LOS ANGELES | METRO Project Rundown 2.0 (non-downtown) - Page 73

liat91 · #**1441** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 3:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by San Frangelino

Found this image at the Perkins+Will website:

Chance of this happening: 50% imo

Damn, this along with developing MacCarthur /Westlake, and continuing infill for mid-wilshire as well as the downtown projects would push LA to striking distance of obtaining the title of second city from Chicago.

Complete Expo-line, airport expansion and transit connection, purple line, crenshaw line and red line extension down Sunset/Beverly Center/connecting to puple line. Second City Status Complete

P.S. : Heavy rail spur off Westwood purble line up into vally and west to Calabasas, commuter rail extension a few stations west to Ventura, extension to Palm Desert, street car line from Santa Monica to Malibu and finally a air tram spur from the Santa Ana Metra to John Wayne Airport onto to Costa Mesa. I can only dream and hope of course....

Quixote · #**1442** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 3:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by StethJeff

Perkins+Will are a-holes for teasing us with a vision we'll never see : (
That would be amazing. Though I'd much rather see that level of density along Wilshire first.

I wouldn't say that. It only looks unrealistic because all of it is attractive glassy skyscraper (that part isn't realistic).

Much of what is depicted is/has been proposed -- KTLA Studios, Sunset and Gordon (Spaghetti Factory), Columbia Square, the aforementioned Camden project, etc.

With ambitious projects like the Hollywood Freeway Central Park and Santa Monica Blvd. subway transforming the neighborhood's quality of life, such large-scale growth/development is conceivable.

bmfarley · #**1443** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 4:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by liat91

Chance of this happening: 50% imo

Damn, this along with developing MacCarthur /Westlake, and continuing infill for mid-wilshire as well as the downtown projects would push LA to striking distance of obtaining the title of second city from Chicago.

Complete Expo-line, airport expansion and transit connection, purple line, crenshaw line and red line extension down Sunset/Beverly Center/connecting to puple line. Second City Status Complete

P.S. : Heavy rail spur off Westwood purble line up into vally and west to Calabasas, commuter rail extension a few stations west to Ventura, extension to Palm Desert, street car line from Santa Monica to Malibu and finally a air tram spur from the Santa Ana Metra to John Wayne Airport onto to Costa Mesa. I can only dream and hope of course....

Second City? I already thought it was New York and Los Angeles, and then the rest.

Illithid Dude · #**1444** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 4:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley

Second City? I already thought it was New York and Los Angeles, and then the rest.

He was talking about the amount of high-rises. I don't think we will ever get near Chicago, but Miami could possibly fall to the next Los Angeles building boom. Chicago, for those who (shockingly) don't know, has hundreds of 500+ foot tall skyscraper. Then comes Miami, with 27 and six more under construction. Then comes Houston, with 30 500+ and nothing under construction. Then is Los Angeles in fourth place.

DistrictDirt · #**1445** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 5:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

He was talking about the amount of high-rises. I don't think we will ever get near Chicago, but Miami could possibly fall to the next Los Angeles building boom. Chicago, for those who (shockingly) don't know, has hundreds of 500+ foot tall skyscraper. Then comes Miami, with 27 and six more under construction. Then comes Houston, with 30 500+ and nothing under construction. Then is Los Angeles in fourth place.

If its NY, Chicago, Miami, Houston, then LA...doesn't that mean LA is 5th?

Illithid Dude · #**1446** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 5:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

If its NY, Chicago, Miami, Houston, then LA...doesn't that mean LA is 5th?

Oops. Yeah. L.A. is the fifth.

JDRCRASH · #**1447** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 7:00 AM**

LOL, guys, Miami and Houston are NOT ahead of LA. LA is #3 in high-rises. I don't have actual numbers at the moment, but I don't need them to tell me that it's not even close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by liat91

Chance of this happening: 50% imo

Damn, this along with developing MacCarthur /Westlake, and continuing infill for mid-wilshire as well as the downtown projects would push LA to striking distance of obtaining the title of second city from Chicago.

This thing of Chicago being the "second city" is an old title from the early 20th century.

Illithid Dude · #**1448** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 7:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

LOL, guys, Miami and Houston are NOT ahead of LA. LA is #3 in high-rises. I don't have actual numbers at the moment, but I don't need them to tell me that it's not even close.

This thing of Chicago being the "second city" is an old title from the early 20th century.

Have you seen Miami in the past few years? It is like the Dubai of America. Go check out the last two pages of the Miami thread, it's pretty ridiculous. Houston is barely edging us out, another few high-rises and we will beat them. This is referring only to buildings over five hundred feet, by the way.

mdiederi · #**1449** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 2:32 PM**

Miami has 295 existing high-rise buildings.
Los Angeles has 509 existing high-rise buildings.

Illithid Dude · #**1450** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 3:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdiederi

Miami has 295 existing high-rise buildings.
Los Angeles has 509 existing high-rise buildings.

