LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 3.0

[ladowntowner]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

That should definitely help slow the rising costs of projects like Grand Ave, which, if i'm correct, has nearly doubled in price.

The cost of a particular project - even if it drops by, say, 50% - becomes moot if what said project is offering has no demand. In such a scenario - in a sane environment - it will not, nor should not get built. I'm getting the distinct impression this is where we are at and will be for a good long while.

[WonderlandPark]

Originally Posted by edluva

ugly, suburban, dense, lowrise, dysfunctional, sprawling, diverse, uneducated, contextually challenged, philistine, auto-oriented. .

I agree, but you also have to throw in the other side of the coin:

L.A. hands down is one of the most interesting places on earth, not dominated by one era or one building type, but a total mish-mash of architecture, diversity, immigrants, entrepreneurs; a place to experiment, a place to succeed, a place to fail. A first world city with third world characteristics. Mind blowing huge in its expanse.

Despite being born and raised here, I am not an L.A. defender by any means. But boring it is not. I wish we could have gotten more out of this boom cycle and stepped more into urbanism. But perhaps that is not the nature of L.A. To me Beck (interestingly) somehow captures the city, with diverse samples of music from all over time and space and mashing it together to somehow make great music.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

I think most of us agree that L.A. has problems. Where we disagree is about which problems have the biggest negative impact.

IMO, Downtown L.A.'s biggest problem is its failure to include public places that feel clean, secure, memorable and welcoming.

It starts with the streets. Exhibit A: the area around the Bonaventure is an extremely unwelcoming place. The structure is a fortress against the outside, all but explicitly saying "come in or go away". The landscaping is designed for cars only: the bushes are populated by homeless.

Exhibit B: Pershing Square. Talk about an insta-ghetto. Yellow and purple "rooms" - what is this, a brothel?

Pershing Square is not only a massive failure but a huge opportunity. It could be the famous crossroads of Downtown, attracting tourists, families, workers, shoppers, etc. It could have a beautiful fountain, or iconic arch, or statues. How about a clock tower that chimes on the hour? The square could be filled with trees and chess boards and lunching crowds. It could symbolize the renaissance of Downtown by simply giving people what they want - a place to meet, a place to relax. In short, a place to remember.

I think DTLA is far better than it used to be. The creation of real neighborhoods (e.g., Old Bank District and Santee Alley) has enlivened once-dead streets. But it could be so much more. Because even now, in the heart of Downtown, too many people feel the need to flee at 5 PM, rather than lingering there.

[hughfb3]

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Since we now know grand ave will be delayed, this is a great opportunity to use the un-allocated funds generated from Related's late payment of $250,000/month to use for the streetcar project. I encourage everyone to PLEASE EMAIL ALL THREE about using the newly generated funds to reinvest it back into the downtown neighborhood by way of the streetcar system. SPREAD THE WORD TO OTHERS TO DO THE SAME and maybe we can get it running sooner rather than later.

I just sent my email to all three

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

I don't know about you guys but I think Edluva is right. There's nothing wrong with being real and quite frankly I think most of his post are well thought out and balanced. Unfortunately, balance isn't in our favor because while DTLA has improved, it has a lot to go.

Yeah, I think I see Edluva's point; I mean, look what happened to the reconstruction of the World Trade Center. Many dreamed it would be finished before the 10th anniversary. In fact, if I remember correctly, there was someone at the 1-year anniversary of 9/11 that said New York City would once again be home to the tallest building in the world. LOL...but what happened? Delays after delays afer delays.

With what result? Even the Freedom Tower alone isn't expected to be finished by 2011. And even when it is finished, it won't even be the tallest in the United States, much less than the world. (that is if those people working on 400 Lake Shore get they're behinds moving)

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by LongBeachUrbanist

I think most of us agree that L.A. has problems. Where we disagree is about which problems have the biggest negative impact.

IMO, Downtown L.A.'s biggest problem is its failure to include public places that feel clean, secure, memorable and welcoming.

It starts with the streets. Exhibit A: the area around the Bonaventure is an extremely unwelcoming place. The structure is a fortress against the outside, all but explicitly saying "come in or go away". The landscaping is designed for cars only: the bushes are populated by homeless.

Exhibit B: Pershing Square. Talk about an insta-ghetto. Yellow and purple "rooms" - what is this, a brothel?

Pershing Square is not only a massive failure but a huge opportunity. It could be the famous crossroads of Downtown, attracting tourists, families, workers, shoppers, etc. It could have a beautiful fountain, or iconic arch, or statues. How about a clock tower that chimes on the hour? The square could be filled with trees and chess boards and lunching crowds. It could symbolize the renaissance of Downtown by simply giving people what they want - a place to meet, a place to relax. In short, a place to remember.

I think DTLA is far better than it used to be. The creation of real neighborhoods (e.g., Old Bank District and Santee Alley) has enlivened once-dead streets. But it could be so much more. Because even now, in the heart of Downtown, too many people feel the need to flee at 5 PM, rather than lingering there.

I love your description of what we could do to Pershing Square. I completely agree on that part.

