LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0 - Page 391

JRinSoCal · #**7801** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 3:25 AM**

Sometimes this city just pisses me off!!! I mean I understand that more grass + more trees = higher maintenance costs, which is bad for a broke-ass city like LA, but why that ugly fence???

And don't get me started on that parking structure...

as if we don't have enough of those already!!!!

DistrictDirt · #**7802** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 4:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

Also, has anyone seen the curbed post about the Spring Street Park? I'm not at all a fan from the pictures. There is way too much concrete and the fences really kill any sort of pedestrian vibe. I doubt it's going to get much use. Whoever plans our parks needs to check out Brigham Yen's post about what makes an urban park successful.

I don't particularly like the fence either, but the park is going to be packed, trust me. Everyone that lives in the Historic Core has been waiting for it, and they're not going to forego using it because of a fence.

LA/OCman · #**7803** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 2:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

I don't particularly like the fence either, but the park is going to be packed, trust me. Everyone that lives in the Historic Core has been waiting for it, and they're not going to forego using it because of a fence.

I agree. The crowds will definitely be there. We need one of these 3/4 acre parks on every block in the Historic Core. I do have concerns about the amount of dogs that will be visiting...and that concern is from a dog owner. I think that is why the architects had to keep the grass at a minimum. It is a very small area given that there are hundreds/thousands of dogs within blocks of the new park.

BTW, the pics are all taken from the fence which makes it look worse. With Skid Row being so close there had to be a fenced park. The fence will go away as the trees grow. My concern is too much concrete/pavers. It sure beats the ugly parking lot it replaced. Now we need many more of these small parks.

ConstructDTLA · #**7804** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 2:52 PM**

Wow.

Referring to the 9th & Hope site & the Spring Street park - (Downtown) LA never, ever, misses an opportunity to let the public down.

BrandonJXN · #**7805** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 3:08 PM**

Shouldn't we let the plants at least grow before we shame the park?

ConstructDTLA · #**7806** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 4:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThreeHundred

Shouldn't we let the plants at least grow before we shame the park?

Probably. The parking structure on Hope is what everyone should truly be upset over.. Really a tragedy considering how much parking there already is right there.

Muji · #**7807** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 4:18 PM**

I agree that we should wait on criticizing the landscaping. Spring St Park is still a couple of months from opening, and new parks never look nearly as lush as one would like anyway. Plus, the pictures on Curbed were literally taken pressed up against the fence, so they're not a great indication of how the park will actually feel. On the other hand, I'm pretty sad to see that the seating looks about as uncomfortable as possible.

LosAngelesSportsFan · #**7808** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 5:25 PM**

the park looks good. i walked passed and its much better in person. relax with the criticism based on a couple bad pictures.

I am really disappointed regarding 9th and hope. That is the LAST fucking thing we need on that corner. everyone contact Huizar and the mayor about this. maybe we can get them to deny the permit

blackcat23 · #**7809** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 6:12 PM**

It seems odd that the permit application for the 9th/Hope lot wants a rooftop garden. Seems like a very strange accommodation for a standalone parking garage. Wouldn't you just put more parking on top?

Hopefully there is more planned for the lot than just a parking garage. The Park Tower proposal did call for a parking garage/rooftop garden.

Illithid Dude · #**7810** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackcat23

It seems odd that the permit application for the 9th/Hope lot wants a rooftop garden. Seems like a very strange accommodation for a standalone parking garage. Wouldn't you just put more parking on top?

Hopefully there is more planned for the lot than just a parking garage. The Park Tower proposal did call for a parking garage/rooftop garden.

Interesting theory. It's true that if you look at the proposal, there is clearly a six story garage at the back of the lot. Perhaps they are planning on building the garage first and the tower later? Barry Shy was going to do something similar for his 40 story tower.

Valyrian Steel · #**7811** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 7:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Interesting theory. It's true that if you look at the proposal, there is clearly a six story garage at the back of the lot. Perhaps they are planning on building the garage first and the tower later? Barry Shy was going to do something similar for his 40 story tower.

