HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5681  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 6:07 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,543
Not amazing, not a travesty. Hope it gets built.

Agreed on the parking garage...just cover it in plants and vines or something...or some creative light scheme. Maybe a light patterns that mimics car traffic, even though thats not very original.
     
     
  #5682  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 6:16 AM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,904
much much better than any of the previous renders. Its.... interesting. My hope is that every phase looks different so that it doesnt seem like the same developer did the whole block. Integration will be key. Too bad this wont get built anytime soon because that is a very important block that is rather 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 right now, with the power poles, the run down old buildings, the empty lots and the fact that nothing of value is there right now.
     
     
  #5683  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 6:58 AM
citywatch citywatch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 6,730
^ That sums it up pretty nicely, & not just about the Metropolis, but about LA in general. For everyone to be debating about the design of a proj that probably won't be built for some time to come, if ever----even more so cuz of the news out of Wall St today----really ends up being an exercise in futility.

As for LA, I think alot more ppl have problems with it not cuz of its limited transit system, or cuz its sidewalks are too narrow, or its fwys are too big, or cuz its condo bldgs have parking podiums. No, I think many more ppl have a hard time warming up to the city for exactly the conditions that LASF describes.

BTW, I was in Pasadena yesterday & what makes that town easier to accept, or easier to like, is that a good amt of it isn't the type of dive that is described above. I can drive through quite a few parts of that town & not run into hoods that look like dumps.

Example: I notice Raymond St----which has been a more industrialized section of pasadena----has been improved recently & looks much better, & the major street to the east of that, the Arroyo Seco, that leads northward into Pasadena from the fwy is being upgraded right now. Since alot of ppl use that street each yr, esp tourists around NYE, that shows the city of Pasadena knows how to do things right.

But not everyone would agree. There are those ppl who believe LA is bad, or who hate it, cuz Beverly Hills is too much like a slicked up Mission viejo.

Ppl like THAT really are the yin to your yang----or is that the yang to your yin?----LASF!
     
     
  #5684  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 7:59 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
I'm probably the only one but I think that proposal looks pretty good.

I must be boring.
     
     
  #5685  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 6:43 PM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by citywatch View Post
^ That sums it up pretty nicely, & not just about the Metropolis, but about LA in general. For everyone to be debating about the design of a proj that probably won't be built for some time to come, if ever----even more so cuz of the news out of Wall St today----really ends up being an exercise in futility.

As for LA, I think alot more ppl have problems with it not cuz of its limited transit system, or cuz its sidewalks are too narrow, or its fwys are too big, or cuz its condo bldgs have parking podiums. No, I think many more ppl have a hard time warming up to the city for exactly the conditions that LASF describes.

BTW, I was in Pasadena yesterday & what makes that town easier to accept, or easier to like, is that a good amt of it isn't the type of dive that is described above. I can drive through quite a few parts of that town & not run into hoods that look like dumps.

Example: I notice Raymond St----which has been a more industrialized section of pasadena----has been improved recently & looks much better, & the major street to the east of that, the Arroyo Seco, that leads northward into Pasadena from the fwy is being upgraded right now. Since alot of ppl use that street each yr, esp tourists around NYE, that shows the city of Pasadena knows how to do things right.

But not everyone would agree. There are those ppl who believe LA is bad, or who hate it, cuz Beverly Hills is too much like a slicked up Mission viejo.

Ppl like THAT really are the yin to your yang----or is that the yang to your yin?----LASF!

I have to agree with you citywatch that most people don't like LA because it is pretty ugly in most areas. After taking a weekend trip to San Diego, I realize how much nicer that city looks overall. (DTSD, La Jolla, Mission Beach, Balboa Park, etc.)

Nevertheless, LA could garner higher marks from visitors and residents alike IF it did have a great mass transit system. Tokyo probably comes to mind as a city that is NOT great looking, but it's super convenient to get around and has a lot of people on the streets. IF LA had a convenient transit system, it would alter the perception of so many people who are now TRAPPED in traffic and congestion.

IOW, because LA already looks pretty bad right now, it needs something else to offset that ugliness. Currently, it's ugly and it's hard to get around! How bad is that???
     
     
  #5686  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 6:52 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeHundred View Post
And I already explained:
LOL. You are hilarious. You still don't get it. You can check in the Newspapers, online, or even the front desk of the condo for information on price listings. And last time I checked, not all units are the same in terms of sq ft and amenities, as well as city views....so does it even matter? Besides, when was the last time you saw a billboard in front of a residential high-rise giving out the info you just described in your past post? And how on earth whether if everyone has already been to Starbucks or McDonald's have anything to do with puting they're ads on billboards?


And I know i'll likely get slammed doing this due to the fact i've said the following so many times before when trying to explain myself, but here goes:

Read my post carefully:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Anybody who thinks self-promotion ads are all thats needed is not thinking straight.

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Sep 16, 2008 at 7:02 PM.
     
