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

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

I went by this project yesterday, and it's still an operating smoke shop. So this isn't starting anytime in the very near future. On a positive note, the Emerson College building and the Old Spaghetti Factory projects on Sunset are really starting to make an impact. No pictures because I was driving, but it's pretty cool. Sometime over the next month I'll take the subway down there and take photos of all the projects in the area. There are a lot of cranes in Hollywood. Feels like 2008 all over again!

I know they mentioned that they were going to keep the garage open during construction. Maybe the smoke shop will be open during construction as well?

[blackcat23]

Vermont/Wilshire, today. Construction here is going at a much quicker pace than any of the other high rise projects currently underway in Los Angeles.

[Quixote]

^ That's a huge ass podium, and it's rather pronounced. Meh, it's good density and height across from a major subway station. And it looks like we'll be getting a wide sidewalk. That's always nice.

[Muji]

The podium at the Vermont is done, so every new floor we see will be part of the two towers. In terms of height, it matches fairly closely with the 7-story Wilshire/Vermont Station building above the Red Line stop. It also has the same building line on the Vermont Avenue side, which actually makes me worried that they will widen their side of Vermont Avenue once construction wraps up, as they did for Wilshire/Vermont Station.

[Illithid Dude]

Here's a picture I took of one of the buildings at the Santa Monica Village. Sorry it's dark, but ya gotta make do with what you got. I'll try to go back sometime this weekend and do a proper photothread, though all signs are pointed to rainy weather. Anyways, if you look towards the lower right corner you will notice the first hints of cladding. Yay!

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

I am really excited to see how that Hollywood project mentioned a few posts above is going to turn out. That's not at all a bad design.


Great news. My favorite Thai restaurant isn't too far past there. I agree, Melrose from, say, Vine on east, is exceptionally dead. I have always wondered what it would take to get LA's sleepy, autocentric E/W commercial streets, such as Melrose, Beverly, and even alot of Santa Monica (to make no mention of Jefferson, or Washington), back from the dead.

The answer almost always seems to be rail.

[Kingofthehill]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

The answer almost always seems to be rail.

In other cities, perhaps. Unfortunately, I can think of a number of rail-adjacent areas that have little to show for their proximity to mass transit. Vermont/Beverly, the entirety of the Blue Line between Downtown and Downtown Long Beach, Westlake, Highland Park, much of Boyle Heights and the areas along the new Expo Line, etc. I know this is changing, but this areas and more, haven't really improved a whole lot in spite of having rail. Highland Park is suburban, and the bulk of its gentrification and house flipping tend to gravitate towards the York/Ave 50 intersection,

Granted, a large number of these stations are in industrial or formerly industrial ROWs, but there are still plenty of deadspots in our transit system. Conversely, Abbot Kinney, Sunset Junction, Huntington Park, all of West Hollywood, the Beach Cities, and Downtown Santa Monica, among other places, are thriving without rail.

I drove past the Melrose/Gramercy Place site twice this past week, and didn't notice anything different? It was dark, so that may have hindered things a bit. That said, I can't wait to see what kind of impact that project will have on the area.

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

In other cities, perhaps. Unfortunately, I can think of a number of rail-adjacent areas that have little to show for their proximity to mass transit. Vermont/Beverly, the entirety of the Blue Line between Downtown and Downtown Long Beach, Westlake, Highland Park, much of Boyle Heights and the areas along the new Expo Line, etc. I know this is changing, but this areas and more, haven't really improved a whole lot in spite of having rail. Highland Park is suburban, and the bulk of its gentrification and house flipping tend to gravitate towards the York/Ave 50 intersection,

Granted, a large number of these stations are in industrial or formerly industrial ROWs, but there are still plenty of deadspots in our transit system. Conversely, Abbot Kinney, Sunset Junction, Huntington Park, all of West Hollywood, the Beach Cities, and Downtown Santa Monica, among other places, are thriving without rail.

