LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[all of the trash]

Agreed. times square comparisons need to go among developers and their advertisers, and should be a bannable offense on these forums

[all of the trash]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

I ttly know what you mean about that certain forumer getting away with his advanced trolling and obnoxious Ivy League-like vernicular. It almost feels like he's talking down on us.

Yes, curse this unnamed forumer and his academic insight and his acumen. Can't have room for intelligent opposition here in the LA development forum, no sir

LA Live is an enclosed, private space, heavily regulated, run by security, insular, sterile, artificial and unless you're into lame corporate mainstream bands and music artists, or overpriced chain restaurants, or airheaded award events, poor architecture, and happen to be lucky to score overpriced lakers tickets, then this place is nothing to you, as it is to millions of angelenos.

but its shiny and has lights! I guess we have that going for our 'downtown'

[all of the trash]

LA's success is reliant on taking the focus AWAY from downtown LA and reducing our expectations and development there. Allow downtown LA to grow on a small, organic, scale, as has been the success along thoroughfares on Main and Spring and kill worthless megaprojects like the Wilshire Grand and gehry's Grand Tower which are empty hollow revenue-bleeding projects. Spread the investment to build trendy bars and venues in dense Koreatown, create vibrant communities in south LA like Leimart Park, bring transit to wealthy areas in the westside, around the beverly center, instead of trying to force wealthy people to come to downtown with halluncinations of Broadway becoming an upscale retail capital. Continue the infill around Hollywood, West Hollywood, venice, santa monica and pasadena, and extend transit there. ALL MAJOR STREETS SHOULD HAVE BIKE LANES. and not the crappy green paint spring st. kind, I mean those that run between parking lanes and sidewalks, separated by a raised curb, with landscape. You know the kind that are actually attractive to people and will get people out of their cars and on their bikes. Stop trying to develop downtown LA into the Grove or the Americana. All of LA from the ocean to boyle heights needs to be integrated into an urban framework; heavily weighted focus on downtown kills that concept. Forumers here tend to ignore and piss and spit on LA's strengths (for all the boosterism here I think I'm one of the few that actually love this city) and instead favor antiquated delusions about LA becoming a 20th century style single node center

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Yea Citywatch... I ttly know what you mean about that certain forumer getting away with his advanced trolling and obnoxious Ivy League-like vernicular. It almost feels like he's talking down on us.

Hey, there's nothing wrong with talking eloquently. Hell, I could talk just as 'ivy-league-like' if I wasn't so damn lazy.

Originally Posted by all of the trash

and unless you're into lame corporate mainstream bands and music artists, or overpriced chain restaurants, or airheaded award events, poor architecture, and happen to be lucky to score overpriced lakers tickets, then this place is nothing to you, as it is to millions of angelenos.

Sort of a weird complaint. I mean, corporate mainstream bands? Really? It's like your a hipster who isn't even trying to pretend otherwise anymore.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Sort of a weird complaint. I mean, corporate mainstream bands? Really? It's like your a hipster who isn't even trying to pretend otherwise anymore.

[Hubris]

Originally Posted by all of the trash

...Forumers here tend to ignore and piss and spit on LA's strengths (for all the boosterism here I think I'm one of the few that actually love this city) and instead favor antiquated delusions about LA becoming a 20th century style single node center

Well, this is a skyscraper forum, and skyscrapers are only found in bunches in downtown and Century City (on a much smaller scale). There's also a non-downtown thread if you find this one (you know, the downtown thread) a little too downtown-centric.

But I agree with much of what you wrote. There's more money to be made downtown, or at least developers think so, and so we're seeing more development downtown.

Yes, LA is multi-nodal. But that doesn't mean downtown can't be the hub.

[Hubris]

Originally Posted by all of the trash

LA Live is an enclosed, private space, heavily regulated, run by security, insular, sterile, artificial and unless you're into lame corporate mainstream bands and music artists, or overpriced chain restaurants, or airheaded award events, poor architecture, and happen to be lucky to score overpriced lakers tickets, then this place is nothing to you, as it is to millions of angelenos.

It's a tax-advantaged economic driver. No more, no less. It's an entertainment and events center. It's there to make money, not provide a sense of civic pride.

It's downtown's version of City Walk. I like it for what it is, and don't hate it for what it could have been.

[Hubris]

Originally Posted by dachacon

Another gripe I have is the pushy security onsite, unless your there to shop or eat they are quick to ask you to leave, No Loitering allowed.

There are places to shop?

I haven't had that experience with security. But I'm not a teenager who travels in packs with other teenagers. I don't look homeless (provided my wife has chosen my outfit). And I'm not a paparazzo staking out a celebrity.

Not saying that you're any of those things. Just noting that those are the types of folks security tends to target. Agreed that security can be pushy, consistently so with the above-mentioned groups.

But I see plenty of families just hanging out / loitering at Nokia Plaza.

[colemonkee]

all of the trash, quoting your own post with nothing else to add other than to give yourself a "standing ovation" is a bit pompous and presumptuous, at least from a personality perspective. From the forum's perspective, it's spamming the thread, and will result in a suspension next time you do it.

[Illithid Dude]

Bringing back Broadway just posted a picture of the interior of the new Clark Hotel on Facebook. And it looks.... trendy.

[dachacon]

Sexy!!

[Allnatural85]

reminds me of the Standard =)

[Allnatural85]

Some news about a potential Walmart being build in the Chinatown area... dunno if this has been posted

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=8592373

[alki]

Originally Posted by alki

You're right. The last bldg built in DTLA was in 1992 and it took nearly 5 years to lease up the space. No new office bldg will go up in DTLA period until there is better absorption.

MODERATOR EDIT: Keep the posts on topic. This thread is for downtown projects. Alki, you've been warned before. Posting images or stats from other cities in this thread will result in a suspension from the forums.