[tujunga]

Yes Pershing square needs class not cheap colors and geometric shapes that scream I'm only here as cheap eye candy waiting to be torn down.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Pershing Square is just cheap. It's not even eye candy in the least bit. It's just a horrid space reserved for vagrants and very little else.

[edluva]

80 percent of LA's problems with regard to urbanism (identity) or lack thereof would be elminated by a regionally focused, fix-guided mass trans network. and by regionally focused i do not mean downtown LA, but rather, the entire stretch from dtla to santa monica. dtla is overrated as a solution. it's only a tiny neighborhood, and as of now, a rather inconsequential one at that. la defense, the city of london, downtown manhattan, the loop, fidi, shinjuku...none of these places factor into what makes these cities great, and nor should dtla.

the oft repeated phrase "there's no there, there" should be referring to the area mentioned instead of dtla. the fact that politicians and denizens alike continually refer to dtla as our future "there" perpetuates a falsely held goal and a general ignorance among angelenos our own true urban character and identity. the whole idea that is often repeated on this forum, that there is an "LA" for every type, isn't really a trait unique to LA, but rather a symptom of this region's fractious and divergent tendencies such that as far as urbanism (our goal) is concerned, it is nothing to be proud of.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

I don't think anyone really thinks that LA's future hinges only on Downtown LA's success. The fact that districts like Venice, Hollywood, or Beverly Hills are substantial to LA's identity as well means that they must be connected by rail to one another. West Central is really the true identity of LA and it must be accessible to pedestrians in order for LA to become truly great.

[JDRCRASH]

Edluva, are you saying that when the economy corrects itself, we should be thinking on an even larger and wider scale of redevelopment? Many of my family members that live in South Los Angeles say their area is long overdue for economic growth as well.

[RuFFy]

Click link for news on 1340 S. Figueroa..

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2008/11/architect_daniel_libeskind_designing_downtown_tower.php

[JDRCRASH]

Thanks RuFFy! .

[JDRCRASH]

Wait; Dakota must have made an error because 1340 Figueroa is 43 stories, not units.

BTW, 717 Ninth's crane came down.

[Just-In-Cali]

Well, the "I hate LA train" seems to be up and running as usual in the forum.

Here is a little blurb from MSN i read. Its not a bellweather, but is interesting to see what experts say. Im sure certain people will have strong opinions on this, and I welcome them.

Real-estate markets most likely to rebound

If you're a homeowner seeing property values plummet, look to the commercial real-estate market for solace. It might tell you which areas will recover fastest — and which will likely remain weak.

The Urban Land Institute recently asked 700 real-estate professionals to name the best (and worst) places to invest in commercial real estate in the coming year. Those surveyed included private developers, real-estate agents and real-estate investment trust executives. Their answers also apply to the residential market, since the single-family-home sector typically follows the economy. As wages go up and there are more jobs, more people can buy homes, pushing prices up.

The best cities in which to invest are those that are considered gateways to international investment, have vital downtowns where people can forgo cars and don't have a glut of condos or office space.

What’s your home worth?Find out what your home is worth in one easy step!
These traits landed Seattle the No. 1 spot on the list. No city scored above a 6.15 on a scale of one to nine (one being an abysmal place to invest and nine being excellent).

Seattle is "a diversified market, has a good base of business and is becoming a 24-hour city," says Stephen Blank, senior resident fellow, finance, at the Urban Land Institute. "It's going to be in a good position to come back."

The city is suffering from the loss of Washington Mutual and the downsizing of Starbucks, but Boeing and Microsoft are still strong. Apartment vacancies are low and there aren't too many new buildings going up, meaning the market won't be oversupplied. The same is true of retail space.

San Francisco comes in second, with a 6.12. The “City by the Bay” learned from the 2001 tech crash not to overbuild. There is a reasonable supply of office and apartment space, which should limit vacancies. San Francisco's port is also expected to help the city during the downturn as Americans continue to rely on Asian imports.

Washington, D.C., New York and Los Angeles round out the top five.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

I happen to think that L.A. in general, and Downtown L.A. in particular, is in a good position going forward, due to the many recent and planned investments in infrastructure here. It's certainly looking better in many ways than it did during our last few major downturns.

Granted, the economy is currently in the toilet, and I think it would be silly to imagine we will continue to see lots of building projects, as we have over the past few years. But Rome wasn't built in a day, you know?

[JDRCRASH]

No, but Dubai almost was.

[JDRCRASH]

November 18, 2008


From flickr by Eric Richardson

You can barely see Concerto's crane in this photo:

From flickr by Eric Richardson

Great photos taken by Eric! Does he have an account on SSP?

[colemonkee]

^ Yes, he's blogdowntown. As in the founder of www.blogdowntown.com

[edluva]

Originally Posted by Just-In-Cali

....The best cities in which to invest are those that are considered gateways to international investment, have vital downtowns where people can forgo cars....

well, fwiw i don't take issue with the findings. but obviously LA didn't get top five for having either of those general characteristics bolded above. if you can think for yourself, you'd already know that (not directing this at you, JIC). LA is obviously a major "gateway to international investment", whatever than means to the folks being surveyed.