LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

You mean this?


Wikipedia

I don't think that counts.

THAT IS JUST PITIFUL...

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Don't we have a water feature at Pershing Square? How's that doing?

Right...what I was getting at is there no shortage of water fountain areas...the problem is putting it in a dense area; and not in a plaza that's fenced off from a public area. Though I love Nokia Plaza for what it brings, it's not a central urban area to bring people together, much less anything would change due to a fountain. I hope the new Civic Park will create that, however, it's located in an area where there are no residential buildings within footsteps (more like a 15 minute walk minimum). The Spring Street park has the potential to be a great gathering place. A revamped fountain at Pershing Square would be awesome (it's already amazing at nights with the free concert series). Pershing Square is our CENTRAL gathering spot. Let's work to improve that. LA Live! will not achieve that, so it's a waste to get a fountain in that area. It's like putting a fountain at City Walk...an enclaved area.

[JDRCRASH]

I'm gonna update page 1 for the Metropolis update. I'm gonna change the rendering. But since there isn't any official word on the exact height, I'll leave that alone.

But based on it's current projection, is it safe to say this thing is "Approved"?

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Right...what I was getting at is there no shortage of water fountain areas...the problem is putting it in a dense area; and not in a plaza that's fenced off from a public area. Though I love Nokia Plaza for what it brings, it's not a central urban area to bring people together, much less anything would change due to a fountain. I hope the new Civic Park will create that, however, it's located in an area where there are no residential buildings within footsteps (more like a 15 minute walk minimum). The Spring Street park has the potential to be a great gathering place. A revamped fountain at Pershing Square would be awesome (it's already amazing at nights with the free concert series). Pershing Square is our CENTRAL gathering spot. Let's work to improve that. LA Live! will not achieve that, so it's a waste to get a fountain in that area. It's like putting a fountain at City Walk...an enclaved area.

I agree with you that Pershing Square is the central gathering spot. But I think Nokia Plaza would be much improved with a fountain too. LA Live has plenty of foot traffic...its just that no one wants to stop and linger...they're either on their way to/from a basketball game, concern, movie, or restaurant.

This is all academic anyway. I had neglected to think about this when I posted earlier, but Nokia Plaza can never be a true gathering space, because its not actually public space. Its all private property, owned by AEG. I bet if you tried sitting down on the pavement in the middle of the plaza the way you could in Pershing Square, a security guard would be over in 30 seconds asking you politely to get up and go elsewhere. Nokia Plaza is an illusion of public space, designed specifically to sell you stuff.

[alki]

Originally posted by DistrictDirt

Wall Street torpedoed the economy, not the mayor. And I'm not sure what you're proposing here...it doesn't matter how cheap materials are if the financing for major projects just isn't there.

More importantly, without job growth, there is not a great need for more offices and to a lesser degree, apts. And contrary to what some of the press are reporting, most banks aren't lending for new construction.

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by alki

Originally posted by Brigham Yen



When I would walk the streets of DTLA, I always envisioned Broadway as developing into a La Brea circa late 90s and 7th Street becoming high end retail.......not high, high end but stuff like Nike's or Banana Republic. I always saw the Bank District as a potential Soho.

Restaurants tend to be urban pioneers that are low margin affairs even if they serve alcohol. Typically, they are the first wave into a commercial strip that has the potential to turn around. That was 7th Street a few years back and the restaurants are doing what they typically do.....bringing new life to the street.

However, I don't think this is the final configuration for 7th. It really lends itself to retail. Macy's could be a formidable anchor.....esp. if the damn building is renovated and opened up to the street. The old Robinson's store could be another anchor.....with its high ceilings......the upper floors could be turned into a mid rise mall or offices. Then there is the old Bullock's store at the corner of 7th and Broadway. What's happening with it?

Given the greediness of LA landlords and their propensity to take advantage of a street that's turning, I don't see restaurants staying long term on 7th. I bet in ten years more and more retail will be on 7th and it will act as a connector between Fig@7h and Broadway. FWIW.

I myself have always envisioned 7th as a shopping corridor... would be cool if Broadway got back the high end department flagship stores and retail like G for Guess, H&M, Express, XXI, etc etc and 7th st being an extension of the shopping district... but i love that it contains lots of restaurants as well. stores you would see around San Francisco's Union Square.