I guess we'll find out if they put up a sign with a rendering. I mentioned over on SCC how the Broad didn't receive a construction permit for the museum until after they built the parking garage.

ThomJames · #**7812** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 7:49 PM**

I think your theory may have merit. I observed the soil-sampling towards the corner of the intersection. (9th and Hope) From my experience sampling is usually done months before permits are pulled, so maybe they are subdividing the project into two phases: Parking lot toward the back of the lot first, with some kind of tower to be built abutting the intersection in the future. If we're lucky, using the same design as previous renderings??

Illithid Dude · #**7813** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 8:01 PM**

Someone should ask the people testing for soil samples.

blackcat23 · #**7814** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 10:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThomJames

I think your theory may have merit. I observed the soil-sampling towards the corner of the intersection. (9th and Hope) From my experience sampling is usually done months before permits are pulled, so maybe they are subdividing the project into two phases: Parking lot toward the back of the lot first, with some kind of tower to be built abutting the intersection in the future. If we're lucky, using the same design as previous renderings??

Probably worth mentioning that the permit application looks like it was submitted on April 17th, two days before you observed the soil testing. I suppose we'll hear something eventually, so I won't worry until then. Hopefully it's not just a parking structure.

Just next door to the 9th/Hope lot, I witnessed a rare sight this afternoon: people actually working on the Trinity Auditorium/Embassy Hotel.

As is typical of the Chetrit Group, it looked like a skeleton crew.

And another block down 9th street, 888 Olive continues.

StethJeff · #**7815** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 1:32 AM**

With respect to the park, I don't find a problem with all of the criticism. If it already looks like too much concrete, I don't think it'll get much better. Grand Avenue Park looked like too much concrete when the renderings were revealed and looks like way too much concrete today. There's already a precedence for underwhelming parks in DTLA.

BOYCOTT 90210 · #**7816** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 6:13 AM**

Onni Group Looks to Add Four More Towers

From Globest.com:http://www.globest.com/news/12_589/losan...oks-to-Add-Three-More-Towers-332468.html

Quote:

LOS ANGELES-A $100-million, 33-story mixed-use high rise apartment tower currently under construction in the downtown area may be joined by four similar multifamily towers. The four additions would make the potential downtown development total over a half-billion dollars.

Developer Onni Group of Canada, which is building the under-construction mixed-use tower at 888 Olive, is in the entitlement stage of developing the four additional mixed-use towers for the downtown area.

Apriano Meola, VP for U.S. operations for Onni Group, confirmed the plans to GlobeSt.com, saying the developer is planning four other mixed-use residential towers at other sites downtown that will be similar in size and scope to the one currently being built at 888 Olive. One of the earmarked sites is near the current development at 888 Olive. The other is near Staples Center, Meola says.

Quixote · #**7817** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 6:19 AM**

Can they come up with designs that don't look like Vancouver circa 2000?

Illithid Dude · #**7818** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 7:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westsidelife

Can they come up with designs that don't look like Vancouver circa 2000?

Hey hey hey. Be nice now. Circa 2005.

StethJeff · #**7819** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 7:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westsidelife

Can they come up with designs that don't look like Vancouver circa 2000?

Isn't that the only design that's been built there for two decades? Honestly, more towers is excellent news but if they get built, these should be the last four Vancouvers that get built in DTLA. Feel free to place a few in Hollywood, Ktown, Westwood, SaMo, Miracle Mile, etc. but no more in DTLA. We can't let South Park become a sea of copy-and-paste Vancondos.

SoCalKid · #**7820** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 6:00 PM**

I respectfully disagree. While the Vancouver style tower may not be the most exciting, it adds density, activates the street with retail, and looks sleek and modern. I get that a whole downtown of this type of tower can bring about a sense of uniformity, but downtown has plenty of architectural diversity. I'd take 30 of these if they all ate up surface parking lots. There's tons of room for development, this isn't a zero sum game.