I think the Expo line is going to be the beginning of true, sustained transit oriented development in Los Angeles. There are many mixed-use projects in the planning stage already for the stretch between Culver City and Santa Monica, even though we're a few years away from that part of the line even being operational.

[Kingofthehill]

Agreed. It seems as if every week there is a new proposal a mixed-used project along the Expo Phase II project. Exciting times, to be sure.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Muji

The podium at the Vermont is done, so every new floor we see will be part of the two towers. In terms of height, it matches fairly closely with the 7-story Wilshire/Vermont Station building above the Red Line stop. It also has the same building line on the Vermont Avenue side, which actually makes me worried that they will widen their side of Vermont Avenue once construction wraps up, as they did for Wilshire/Vermont Station.

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if that happened. The city of LA is so averse to good urban design. That will remain the biggest challenge/roadblock going forward as we try to adapt our city through a more pedestrian-focused lens. Transit and density, the other two key ingredients in generating a livable urban milieu, we have down.

As of right now, the idea of reducing traffic lanes in favor of wider sidwalks is unfathomable. Quite honestly though, we don't have the transit options yet either.

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by Westsidelife

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if that happened. The city of LA is so averse to good urban design. That will remain the biggest challenge/roadblock going forward as we try to adapt our city through a more pedestrian-focused lens. Transit and density, the other two key ingredients in generating a livable urban milieu, we have down.

As of right now, the idea of reducing traffic lanes in favor of wider sidwalks is unfathomable. Quite honestly though, we don't have the transit options yet either.

I blame LADOT 100%. They're incredibly greedy when it comes to widening the roadway for cars. I heard that they tried to do the same thing downtown on 2nd street when they Caltrans building went up, and it took intensive protest by neighborhood groups to get them to change their mind.

The agency is still living a completely siloed, level-of-service-chasing, car centric, 1950s paradigm. There might be some people over there trying to change things, nibbling around the edges, doing the bike lane stuff and whatnot, but the true sea change hasn't occurred yet. It's going to take strong leadership to turn the ship.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

In other cities, perhaps. Unfortunately, I can think of a number of rail-adjacent areas that have little to show for their proximity to mass transit. Vermont/Beverly, the entirety of the Blue Line between Downtown and Downtown Long Beach, Westlake, Highland Park, much of Boyle Heights and the areas along the new Expo Line, etc. I know this is changing, but this areas and more, haven't really improved a whole lot in spite of having rail. Highland Park is suburban, and the bulk of its gentrification and house flipping tend to gravitate towards the York/Ave 50 intersection,

Granted, a large number of these stations are in industrial or formerly industrial ROWs, but there are still plenty of deadspots in our transit system. Conversely, Abbot Kinney, Sunset Junction, Huntington Park, all of West Hollywood, the Beach Cities, and Downtown Santa Monica, among other places, are thriving without rail.

I drove past the Melrose/Gramercy Place site twice this past week, and didn't notice anything different? It was dark, so that may have hindered things a bit. That said, I can't wait to see what kind of impact that project will have on the area.

In the right neighborhoods and along the right streets, rail will create good TOD. Routes like Blue and Gold line connect dense termini, but like you said they're running through areas that need a lot more than a rail line to develop.

You make a good point though about Vermont. It's surprising to see how little the area between Hollywood and DTLA has improved since the Red Line was built. Luckily the amount of activity in K-town as a whole seems to suggest that things are only improving.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

In the right neighborhoods and along the right streets, rail will create good TOD. Routes like Blue and Gold line connect dense termini, but like you said they're running through areas that need a lot more than a rail line to develop.

You make a good point though about Vermont. It's surprising to see how little the area between Hollywood and DTLA has improved since the Red Line was built. Luckily the amount of activity in K-town as a whole seems to suggest that things are only improving.

The gold, red, and blue lines also spend a good bit of their times going diagonal or zig zagging. But they will all see some development eventually. Even the blue line. Like you say, it just has a few more pressing issues. Once people realize what is possible after seeing development along other lines, some of it will trickle to the blue line.