     
  #5687  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 7:06 PM
Just-In-Cali's Avatar
Just-In-Cali Just-In-Cali is offline
Urbanite in Suburbia
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Angeles Metro
Posts: 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty View Post
I have to agree with you citywatch that most people don't like LA because it is pretty ugly in most areas. After taking a weekend trip to San Diego, I realize how much nicer that city looks overall. (DTSD, La Jolla, Mission Beach, Balboa Park, etc.)

Nevertheless, LA could garner higher marks from visitors and residents alike IF it did have a great mass transit system. Tokyo probably comes to mind as a city that is NOT great looking, but it's super convenient to get around and has a lot of people on the streets. IF LA had a convenient transit system, it would alter the perception of so many people who are now TRAPPED in traffic and congestion.

IOW, because LA already looks pretty bad right now, it needs something else to offset that ugliness. Currently, it's ugly and it's hard to get around! How bad is that???
Id actually have to disagree with you on this. SD looks okay around Mission Valley and the waterfront of DT, and of course La Jolla and such. But much of the eastern part of the city and the southern parts are rather dumpy...plus it feels more like a large suburb than any kind of large city.
Again it breaks down to what people think of as a nice city. I for one think San Fran is a rather dirty city, with great food. But I know its sacrilige to say that about SF.
As far as Metropolis, like most, is not a bad structure, but I guess my question is, what is everyone expecting for a simple residential tower? Have you seen most new highrises nationwide? Miami looks like a highrise subdivision, its so homaganized. I think we need to understand that some structures truly are fuction over form. Not everything can be a work of art. Lets just hope if any more substantial structures are built, they are more interesting.
     
     
  #5688  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 7:16 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
^ That is a good assessment of things.

One thing I'd like to see of more in town to quickly fill up all those deadzone spaces are simple 3-5 story townhomes, where there's an entry to the street and large porch and it adds to the pedestrian scale. Given our vast size of our Downtown, this will be needed more than 20-40 story high rises that take forever and a day to materalize. So that those towers can become more focal points with a lot more going on in the ground floor.

The current problem is that the buildings are in direct competition with each other on ground floor retail with little critcal mass. Also to add the building codes and zoning doesn't help matters in terms of parking. However from a design standpoint, the South Group has done a remarkable job of taking advantage of the existing set-back rules that is available to every building design and have competent designers to give that space back to the city and make that a feature for their development on their ground floor retail so that it becomes a small network of special spaces.

Last edited by Wright Concept; Sep 16, 2008 at 7:27 PM.
     
     
  #5689  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 9:11 PM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Hmm, I disagree, and here's why:
After a while people visiting-and especially those living in-Downtown that care to look at these signs will start to notice that they are seeing the same ads over and over again. And then that is when they will begin to wonder, "why hasn't there been different ads promoting different stuff? I'm curious and confused. Wait a second...Aha! I think I understand now; is this the kind of personality and atmosphere that this particular area of this grand city wants to have? Does it really like having Billboards with advertisements that only talk about the venues or developments that they sit on? Does it not like wide creativity and variety? I certainly do. Perhaps I should shop, hang out, or even live somewhere else in this town the next time opportunity presents itself, like when housing costs drop elsewhere in more expensive areas, or when i'm visiting here again."
In other words, we need not only newcomers to Downtown L.A., but others that have already been here previously.
So according to JDRCRASH, potential homeowners are swayed by building ads.

Safe streets ✓
Good schools ✓
Sq footage ✓
Billboard "Wide creativity and variety" ✓

     
     
  #5690  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 12:42 AM
RuFFy's Avatar
RuFFy RuFFy is offline
FlyyyFALiiFe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 364
WAIT! I think I agree with JDCrash. It's a horrible idea to advertise yourself on a building you own and are looking to rent out - "especially" when there are vacant units. It seems so fake. For that matter, McDonald's should change all their signs because you don't want them advertising the building their signs are attached to. It's like, you drive up and think.. Hmm.. I'm going to Olive Garden when their prices go down!

     
     
  #5691  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 3:55 AM
DTLA's Avatar
DTLA DTLA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arcata, CA
Posts: 84
Does anyone know what is happening to the building on the northeast side of Pershing Square? They're constructing something on the top of the building
     
     
  #5692  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 4:28 AM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
LOL. You are hilarious. You still don't get it. You can check in the Newspapers, online, or even the front desk of the condo for information on price listings. And last time I checked, not all units are the same in terms of sq ft and amenities, as well as city views....so does it even matter? Besides, when was the last time you saw a billboard in front of a residential high-rise giving out the info you just described in your past post? And how on earth whether if everyone has already been to Starbucks or McDonald's have anything to do with puting they're ads on billboards?


And I know i'll likely get slammed doing this due to the fact i've said the following so many times before when trying to explain myself, but here goes:
Hikari


Roosevelt


Mercury


Glo
     
     
  #5693  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 4:58 AM
ladowntowner ladowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: DTLA
Posts: 441
^

.
     
