LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[BrandonJXN]

^ Really? South Park is not JUST a sports entertainment district. A block away, the South Group is filled with normal people doing their daily duties. These types of buildings, while not the greatest designs, are vital in making downtown more of a neighborhood.

So relax young Padawan.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesDreamin

it looks like a Northern San Diego suburb bldg. at least Libeskind drew more attention positive or negative.. the bldg would have gotten known, ppl would have mentioned dtla more.. "did you see that weird lookin bldg in DTLA??"

I'd share your pov, LAD, if I believed the hood had the ability to attract lots & lots of new businesses (with big $$$) & lot & lots of ppl (with $$$) over the next few yrs. but I don't see that happening.

a Libeskind type of bldg may be possible 20 or 30 yrs from now, but not before then. if someone actually tried to build it in the near future, not only would it require banks or investors to loan a huge amt of money that's no longer available, but to make the proj pencil out, the devlpr would have to charge future tenants big $$$ in rent per month.

another reason I can't go over a proposed large landmark tower being substituted with a short bldg is cuz my impatience over changing the status quo is too great. I can't tolerate the following type of view any longer, which is too typical of much of south pk, & hasn't changed much in yrs & yrs, & yrs.....



the article also says the proj may break ground in the next 8 months, or the 2nd qtr of 2012, or hopefully no later than next June. if so---& considering how lifeless the economy is right now----that alone makes me wanna:

I also wanna cuz this thread finally----FINALLY!!!----is dealing with an actual new proj. It's hard to consider this a forum for "dt proj rundown 4.0" when so little new devlpt is happening in dt, & so many postings here are forced to duplicate what goes on in an "urban planning 1.0" college course.

[edluva]

intelligent discussion going on here

LA really needs decent looking architecture. this city looks like trash and the new developments we've seen over the past decade only reinforce that fact.

it's always a shock to spend time in a more sophisticated place, and return to see the amount of junk that constitutes our metro, where every new building seems to have an obnoxiously tacky attention-grabbing theme to it. stucco asshats, white elephants (literally as well as figuratively), theme-park shopping centers, and pseudo-modern glass facades, which will only look sleek for about 8 years until the next remodel attempting to ape the latest architectural fad. billions of dollars wasted for shitty architecture and superficial "updates"

why can't we just build a solidly good looking building?

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by edluva

why can't we just build a solidly good looking building?

Oh, we can, and we have. The question is, why can't we build rough good looking buildings to fill an area. It seems that for every attractive building that is built in Los Angeles, two ugly buildings are built along with it. It is extremely aggravating, and bugs me to no end. Id say, the reason this happens is because, in L.A., people settle for what they have got. Like take this forum for example. Everyone seems to like the proposed building because it is 'better' then what is there now. People in L.A. have no civic pride. I am positive that if this building was being built in, say, Seattle on an empty lot, people would be all against it. In L.A. It is simple better then what was there before, so why not? This behavior has to stop for L.A. to become pretty. Otherwise, L.A. will be in its ugly slump forever.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Oh, we can, and we have.

what major structure do you consider good looking? the ritz? i would disagree.

i do agree that it can be a numbers game, with all the big money flowing to developers who lack vision.

but it's not lack of civic pride that's the problem. angeleno's, in my mind, like this crap. there is even a certain style of dress that is so annoying about this city's residents, and which reflects their sense of taste. this is the only city where ordinary people strive (and fail) to look like rock stars with their goo-goo doll hairdoes and out of context overdressing, where girls push shopping carts at whole foods wearing five inch stilettos, and where you'll see an over-impeccably dressed guy standing at the front entrance to bloomingdales talking on the phone so that he can get noticed. it's the highest douchebag and hoodlum per-capita city in the world. and yet everybody's aping some movement or fad from another city. even our occupy and civil rights protests (see immigration a.k.a. "mexican nationalism" marches) are either poseur or just plain lame by virtue of the extent the feed off and ape other cities.

the "regular decent people" live in the suburbs, or are extremely poor and have no purchasing power to make a difference.

no wonder there's no architecural soul here. this city lacks it's own unique narrative.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by edluva

what major structure do you consider good looking? the ritz? i would disagree.

i do agree that it can be a numbers game, with all the big money flowing to developers who lack vision.

but it's not lack of civic pride that's the problem. angeleno's, in my mind, like this crap. there is even a certain style of dress that is so annoying about this city's residents, and which reflects their sense of taste. this is the only city where ordinary people strive (and fail) to look like rock stars with their goo-goo doll hairdoes and out of context overdressing, where girls push shopping carts at whole foods wearing five inch stilettos, and where you'll see an over-impeccably dressed guy standing at the front entrance to bloomingdales talking on the phone so that he can get noticed. it's the highest douchebag and hoodlum per-capita city in the world. and yet everybody's aping some movement or fad from another city. even our occupy and civil rights protests (see immigration a.k.a. "mexican nationalism" marches) are either poseur or just plain lame by virtue of the extent the feed off and ape other cities.

the "regular decent people" live in the suburbs, or are extremely poor and have no purchasing power to make a difference.

no wonder there's no architecural soul here. this city lacks it's own unique narrative.