One day i wanna see Angelenos in the city dress fashionable yet very practical... like how they do in NYC or all over Europe. something that pops "Yes, this is LA fashion" lol... now i know of you on here are annoyed of that stuff so please don't hate me (>.<) haha

[alki]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

Target progress

Did all the stores close in the mall that preceded Target? When I lived in LA, it was not the most successful mall but it was pretty much 80% occupied. Did that change after I left? TIA.

[alki]

Originally Posted by UrbanJungle

As for Pesto's comment about not approving projects "not good for the long term," all I can say is, "have you looked at an aerial photo of downtown lately?" We have blocks and blocks of surface parking lots and underutilized land in great locations. There is no shortage of development opportunity. I say we need to support projects that bring new jobs, provide more housing, provide retail services, and link the pockets of development throughout downtown into one cohesive whole. And that's saying a lot, and that requires a lot of new development. I think we should be focusing on that, and not whining about some project that will be 12 or 16 stories vs. 40.

I agree with pretty much all you say.........and let me add, the powers to be in LA need to get serious about job creation. Without new jobs, there won't be the kind of demand needed for skyscraper offices and apts/condos. Currently, LA job growth is fairly anemic......its lagging pretty much every major city, and frankly, I don't see from where the new jobs will come.

At the same time, one must remember that LA tends to run to fantasy and this blog plays into that fantasy mode. Some people enjoy imagining what things could be like. Nothing wrong with that. Its visionary and IMO we need that esp in times like these.

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by BrighamYen

I don't get some of the ugly sad faces in this forum, lamenting over Metropolis' lack of height and "poor design." The fact that this project will be from 4 to 12 to 16 stories in staggered height is nothing to sneer at, like I said before. Just because it's not 30 stories tall across the board doesn't make this project a failure.

What will be important to most people is whether or not there will be great businesses to shop at. Not how "pretty" this building will look. In fact, this building looks modern and blends into the area fine. It reminds me somewhat of the South Group towers (Elleven and Luma) bunched up together.

Also, I am more concerned about how Metropolis meets the street/sidewalks than what it'll look like from the 10 freeway as part of the skyline.

Metropolis will be a game-changing project for Downtown LA because of its retail component that LA Live lacks. This inevitably will attract other retailers to the area and start filling up empty spaces or taking over crappy stores/restaurants. The chance that Trader Joes MIGHT take the space in 845 S Fig is amazing enough.

And like I said before, there are PLENTY of parking lots throughout downtown that could use a few more skyscrapers. Plenty. Metropolis taking up an empty parcel actually increases the chance of something else taller going up nearby. But to reiterate, as a pedestrian on the street, 12 to 16 stories will definitely be a nice height.

I completely agree =]... I'm more worried about what my friends from the bay area will think of it at a pedestrian level rather than at the skyline, but i do think it would have been nice if it kept it's height. but as you said, there are plenty of empty lots for skyscraper high development. As far as the design, i love it... its very glassy and blends in well with the other glassy buildings in south park. I was reading on curbed LA that people were complaining that it should have been made a park -__-'' i think the civic park is enough and there are already smaller parks in the area... and also other empty lots that could be turned into another public square.

what got me was why didn't the city in the past just build another city square instead of destroying the older and more beautiful pershing square with the cherub fountain???

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

Tell 'em. The most desirable nabes in NYC are low-slung (in comparison to skyscraper-filled Midtown and Downtown) - places like the Greenwich Village, West Village, SoHo, Dumbo, Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope, et al. Same for European cities; London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Prague, et al, tend to be characterized by 4-6-story buildings. Take a peek at this Vienna thread....it should make clear that skyscrapers are not needed for a fully-functioning, vibrant neighborhood.

Also, as this photo illustrates, there is enough room for everybody:

OH MAH GAAAAHHDD!!!! My eyes hurt!!

That is TERRIBLE.

[alki]

Originally Posted by BrighamYen

I can see that vision coming to fruition especially when demand picks up. However, even though 7th Street SHOULD be the east-west corridor connecting Fig and Broadway, we can't ignore 6th, 8th, and 9th Streets with all so much potential if we can just get some damn good infills to replace those ugly surface parking lots.

Downtown LA's 7th Street is like Broadway in NY through SoHo. Then there are the side streets with more interesting boutiques, galleries and cafes that branch off of Broadway such as Prince or Spring Streets. Most of the UBER high end stores in SoHo are not on Broadway like Prada, Alexander Wang, etc.