     
  #5694  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 5:15 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
Yes indeed, ladowntowner, it is funny. Especially when he only answered one question...partly.
I had no idea about those ads.....definately my fault.....although, I don't see "the price is on whatever unit someone might be interested in buying".

And he still hasn't explained why McDonald's and Starbucks ads are pointless because he claims everyone has been there, which i'm sure isn't true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StethJeff View Post
So according to JDRCRASH, potential homeowners are swayed by building ads.
Yes. But i'm going to go a step further by saying that it's part of what sways potential homeowners; such as safety, for example.

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Sep 17, 2008 at 5:36 AM. Reason: Disrespectful comments
     
     
  #5695  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 6:05 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
Bid for downtown L.A. electronic billboards fails

Bid for downtown L.A. electronic billboards fails

State Senate rejects a bill that would have allowed Staples Center owner AEG to put up the signs at the convention center. The City Council had approved the plan, but state action was necessary.

By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 17, 2008

SACRAMENTO -- An after-midnight push to allow dozens of new electronic billboards along freeways in downtown Los Angeles and in Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties was shot down Tuesday in the state Senate.

The bill, with some provisions tailored for a company headed by billionaire Philip Anschutz, would have created an exemption to the state ban on new freeway billboards for certain projects, including a downtown entertainment district being built by Anschutz, who owns the adjacent Staples Center. Backers vowed to bring the measure back next year.


The legislation was an attempt to circumvent the Senate Transportation Committee, which has rejected previous requests for exemptions, critics said.

"This is worse than earmarks. Earmarks are at least legal," said Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), the committee chairman. "These billboards . . . are illegal."

The bill would have allowed electronic billboards operated in conjunction with convention centers and theaters "located within, or immediately adjacent to, the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District [e.g. Staples Center]," according to a report to the Senate by a legislative analyst.


Across the street from Staples, Anschutz's company AEG is developing the $2.5-billion L.A. Live, which includes the Nokia Theatre and will feature broadcast TV studios, movie theaters, restaurants and a luxury hotel.

Last week, the Los Angeles City Council voted to sell signage rights for the L.A. Convention Center to AEG paving the way for potentially dozens of billboards on city property at the interchange of the 10 and 110 freeways.

But billboards proposed in the council agreement require state exemptions such as those in the failed bill if they are to be built close to freeways, according to Michael Roth, an AEG spokesman.

Those signs would provide advertising for events at the development's venues, as well as the convention center, and would bring money into the city's coffers.

"It means five to 10 million dollars in revenue for the city of Los Angeles," said Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles), who brought the L.A. Live provision to the Senate.

The legislation by Assemblyman Bill Emmerson (R-Redlands) would also have provided an exemption allowing digital signs in Rancho Cucamonga, Riverside, Huntington Beach and Lennox, an unincorporated area near Los Angeles International Airport. AEG is not involved in any of those projects.

In a vote after midnight on trailer bills attached to the budget, the Senate deadlocked 17 to 17 on Emmerson's legislation.

"None of us were in the mood for extraneous special interest 🞵🞵🞵🞵 thrown at us in the wee hours of the morning," said Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), explaining her vote against the bill.

Firms and executives affiliated with Anschutz have given $2.7 million to political committees in California in the last five years, including $583,000 to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign accounts.

The bill's original intent was to improve the state's whistle-blower law, but all of the language was gutted Tuesday and replaced with the billboard proposals.

Opponents of the plan to put billboards on the L.A. Convention Center were angered to find out about the Emmerson bill after the vote.

"It's outrageous," said Dennis Hathaway of the Coalition to Ban Billboard Blight. "These issues are supposed to have transparency and public input. They are trying to keep everything below the radar. It's not the way democracy is supposed to work."

The Emmerson bill was one of several last-minute measures unrelated to the budget that failed to win approval, including legislation to provide incentives for film companies to stay in California, to relax air quality standards for new power plants in Vernon and to help pave the way for construction of a power plant in Riverside County.

[email protected]
     
     
  #5696  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 6:53 AM
ladowntowner ladowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: DTLA
Posts: 441
^ Good riddance, I say...
     
     
  #5697  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 8:39 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,066
Agreed. It wasn't a smart plan.
     
     
  #5698  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 6:24 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
Maybe what they should do is to rewrite the proposal without the signs facing the interchange.
     
     
  #5699  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 6:39 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Yes indeed, ladowntowner, it is funny. Especially when he only answered one question...partly.
I had no idea about those ads.....definately my fault.....although, I don't see "the price is on whatever unit someone might be interested in buying".
So you have never walked down the street and seen an apartment building that has 5 or 6 signs saying something like, 'Tennis Courts! Swimming Pool! Sauna! Close to schools! 2, 3, or 4 bedroom units! Prices start at whatever price!'

You've never seen that?
     
     
  #5700  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2008, 10:40 PM
Echo Park Echo Park is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: cardboard box on skid row
Posts: 1,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Maybe what they should do is to rewrite the proposal without the signs facing the interchange.
having them face the freeway was kinda the point there, jdrcrash
     
     
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 12:32 AM.

     

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