One again, it is really only the five hundread+'buildings that ount in the end.

pesto · #**1451** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 7:06 PM**

2 ways to make sure that Hollywood doesn't develop:

1. Getting the city overly involved (mandating one thing or another, trying to manage the market). The demand should be there for commercial and mid-range residential to the west and lower price housing filling-in east of 101. Let the market decide; let the city stick to roads, sidewalks and streetscape.

2. Push too many high-rises. This will generate community opposition. Better to have plenty of 3-5 story buildings, creating pleasant neighborhoods, complemented by 10-20 on the main streets and up to 30 on parts of Sunset, Cahuenga, etc. Let's not mess this up by looking for high-rises where they don't belong.

pesto · #**1452** Posted **Jan 12, 2011, 7:12 PM**

btw, if you want high-rise, don't forget that Wilshire, 6th and 7th are down there south of the picture; there is also DT and CC for serious high-rise and many other places for 20-30 stories.

mdiederi · #**1453** Posted **Jan 13, 2011, 4:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

One again, it is really only the five hundread+'buildings that ount in the end.

Ah, okay, 500 ft tall existing buildings:

Houston 31
Miami 27
Los Angeles 22

JDRCRASH · #**1454** Posted **Jan 13, 2011, 4:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pesto

2. Push too many high-rises. This will generate community opposition. Better to have plenty of 3-5 story buildings, creating pleasant neighborhoods, complemented by 10-20 on the main streets and up to 30 on parts of Sunset, Cahuenga, etc. Let's not mess this up by looking for high-rises where they don't belong.

C'mon, 3-5 stories is just an exaggeration. 10-15 story towers are very feasible in large numbers in this town.

Illithid Dude · #**1455** Posted **Jan 13, 2011, 6:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdiederi

Ah, okay, 500 ft tall existing buildings:

Houston 31
Miami 27
Los Angeles 22

And, crazily enough, Miami has six more under construction.

robhut · #**1456** Posted **Jan 13, 2011, 8:30 AM**

Miami, like L.A doesn't have only one skyline, Miami metro has Sunny Isles and Aventura, which are impressive by themselves.

pesto · #**1457** Posted **Jan 13, 2011, 6:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

C'mon, 3-5 stories is just an exaggeration. 10-15 story towers are very feasible in large numbers in this town.

true, but why? The nicest neighborhoods in SF, NY, London, Paris, Berlin, etc., are not 10-20 stories. They are 3-5 or so.

Another problem is that, in general, demand is highest on the westside, which is also where many of the best established sfh neighborhoods are. Proposals for 10-15 next to them will get shot down immediately.

Conversely, in Hollywood or Westlake, along some larger streets 10-15 is fine, assuming 3-5 story in the side streets. But I'm not sure if there is sufficient demand to convert huge areas this way.

JDRCRASH · #**1458** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 6:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pesto

true, but why? The nicest neighborhoods in SF, NY, London, Paris, Berlin, etc., are not 10-20 stories. They are 3-5 or so.

A alot of those "nice" neighborhoods are so largely because they're very old.

Quote:

Proposals for 10-15 next to them will get shot down immediately.

Perhaps in today's era of NIMBYism (but even then, i'm not seeing a lot of opposition in the news for density lately as I used to), but 10 years from now, I assure you, it will be MUCH different.

pesto · #**1459** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 6:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

A alot of those "nice" neighborhoods are so largely because they're very old.

Perhaps in today's era of NIMBYism (but even then, i'm not seeing a lot of opposition in the news for density lately as I used to), but 10 years from now, I assure you, it will be MUCH different.

I'm not so sure. Broadly speaking, I think it will be very similar 10 years from now.

Some things never change. People are not going to spend 500k and up for a house and then let someone destroy the neighborhood without a fight. I look for Carthay, Hancock Park, Westwood, BH, most of SM and Weho, pretty much anything in the hills and many other neighborhoods to be essentially unchanged. Even 20 years from now.

Why mess with the areas of LA that have actual functioning neighborhoods when so many areas are decayed, mixed apartment and dilapidated housing, mixed industrial and slum housing, dying small commercial, and parking lots? More likely for changes: Hollywood, E. Hollywood, Westlake, Ktown, the Marina, Venice, areas around Beverly Center and others.

The reason that neighborhoods are nice is not because they are old; there are plenty of old neighborhoods that are not nice and plenty of new neighborhoods that are nice. The reasons they are desirable are varied, but they turn on nearness to amenities, consistency of the neighborhood, quality of construction, and others. They DO NOT turn on being high-rise. Although there are expensive high rise neighborhoods, they don’t tend to be the ones with the best street life.

Sodha · #**1460** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 8:23 PM**

Can LA build reasonable 3 - 5 story mixed use buildings with it's ridiculous high parking minimums? Maybe that's why we get expansive huge 20 story building proposals, just so the project can pencil out financially. Those parking structures cost a lot. Build a 50 unit building, with 30 spaces; not every single person needs a parking spot. If they want parking, they should pay for the spot in a nearby lot and pay a fair price. Then we get some nice infill and dense housing in the central core.