room for 397 residential units and 6,500 square-feet of commercial space over two downgraded structures.

The smaller of the two, a six-story mid-rise facing Wilshire Boulevard, would contain 132 apartment units and all of the retail.

A 261-unit, 30-story tower with floor-to-ceiling glass windows and a seven-level parking podium would fill in the rest of the project site, currently a surface parking lot.

Entitlements for all of this are still being sought, and Holland Partners is looking to unload the responsibility, as its attention seems to be diverted to another project just around the corner.

David L. Gray Architects and Nadel Architects are sharing design credit, and according to Moran & Company, a completion date of summer 2010 is now estimated.

-Residences @ Bixel Project Down-Sizes, Goes Rental




1111 Wilshire project site
     
     
  #5579  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2008, 1:00 AM
LAofAnaheim LAofAnaheim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 761
I think people do the Pershing Square = Union Square similarity b/c of the parking garage underneath, whereas, there is none under Bryant Park.

I don't mind the structure underneath, heck, it prevents downtown LA having to build even more parking structures, but they could seriously reduce the number of on & off ramps. Pershing Square has a ramp on 3 of the 4 sides, and ramps that come parallel to the park. Union Square has 2 ramps and the cars just go straight into the park.

Also, I went to the Grand Avenue meeting a few months ago, the developer is also putting a parking garage under 1 block of the park. It's like LA, can never get away from this parking fiasco. Maybe that's why people don't walk, b/c the car is too convenient?
     
     
  #5580  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2008, 1:35 AM
ksep's Avatar
ksep ksep is offline
übersupermegascraper
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: los angeles
Posts: 321
^ no, people don't walk here because everything you would wanna walk to is too far away.
     
     
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 12:43 AM.

     

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