LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[pesto]

Originally Posted by ThreeHundred

Well..as far as I can tell, the area hasn't gentrified much. Which isn't to say it won't as I found a large studio for $650. I supposed I'm one of the first to help gentrify Westlake because I haven't seen any other gay 6'6 black guys walking down Alvarado. Although I feel as though this area, while having tons of potential of becoming an area like Silverlake, it has too much of a neighborhood presence I think.

I'm going to guess that Koreans are going to drive the gentrification of Westlake (plus some hipsters). You constantly see people in the LA Korean press talk about how clean, uncrowded, new and full of opportunities LA is.

You can walk along Wilshire and around Lafayette Park to see the Korean encroachment from the west. And, over time, the Latinos become more stable and wealthier as well, assuming a reasonable economy.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

You sound very bitter. Look, downtown LA has immense demand today than it did 10 years ago. Look at Spring street and 7th street after 7 pm at night.......it's literally night/day in terms of nightlife than 10 years ago. So to say its "going to s***s" is just more emotional than truth. Also, there is still plenty of new restaurants/buildings/development happening in downtown LA than in a lot of other parts of LA. So there is demand people. But maybe for you, it's just not there. Sorry, I haven't heard the mass exodus of rumors in my building and we're so happy to get a brand new Starbucks downstairs and the cafe opening up catty-corner from us....here at 9th/Flower.

There's a reason rents are high here........because people want to be here.

exactly. rental vacancy in downtown LA is somewhere near 3.5% for a reason.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by pesto

I'm going to guess that Koreans are going to drive the gentrification of Westlake (plus some hipsters). You constantly see people in the LA Korean press talk about how clean, uncrowded, new and full of opportunities LA is.

You can walk along Wilshire and around Lafayette Park to see the Korean encroachment from the west. And, over time, the Latinos become more stable and wealthier as well, assuming a reasonable economy.

agreed. ive always thought that the Koreantown borders will continue to expand until it reaches downtown LA. its a good thing though, they bring money and investment that will improve the area.

[Kingofthehill]

Originally Posted by pesto

I'm going to guess that Koreans are going to drive the gentrification of Westlake (plus some hipsters). You constantly see people in the LA Korean press talk about how clean, uncrowded, new and full of opportunities LA is.

You can walk along Wilshire and around Lafayette Park to see the Korean encroachment from the west. And, over time, the Latinos become more stable and wealthier as well, assuming a reasonable economy.

When the Latinos stabilize (they actually are, but the successful ones are far outnumbered by poor, uneducated new arrivals) and break away from the downward socioeconomic trajectory prevalent in the barrio, they tend to go to places like Downey, Whittier, Montebello, Lakewood, etc. Westlake is pretty much where the dregs (i.e, the worst-off) of Central America come, and it is their culture and customs that personify the area. Most educated and wealthy Latinos don't have, or want to have, anything to do with Westlake.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

When the Latinos stabilize (they actually are, but the successful ones are far outnumbered by poor, uneducated new arrivals) and break away from the downward socioeconomic trajectory prevalent in the barrio, they tend to go to places like Downey, Whittier, Montebello, Lakewood, etc. Westlake is pretty much where the dregs (i.e, the worst-off) of Central America come, and it is their culture and customs that personify the area. Most educated and wealthy Latinos don't have, or want to have, anything to do with Westlake.

Agreed; that's what my family did 50 years ago (Wyvernwood to Glendale). In fact, hardly anyone educated and wealthy looks to Westlake.

But I am hoping that with the trend toward urban living, there will be some percentage that move to the new or old mid-rise buildings in the area instead of the SGV. The Koreans will certainly press for changes in quality of schools, which is a big driver for families. Admitedly the area has a long way to go.

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by pesto

Agreed; that's what my family did 50 years ago (Wyvernwood to Glendale). In fact, hardly anyone educated and wealthy looks to Westlake.

But I am hoping that with the trend toward urban living, there will be some percentage that move to the new or old mid-rise buildings in the area instead of the SGV. The Koreans will certainly press for changes in quality of schools, which is a big driver for families. Admitedly the area has a long way to go.

We actually looked around for apartments in Westlake before we moved to Koreatown. I figured, why not? Its close to Downtown, has a metro station, good bus service, a giant park, and some beautiful old buildings. I can take some grit, especially if it means saving some $ . Unfortunately, most of what we found were studios, and some tiny 1-bedrooms. For a couple with 2 cats and a dog, that just doesn't cut it. It would be cool if some of those nice old brick apartment midrises were rehabed, maybe combining smaller units together to create fewer but larger units. I don't see this happening for a while though.

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by pesto

You constantly see people in the LA Korean press talk about how clean, uncrowded, new and full of opportunities LA is.

What Korean press did you see that in? I'm always curious what Koreans in Korea think of Koreatown, LA. There is such a large population of Koreans and Korean-Americans in K-town, it seems like it would have to be pretty well known back in Korea. Its not like every city has a Koreatown that takes up such a significant portion of the city center. It's pretty unique.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

What Korean press did you see that in? I'm always curious what Koreans in Korea think of Koreatown, LA. There is such a large population of Koreans and Korean-Americans in K-town, it seems like it would have to be pretty well known back in Korea. Its not like every city has a Koreatown that takes up such a significant portion of the city center. It's pretty unique.