Wouldn't what you just described be considered the cities unique narrative? And I don't necessarily agree with you analysis. The places were this inheritly trendy quality you just described is most prominent happens to also be the areas that have the best arctecture (Venice, West Hollywood) . They are also the places where peoplpelove where they live. I think when people are proud of where they live, they strive to make it more beautiful. And the inverse as well.

Oh, and in terms of major buildings built that I like, I happen to find most of the new civic buildings atractive, specifically the LACMA Headquarters, Caltrans, and some of the police stations. Of course, we can't discount Disney Hall, which is an L.A. icon in itself. Also, the brand new Red Building at the Pacific Design Center is stunning, IMO.

[LA/OCman]

Living Downtown you really understand that the development is all about making neighborhoods pedestrian friendly, filling in gaps and restoration of historic buildings. We can also look forward to the Korean Air project, the Broad Museum, the renovation of 7th and Fig, the Genesis Apts, Spring St Park and the Civic Center Park, and the EXPO line. In my neighborhood, Baco on Main, the Artisan Market and Restaurant on 6th are about to open, the renovation of Clifton's into a 24 hour restaurant, bar and bakery is underway plus there are great new additions like the Pattern Bar, the Salvage Bar and Perch.

Downtown is changing...to me, livability is #1. The glitz and excitement of new skyscrapers will come as the economy improves. Quality projects will develop.

For those of you who don't live Downtown...come have a pizza at Urbano, have a cocktail at the Varnish or the Edison and enjoy the LA Phil or the LA Opera on Bunker Hill. Lots to do down here. Some of the best architecture downtown is in the interior space right now. I am enjoying the ride.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by edluva

what major structure do you consider good looking? the ritz? i would disagree.

I'm going to say that if the Ritz Carlton was built in any city not named Los Angeles, you would have been like "wow, look at that fine 55 story iconic hotel tower built in XXXX".

The Ritz is a fashionable building that has made a positive mark in downtown LA. Watch the Mtv Music Awards 2 months ago...it reinforces the image of a "world-wide stage" (they used the INSIDE of a hotel for their "black carpet affair".......I'd like to see any other place outside of Vegas that happens).

I'd like to thrown in the South buildings, Concerto as well as "pretty cool" new buildings that have been built over the last decade. Then, I would knock in the SLS, W Hotel in Hollywood, etc... as other very cool iconic buldings built in LA. Also, the revamp of the Historic Core over the last decade has seen complete dilipidated buildings go from dirty into revamped, clean and really ridiciulously good looking icons (Rowan, Continental, San Pedro, SB buildings, Roosevelt, etc...).

So, to give a general statement that the last 10 years has been "blah..."; is kind of dismissing what has truly happened in downtown LA. I don't think you've seen this much excitement in any other city over last 10 years.

[OneMetropolis]

Originally Posted by citywatch

I'd share your pov, LAD, if I believed the hood had the ability to attract lots & lots of new businesses (with big $$$) & lot & lots of ppl (with $$$) over the next few yrs. but I don't see that happening.

a Libeskind type of bldg may be possible 20 or 30 yrs from now, but not before then. if someone actually tried to build it in the near future, not only would it require banks or investors to loan a huge amt of money that's no longer available, but to make the proj pencil out, the devlpr would have to charge future tenants big $$$ in rent per month.

another reason I can't go over a proposed large landmark tower being substituted with a short bldg is cuz my impatience over changing the status quo is too great. I can't tolerate the following type of view any longer, which is too typical of much of south pk, & hasn't changed much in yrs & yrs, & yrs.....



, article also says the proj may break ground in the next 8 months, or the 2nd qtr of 2012, or hopefully no later than next June. if so---& considering how lifeless the economy is right now----that alone makes me wanna:

I also wanna cuz this thread finally----FINALLY!!!----is dealing with an actual new proj. It's hard to consider this a forum for "dt proj rundown 4.0" when so little new devlpt is happening in dt, & so many postings here are forced to duplicate what goes on in an "urban planning 1.0" college course.

Maybe

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Did you guys see what New York is doing with their space shuttle??? It's GORGEOUS!!!

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2011/11/04/zomg_could_this_be_new_york_citys_space_shuttle_museum.php

And what is Los Angeles doing?? something kinda lame -__-''

[jamesinclair]

Originally Posted by ThreeHundred

There is a few random stairways to heaven all over LA. And they appear in the most random places.

For example, this is a picture I took right next to 1055 W. 7th. I don't know why it's there or it's purpose but it is interesting.

Note that the section I highlighted appears to have "new" streetlights, so it must be open to the public.

Has anyone ever used it?

[DJM19]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesDreamin

Did you guys see what New York is doing with their space shuttle??? It's GORGEOUS!!!