Also, considering what is happening on Expo, I expect that Wilshire will just go nuts with development once the purple line is extended. Except of course for that 2 mile gap between Western and La Brea where Metro didn't see any need for a station at Crenshaw. That will likely appear shortsighted before the line even opens.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Easy

The gold, red, and blue lines also spend a good bit of their times going diagonal or zig zagging. But they will all see some development eventually. Even the blue line. Like you say, it just has a few more pressing issues. Once people realize what is possible after seeing development along other lines, some of it will trickle to the blue line.

Also, considering what is happening on Expo, I expect that Wilshire will just go nuts with development once the purple line is extended. Except of course for that 2 mile gap between Western and La Brea where Metro didn't see any need for a station at Crenshaw. That will likely appear shortsighted before the line even opens.

Agreed. I see no other possibility than Wilshire erupting with development. By the time Purple reaches Santa Monica, my guess is that it will look vastly different from the way it looks today. It should be one of America's unquestionable best boulevards.

[Quixote]

TOD watch: The Platform, Culver City









http://www.abramsonteiger.com/news/13/0113.html

[Illithid Dude]

Gandalf, what are you doing with that Na'vi on that garage? Get down from there, Gandalf.

[BrandonJXN]

I lived in Culver City for 2 years. It's already a vibrant, pedestrian friendly, and will only get better with The Platform. I'm a fan of this design. This kind of modern, fresh architecture will only enhance Culver City.

[StethJeff]

Revitalizing the LA River does more for development, communities, recreation, aesthetics, and the environment than any other project in LA, in my opinion. Consequently, articles like this get me more excited than any new rail line or supertall announcements (not that we've had any). Creating an amazing LA River opens up so many possibilities. It restores natural habitats, creates a continuous network of endless parklands, opens up commercial opportunities, and could turn a terrible eyesore into a stunning LA landmark. Glad to see that people are collaborating on such a neglected resource.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LA River District in Northeast LA



Another day, another potentially major gamechanger for the LA River: today the city is launching a new effort to create a development-packed river district. The new Northeast Los Angeles Riverfront Collaborative is designed to help cut some of the red tape among agencies (the government, non-profits, universities, commercial real estate firms) so that they can create "a holistic, collaborative urban planning effort," according to KCET. The proposed Northeast Los Angeles Riverfront District would run along eight miles of river: "The district comprises all of Atwater Village and Elysian Valley and portions of Lincoln Heights, Cypress Park and Glassell Park. It is bounded by the 134 Freeway on the north, Main Street in Lincoln Heights on the south, the L.A. River on the west and the 5 Freeway to the east." (Meanwhile, the Army Corps of Engineers is working on a major access/rehab plan for roughly this area and the city is considering opening up the Atwater/Elysian zone for recreation this summer.)The NELA RC already has some federal grant funding and real estate consultants will start an economic development study to figure out funding for the district and come up with some specific projects to spur the action. Involved parties plan also to look into bike parking and bike and car sharing along the river, encouraging job creation that makes sense for the workers in the area, and "turning the district into a regional food hub," among many other efforts. The group's project manager says "The idea here is to use the [Los Angeles] river -- which has historically been a flood control basin -- and envision it as an actual fully-functioning river and to use that to create a district where it'll be a unique feature."

From Curbed.

[StethJeff]

double post

[Easy]

Somewhat surprisingly the new Wyvernwood was approved by the neighborhood council. Not sure if this will translate into approval from the city as evidently Huizar is still opposed.

The phases for this project are spread out potentially over decades, but if it builds completely they intend to have over 6 million square feet of new development and all except 325,000 square feet will be residential. So that's 4,400 units totaling 5.8 million square feet for an average unit size of 1,318 square feet. You have to figure that will be at least 2 people per unit so that's 8,800 people on 69 acres. That's 81,000 people per square mile. There will be 8,515 parking spaces for the 4,400 units.

I'm all for density, but that seems like a lot for an area with no rail station within walking distance. I think that I might favor the lower intensity option that has 2,709 units. 39 units per acre is still pretty intense.