Macy's Plaza is hands down the most valuable location right now because it sits right smack dab in all the activity happening around it. With FIGat7th and Metropolis attracting big time names, there will be a high chance another national company like Brookfield will come and purchase Macy's Plaza from the apathetic Jamison Properties.

Yes, I see the 7th street comparison to Broadway and a street like Olive would be great for signature stores like Prada. In fact the well known Olive restaurant located in the middle of the block.......its been in a couple of movies........would be perfect for a boutique. Is there alley delivery available for those streets off 7th? That might pose a problem.


As exciting as it sounds, its likely DTLA will have to wait at least another decade before it sees this kind of high end development. I think Macy's is key. You maximize that site's potential by opening it up, and I bet there will be a plethora of projects virtually overnite.

[alki]

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

You mean this?


Wikipedia

I don't think that counts.

There was a great water feature on Bunker Hill? What happened to that one?

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

I agree with you that Pershing Square is the central gathering spot. But I think Nokia Plaza would be much improved with a fountain too. LA Live has plenty of foot traffic...its just that no one wants to stop and linger...they're either on their way to/from a basketball game, concern, movie, or restaurant.

This is all academic anyway. I had neglected to think about this when I posted earlier, but Nokia Plaza can never be a true gathering space, because its not actually public space. Its all private property, owned by AEG. I bet if you tried sitting down on the pavement in the middle of the plaza the way you could in Pershing Square, a security guard would be over in 30 seconds asking you politely to get up and go elsewhere. Nokia Plaza is an illusion of public space, designed specifically to sell you stuff.

I think it's a little harder to make Nokia Plaza a place people want to sit down and linger because it's kind of out of the way right now and there isn't enough density to create the demand for more lingering.

If I'm not mistaken, Rockefeller Center in NY is private property as well but the last time I was there, I took a lunch break and saw quite a few people lingering and just sitting around (not that they looked particularly happy, but then again it's New York!).

Rockefeller Center happens to be right smack dab in the middle of EVERYTHING in Manhattan so it makes total sense that it would be incredibly crowded during lunchtime. However, even in Manhattan, when you go to the outskirts near the rivers, the crowds do disappear quite fast, and that's what we see here in LA Live where not only is it on the fringe of DTLA, but surrounded by a SEA of parking lots.

I think that once Metropolis, LA Central, Marriott Residence Inn, Courtyard, etc. are built, LA Live won't feel like it's on the fringe anymore and may alter or change its role within the context of a densifying city and Nokia Plaza may be retrofitted again to become more conducive to lingering and sitting.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by alki

Yes, I see the 7th street comparison to Broadway and a street like Olive would be great for signature stores like Prada. In fact the well known Olive restaurant located in the middle of the block.......its been in a couple of movies........would be perfect for a boutique. Is there alley delivery available for those streets off 7th? That might pose a problem.


As exciting as it sounds, its likely DTLA will have to wait at least another decade before it sees this kind of high end development. I think Macy's is key. You maximize that site's potential by opening it up, and I bet there will be a plethora of projects virtually overnite.

I totally see high-end designer boutiques take over the ground floor retail spaces of the Biltmore Hotel and other nearby buildings and eventually become a new shopping district surrounding Pershing Square.

It's possible that the ACTUAL name Pershing Square may connote shopping in the future just like when you say "Union Square SF" people usually think of shopping. Or if you say SoHo, people think of shopping now. In the future, what if people said "Pershing Square" and it became synonymous with LA's premier shopping district?

[alki]

I've noticed a thread that seems to run through some of the comments on this blog where a poster talks about wanting LA to become more like other cities that they admire. That was a lament I frequently made when I lived in LA. It was why I was disappointed with the Pershing Square renovation..........I wanted it to look more like the public spaces I had seen in other cities.

Eventually I came to realize that LA is a very unique city in this country with its own very distinctive style. Sure it can and will become a more walkable, more urbane city........but it will still be LA and will come with all the trappings that that name connotes. It was why I moved to a city that more fit my vision. I finally conceded that LA was not about to change in a direction that I wanted. It was going to do it its way and that would not make me happy.

[dachacon]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Home Depot is in City West....no need to bring another Home Depot just 2 miles on the other side of the I-110. It is already huge and has plenty of parking to boot.