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2011/11/04/zomg_could_this_be_new_york_citys_space_shuttle_museum.php

And what is Los Angeles doing?? something kinda lame -__-''

We dont know what the science center will do. Lets not knock it before they even release a design.

[dktshb]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

Well, the Libeskind Tower is officially dead (as if anyone thought that would actually happen), but the upside is that construction may be coming to that plot rather soon. The plan looks like a good one, even if the design is just so-so. I abhor stucco, but metal window mullions throughout - and especially at the corners - help soften the blow. The better part of this plan is that it will have street frontage on Figueroa & Flower, whereas the previous plan treated Flower like a red-headed stepchild. Plus all the parking is now below grade. +10 Urban Design Points.


From Curbed LA:


Image Credit: Cypress Equity Investments

Downtown Libeskind Tower Replaced With Two Seven Story Apartment Buildings
Thursday, November 3, 2011, by Adrian Glick Kudler

Remember January 2009 when you first caught a glimpse of that fellow on the left--Daniel Libeskind's rendering for a 43 story condo building in South Park--and you were like "Really? That? For Downtown? In 2009?" And then you found out it had also been planned for New Jersey in 2005 and São Paulo in 2010? Well, it's dead. Good luck with that, Brazil. The building's site on Figueroa, across from the Convention Center, went up for sale in May, and blogdowntown reports today that it was snapped up in September by a joint venture of Cypress Equity Investments and Fifield Companies, who plan to put up two seven story apartment towers (For Downtown? In 2011?).

Read the full story - and inevitable snarky comments - here.

Well the fact that the parking is below grade is a good thing. I am not really feeling the design of the actual apartment but I am so tired of this city allowing for parking structures at the base of buildings rather than making developers put them below grade. I am really glad that the Lebeskind building isn't going in.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesDreamin

Did you guys see what New York is doing with their space shuttle??? It's GORGEOUS!!!

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2011/11/04/zomg_could_this_be_new_york_citys_space_shuttle_museum.php

And what is Los Angeles doing?? something kinda lame -__-''

actually i dont think its gorgeous and LA hasnt even released its plans.

[JDRCRASH]

^ I have a feeling if it was built in LA, a certain troll here would pile on it...

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

actually i dont think its gorgeous and LA hasnt even released its plans.

well maybe gorgeous wasn't the right word for it haha but it is a pretty looking building... LA planned on putting the shuttle upright as if it were ready for lift of i believe.. thats what i remember reading at least. The way NY is doing it is laying it on it's "stomach" so that people can walk all around and observe the whole thing and most likely walk-ins to see whats inside, you can't do that when the shuttle is "standing" vertically.

So hopefully LA does something amazing also.. we'll just wait and see i guess

[alki]

Originally Posted by jamesinclair

LA
Las Vegas
Mexico City
Salt Lake City

There are certainly enough markets to support expansion.

I agree. I am not sure why the NFL doesn't move forward with the expansion. Probably has to do with the NFL pot and how its divvied up.

[alki]

Originally Posted by Westsidelife

Perfect density. I'd much rather fill in Downtown with mid-rise buildings like that than encourage height for the sake of having an enlarged skyline. The height should only come when there is an actual need for it.

Couldn't agree with you more. Building mid rises fills up vacant land a lot faster than a couple of hi rises. There is a new office and residential district forming near DT Seattle. Less than 10 years ago, the area was mostly parking lots. Its now filled with 8-12 story bldgs with only a few empty lots evident. I was there seeing a friend earlier today and was surprised at the changes.

I would not think it inappropriate to see infill projects of comparable mid rise size get built east of Broadway and south of 7th, and leave hi rise development to the west of broadway and north of 7th.

[alki]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesDreamin

Why are people afraid of height here??? How about the city put a 500ft height limit in the area east of Main street. That's the way it is in Downtown San Diego and its seen as not too short and not too tall... sort of a "Goldilocks Limit" ITS JUUUUUSST RIGHT. So the area will have varied bldg heights. a win win for those who like tall bldgs and those who don't.

If any of you ever walked in SD the bldgs are tall but they're not tall you know?? i just think putting ONLY 7 story bldgs in downtown is just a waste of the space above it.. like how the space above the convention center is a waste, i believe they have the zoning rights to build taller on that spot, but its not being used. maybe in the outlying areas like in Silverlake, Lincoln Heights, Boyle Heights and USC area.. but not in all of downtown.

Whose afraid of height? Not me.

Height has little to do with a city's vibrancy. The most exciting cities in the world have height restrictions. In fact, height can hurt a city's vitality.....not help it.

[alki]

Originally Posted by Steve2726

This is a great post with excellent observations. It's too bad the city is broke and doesn't care about cleaning up large swaths of different neighborhoods. There's so much potential that could be realized thru simple means like fixing sidewalks, changing zoning, etc.

I agree. And let me add to your list.......planting trees, encouraging shop owners to put up hanging pots, putting some restrictions on the size of signs and encouraging better quality signs, tag people who park their cars on their lawns [I know this is a residential issue but it used to annoy the hell out of me], etc.