I often stay in Ktown and there are local advertisers and community newspapers in the lobby. It used to make me laugh at what Seoul must be like because they talk about the modern housing, open space, cleanliness, etc., of that 'hood even 10-15 years ago, when it was still pretty marginal.

[Quixote]

Some news pertinent to Farmers Field:

The Vikings have finalized a deal to build a new stadium at the current site of the Metrodome. That leaves the Rams as the only NFC team viable for relocation.

What else happened today? The Rams rejected the CVC's proposal to renovate the EJD. This comes just a few weeks after Kroenke announced his interest in bidding for the Dodgers.

Rams are coming home soon!

[Mojeda101]

LA Rams? I'd welcome them with open arms. =]

[JDRCRASH]

Wow, not only could we be getting an NFL team, we could be getting an NFL team that might be really good in a few years.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

LA Rams? I'd welcome them with open arms. =]

Hey, at least it isn't The Raiders.

[pesto]

This has been getting some attention in other threads and in the news. Kroenke would buy the Dodgers and the parking lots around the stadium for, say, 2B. He could then build his own stadium there (and rent to the Chargers or Raiders if that works out) and control the "game day experience". Presumably he would add bars, restaurants, studios, VIP housing, entertainment, a museum, conference spaces, etc. Kroenke has experience and organizations in real estate and in media operations, so he doesn't need partners there. So it's the Nirvana of any developer.

The sticking point (as it is for all buyers) is the parking lots, which McCourt says he won't sell. If this is true, Kroenke has Dodger Stadium literally surrounded by a tough, ego-centric developer he can't control; plus a negotiation with AEG, whose current offer the NFL has made clear is not close to being acceptable (control of revenue sources, among other thngs).

Should be a great source of entertainment for a few weeks. Hopefully not much longer than that.

[StethJeff]

I remember getting a questionnaire email from the MLS several months ago asking me to rate fan experience at the Home Depot Center, # of games I go to, etc. In it they asked about how much interest I would have in a team that would play in DTLA, whether it be a current team (i.e. Galaxy or Chivas) vs. a new team. I would kill to be able to walk to Galaxy games downtown!

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

I remember getting a questionnaire email from the MLS several months ago asking me to rate fan experience at the Home Depot Center, # of games I go to, etc. In it they asked about how much interest I would have in a team that would play in DTLA, whether it be a current team (i.e. Galaxy or Chivas) vs. a new team. I would kill to be able to walk to Galaxy games downtown!

At this point, where would we put a third stadium? Level Skid Row and the Fashion District? Actually, that might not be a bad idea....

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

At this point, where would we put a third stadium? Level Skid Row and the Fashion District? Actually, that might not be a bad idea....

I think the idea was to have games (likely games where they'd expect large attendance ) at Farmer's. Maybe trying to emulate what the Sounders are able to do up in Seattle. That or maybe in the hole that would be created when they tear down the Sports Arena - I think I remember seeing some of those photos floating around SSP somewhere.

Honestly, anything but Home Depot Center. That place is far from everyone, it sits on a college campus, has nothing in the immediate vicinity, and has no public transport . I'd go to more than just my usual 1 or 2 games a season if the stadium were more accessible. Put the Galaxy in Farmers or anywhere near a DTLA metro stop and I guarantee you a huge boost attendance and popularity. Considering the rabid fanbase, their recent success, HUGE future with Keane/Donovan/Buddle, some no-name brit david fucking BECKHAM, and probably the best live fan experience in LA sports (yes I said it) - oh dear my head is spinning at how awesome they'd be in Farmers.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by pesto

plus a negotiation with AEG, whose current offer the NFL has made clear is not close to being acceptable (control of revenue sources, among other thngs).

the NFL deserves this... & this... if they put up big roadblocks to making the new stadium next to staples a done deal. But other cities may hope that's exactly what happens, for they'd then have to compete with what could become one of the best setups for the NFL's annual big party.

this is one of 2 articles I've read over the past several wks that have given to the stadium in indianapolis & it being the location of this yr's super bowl. What is true of that city would seem to apply even more to a new stadium next to LA live in dtla...

The Secret to a Successful Urban Stadium

I’ve had several occasions in the past three years or so to travel to Indianapolis, site of last Sunday’s Super Bowl. I am always struck, riding in from the airport, by how well Lucas Oil Stadium, where this year’s NFL championship game was held, fits architecturally within (or right next to, depending on your perspective) the city’s downtown.

It’s a six or seven block walk from Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument, the symbolic center of the city. Most of the city’s big hotels and restaurants are also nearby. Not that Indy isn’t also plagued by sprawl and disinvested neighborhoods, by the way, but its relatively compact, walkable downtown is loaded with convenience compared to the locations of most NFL football facilities. Indeed, Lucas Oil Stadium has a "very walkable" Walk Score of 72. (By contrast, FedEx Field, where the Washington Redskins play, rates only a "car-dependent" 28.)