Only big box retailers needed is Target (which is already slated for Fig@7th) and Bed Bath & Beyond. We have plenty of great independent furniture stores around downtown (Suburban, i2 and Loft Appeal) and then the fantastic Santa Monica/Western boulevard corridor of independent furniture stores at reasonable prices. Target and Bed Bath are what are sorely needed.

And, yes, book stores are a thing of the past....sorry to say. I don't even know why we need libraries open 7 days a week still.....I'm sorry, but the Starbucks culture changed the need for libraries as people can just bring their book, laptop or iPad, have a cup of coffee, and read/study at their leisure there. I stopped using libraries when I studied for the CPA as the Coffee Bean and Starbucks experience was way more fun and felt studious.

Libraries still are relevant, i was there just yesterday to look for something to read. cant have that experience or convenience at a starbucks.

[dachacon]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

First, a few photos from the newly-opened Pattern Bar, of which is amazing! A real joy in an otherwise uninteresting part of DTLA (Main/9th)


Good-looking building on Spring, near 7th. If renovated properly, I am sure this building could be a true gem!




Didn't quite make it to the Civic Center area, but I hope you guys were able to enjoy these photos!

Thats the old Post office building, back in the heyday of Downtown it was a 24 hour location and busiest branch in the city.

[alki]

Originally Posted by BrighamYen

I totally see high-end designer boutiques take over the ground floor retail spaces of the Biltmore Hotel and other nearby buildings and eventually become a new shopping district surrounding Pershing Square.

It's possible that the ACTUAL name Pershing Square may connote shopping in the future just like when you say "Union Square SF" people usually think of shopping. Or if you say SoHo, people think of shopping now. In the future, what if people said "Pershing Square" and it became synonymous with LA's premier shopping district?

Most definitely.........Pershing Square is no where near maximizing its potential. You would have thought the restoration of the Biltmore would have been enough of a catalyst and an anchor to make that part of DT come to life. Instead, PS has acted like the proverbial ball and chain...........and almost brought the Biltmore back down in the 90s. I also don't think the jewelry building across from the Biltmore is doing anyone any favors either.

One of the things I noticed in those photos of the roof top restaurant across from PS was how little foot traffic there was around the Square both day and nite. While there is a lot to be done in DTLA, I think the revitalization of PS area should one of its top priorities.

[milquetoast]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Boy.......if people here really hate 12 to 16 story buildings, then they must hate London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, etc.....

Most of those structures are 100 years old and built with an attention to detail you won't see these days.

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

But based on it's current projection, is it safe to say this thing is "Approved"?

Sure, why not. It sucks, so ... yeah!

.

Let's take a closer look at why this sucks:

.

.

Look at the above picture.

If ever there was a place where a self contained business park should have been created downtown, it was here. Try drawing the crowds over from LA LIVE. I see offramps from both sides of the 110 effectively cutting off pedestrian traffic from the two properties- unless some sort of massive pedestrian bridge is built at 9th (James Wood). This project should have been built one block closer to LA LIVE, in the shadow of The Ritz.

.

Yes, there are plenty of parking lots to go around, but this should be built in Hollywood at best, and doesn't belong on an elite property location like this one.

.

Just ... just a half assed, pathetic choice made here.

.

Like I've stated elsewhere, just Google "Brickell" and sit back and wonder: Why there and not here?

[pesto]

Originally Posted by BrighamYen

It's freakin 12 to 16 floors, what do you guys want?

We're already getting a supertall up the street (Wilshire Grand) at 750 and 1200 feet in the heart of the Financial District at Wilshire/Figueroa. And we're getting another 22 story hotel building (Marriotts) just a block from Metropolis by LA Live. There's still at least a half dozen empty lots SURROUNDING the Metropolis site as well, please don't forget that.

If Metropolis doesn't use its height cap, then it can eventually sell off its air rights to another developer who can build those skyscrapers nearby.

Sorry, but all you're really saying is that this is better than a parking lot. To be fair, I like the idea of development and this is not disastrous. It's just way short of what could happen on this space. The City Council should tell them to reconsider.

I agree that livable 'hoods do not have highrise; in fact, I make this point constantly about areas all over LA. But this is NOT a livable 'hood: it's between the CBD and entertainment and super-sign districts. It's NOT Greenwich Village or the Left Bank or Kensington; it's Times Sq. and La Defense and Canary Wharf.