There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. The point I was making by my post is that employment growth + net absorption = a new skyscraper. And this thread is all about getting new skyscrapers in DTLA.

DTLA does not exist in a vacuum. I think its critical to know what's happening in the rest of the metro area as well as with potential competitors. SF is a natural competitor to LA. I never ignore what my competitors are doing.......but then that's me.

[alki]

Originally Posted by BrighamYen

I would like DTLA to start competing with Orange County (mainly, Irvine and Costa Mesa) instead of our Westside. There are some pretty big companies based in Orange County I would like to see come up to DTLA such as LA Fitness, Taco Bell, St. John, etc.

How reasonable is it to expect that OC companies will consider DTLA? When I was in LA, those companies chose the OC because they liked the suburban atmosphere and the county's more conservative politics. Has that changed do you think?

And let me add.......maybe a better source of DT office users than the Westside would be those users that stand alone say in Van Nuys or some other small office location. More importantly, what I am advocating is DT's active recruitment of potential users...........right now, it looks more like a hit or miss proposition.

[alki]

Originally Posted by citywatch

When I first saw that I went "whoa! & YES!" Then I thought it was a shame that no LA forumer must be spending much time walking or driving around dt, cuz if they did, they'd probably have mentioned the clark hotel finally looking cleaned up. But although the small pic at the DT News does make it look like the ground floor of the clark has been fixed up, it must not be all that accurate. I know it still looked like an abandoned dive when I was around there a few months ago, & someone who's better acquainted with the hood seems to agree.......

You commented on my post that was censored but apparently your post was deleted......so I can't respond to it.

[colemonkee]

This is welcome news. From the Downtown News:


Image Source: Los Angeles Downtown News

Broad Museum Cleared for Takeoff:
Construction Permits Issued for $100 Million Art Complex

by Ryan Vaillancourt, Staff Writer

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES – So far, construction activity at the Grand Avenue site of philanthropist Eli Broad’s $100 million art museum has been limited to a three-level parking structure. Now, it’s time to build the museum.

The Dept. of Building and Safety issued building permits for the planned three-level structure designed by New York architect Diller, Scofidio + Renfro on March 16 and crews are already at work, building on top of the parking facility.

Broad Art Foundation spokeswoman Karen Denne said the project is on schedule, with completion expected in late 2013.

Those interested in watching the construction can see the site in real time via a live webcam feed streaming at broadartfoundation.org.

Article source: Los Angeles Downtown News

[alki]

Originally Posted by all of the trash

LA's success is reliant on taking the focus AWAY from downtown LA and reducing our expectations and development there. Allow downtown LA to grow on a small, organic, scale, as has been the success along thoroughfares on Main and Spring and kill worthless megaprojects like the Wilshire Grand and gehry's Grand Tower which are empty hollow revenue-bleeding projects. Spread the investment to build trendy bars and venues in dense Koreatown, create vibrant communities in south LA like Leimart Park, bring transit to wealthy areas in the westside, around the beverly center, instead of trying to force wealthy people to come to downtown with halluncinations of Broadway becoming an upscale retail capital. Continue the infill around Hollywood, West Hollywood, venice, santa monica and pasadena, and extend transit there. ALL MAJOR STREETS SHOULD HAVE BIKE LANES. and not the crappy green paint spring st. kind, I mean those that run between parking lanes and sidewalks, separated by a raised curb, with landscape. You know the kind that are actually attractive to people and will get people out of their cars and on their bikes. Stop trying to develop downtown LA into the Grove or the Americana. All of LA from the ocean to boyle heights needs to be integrated into an urban framework; heavily weighted focus on downtown kills that concept. Forumers here tend to ignore and piss and spit on LA's strengths (for all the boosterism here I think I'm one of the few that actually love this city) and instead favor antiquated delusions about LA becoming a 20th century style single node center

There is an argument that the most successful metros in this country have a strong DT hub......a strong heart acting as the major node within a multi nodal complex. That argument seems to be mostly substantiated by looking at metro areas throughout the country. Those metro areas with the strongest hubs are experiencing the best growth; those with the weakest not so much. Of course, there are exceptions..........Chicago has a strong DT but its growth is pretty much as anemic as LA's......but generally the rule applies.

[RuFFy]

Originally Posted by alki

There is an argument that the most successful metros in this country have a strong DT hub......a strong heart acting as the major node within a multi nodal complex. That argument seems to be mostly substantiated by looking at metro areas throughout the country. Those metro areas with the strongest hubs are experiencing the best growth; those with the weakest not so much. Of course, there are exceptions..........Chicago has a strong DT but its growth is pretty much as anemic as LA's......but generally the rule applies.

I don't know that I understand your post because it went from most successful to growth. Sure, growth is slow to see in LA's downtown because it is relatively small compared to other core based cities, which btw are few. However, Los Angeles is on its way to becoming the worlds 3rd trillion dollar economy behind only New York And Tokyo. As mentioned before Los Angeles' growth isn't always in the city limits of the City of Los Angeles, yet the metro has seen unprecedented growth over the past hundred years... Enviable growth if you ask me. And because this growth occurs in the "nodes", it's not as obvious as if it had all happened in the core. And yet we have cranes returning for new development in downtown and we even have some forumers calling a boom. Don't get me wrong, I understand the statistics as far as renters and those using public transit are almost reversed when compared to New York, but both are major world centers of business with certain industries dominating the scene.. But in the end, though different, they really are much the same.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by alki

Chicago has a strong DT but its growth is pretty much as anemic as LA's......but generally the rule applies.

I'm pretty sure L.A. doesn't have anemic growth. In fact, as I can recall, over the last ten years it added more people then any other city in the U.S.