This point was not lost on the members of the press who were in town for the game. The most articulate was probably Robert Niles of the trade site Theme Park Insider, who hails the advantages of urbanism for a city hosting a major entertainment event:

Indy nailed this Super Bowl because of infrastructure. No, its football stadium isn't the biggest. Its hotels aren't the fanciest nor are its restaurants world-renowned. But they are packed together within walking distance of each other in Indianapolis' pedestrian-friendly downtown. Take a 20-minute cab ride from the city's new airport, and you don't have to get in a car again all week. The high density of attractions gave the city a critical mass, turning downtown into a multi-day street party ...

It's all about convenience and walkability. People don't want to have to spend a big chunk of their vacation in taxis or rental cars, as they did in Dallas at last year's Super Bowl. If you can offer people a destination where hotels, restaurants and attractions are all within easy walking distance, you're going to have an advantage over an alternative that requires people to get into their cars and drive for 10, 20, 30 minutes or more between where they stay, where they eat and where they play.

Peter King, the lead writer on the NFL beat for Sports Illustrated, agrees:

It's been a great game site for the Super Bowl. So much to do downtown, all on foot, and the natives and even the drunks are in great moods. The meteorologists have helped, but there's something to be said for a vibrant downtown hosting everything at a Super Bowl, and holding the Super Bowl in a place where you never have to get in a car.

In a second article, King continued the praise by noting that he basically didn't need a car all week, and that the New York Giants’ downtown hotel was only four blocks from the stadium.

this is the view of one side of the stadium in indianapolis....


maps.google.com

^ I'd say that if the city in indiana makes for a good site for each year's most watched event on TV, of the most popular sport in america today, then dtla, even with all its deadzones around staples, should be that much better.

LA hasn't hosted a super bowl since the early 1990s, while it playing host to the academy awards doesn't mean as much as it used to, since I've read that event has lost alot of its original popularity. It's easily no longer the biggest special event each yr on TV. times have changed, & it's time LA again have a connection to america's most watched sport.

[alki]

I know this is OT but I had such a strong, visceral reaction to this new building going up in Baku, I couldn't resist posting it. To me it looks like an alien building birthing itself in the center of the city. Its called the flame tower:

[alki]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

I deleted a lot of off topic posts. Anyone's definition of "westside" or "eastside," whether objective or subjective, has nothing - NOTHING - to do with Downtown projects and developments, which is the topic of this forum. Please keep posts in this forum on that very subject.

I disagree. The westside vs eastside perception that exists in LA has a lot to do with the current state of DTLA. The whole city is skewed to the west side in a fashion that makes DTLA redundant. When a multi media company like TMZ decides to move because it needs more space, it doesn't consider DTLA. Instead, it moves from Weho to Playa del Vista and doubles its square footage.

The vacancy factor for LA County and DTLA office space currently is around 20%. Its 12% for the Westside due to new users coming into the market pretty regularly this past year. That's not happening in DTLA with the exception of a couple of architectural firms that can't afford the Westside any longer. The vast majority of new users are not considering DTLA......they are looking at commercial nodes on the Westside and maybe the Valley. That means the Westside is a major job engine for LA, not DT. DTLA gets the table scraps.....whatever drops to the floor.

When LA's DT, Century City, started to fill and there was little land for expansion, developers moved over to Playa del Vista. The whole city is tilted 'unnaturally' to the Westside even to the point where what should be the city's Eastside is actually unincorporated LA county. To ignore that issue and not bring it into the discussion is ignoring reality IMO.

The Westside and the Valley have sucked the life out of DTLA, made it irrelevant and stunted its growth. Its left LA with numerous faux hearts and no real heart. Its why LA empitomizes the concept of sprawl. I believe its one of the reasons why metro LA is not the economic juggernaut it was just 20 years ago.

If DTLA is going to regain its rightful place as the heart of the metro area, its going to have to take on the Westside at some point. It might be nice to contemplate when that might happen on this thread.

[alki]

Originally Posted by citywatch

^ I'd say that if the city in indiana makes for a good site for each year's most watched event on TV, of the most popular sport in america today, then dtla, even with all its deadzones around staples, should be that much better.

City, you are not doing Indy justice.....sounds like flyover 'tude. For thirty years, Indy has worked its butt off to become a sports capital. It has been sponsoring major sporting events for nearly 20 years...........big ones.......like the Pan Am games. It has worked overtime to make DT Indy the success it is today. Its a DT that was successful enough to snag a Nordstorm's only to lose it.

Here's a very abbreviated version of what the city has done to get to where it is.......a successful host of Superbowl 46:

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/pa...polis_has_become_city_that_doesnt_sleep/

Having said that, I agree with you..........LA needs to start diversifying away from the Industry. At one time, films was just part of LA's economic growth engine.........in fact, its major raison d'etre was as a manufacturing center......along with defense, shipping and tourism.....and in small letters, the industry. But in the last 20 years, its lost most of its manufacturing and defense industries, and is much more dependent on shipping, tourism and Hollywood. Something needs to take the place of the lost manufacturing. After all, LA is the second largest metro in the country.