LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[edluva]

Originally Posted by DistrictDirt

Dude you crack me up. I know you're just trolling but you're not even doing a good job of it. Interesting "human fabric" is exactly why people do visit DTLA. Its one of the few places in LA that has an authentic vibe to it. If you're not picking up on that, you have certainly never checked out the DTLA nightlife.

DTLA is the hippest place in Southern California by a mile, which tells me all I need to know about its trajectory: complete and total gentrification. The fact that you're not picking up on this and instead are focusing on crap like the Target tells me all I need to know about you: you're a shut-in.

it appears your definition of downtown's human fabric relies on the nightlife and scene-obsessed "concept" restaurants which depend almost completely on patrons who drive from miles away to get a taste of a "real city", and don't actually live downtown. how shallow.

currently, dtla is an island of hipster-daddy's money surrounded by mostly latino neighborhoods which, despite being improverished, aren't self-conscious suburban homages to "city life" like dtla is becoming

but just because i can tell the difference shouldn't stop you from drinking the kool-aid

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by edluva

it appears your definition of downtown's human fabric relies on the nightlife and scene-obsessed "concept" restaurants which depend almost completely on patrons who drive from miles away to get a taste of a "real city", and don't actually live downtown. how shallow.

troll
/trōl/

Noun

1. A mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.
2. One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument

[edluva]

colemonkee- i'm offering a dissenting opinion of downtown development. please address districtdirt's refusal to address the thread topic directly, and his persistently unconstructive attempts at character assasination

[Valyrian Steel]

Originally Posted by edluva

it appears your definition of downtown's human fabric relies on the nightlife and scene-obsessed "concept" restaurants which depend almost completely on patrons who drive from miles away to get a taste of a "real city", and don't actually live downtown. how shallow.

currently, dtla is an island of hipster-daddy's money surrounded by mostly latino neighborhoods which, despite being improverished, aren't suburban homages to "city life" like dtla is.

but just because i can tell the difference shouldn't stop you from drinking the kool-aid

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by edluva

colemonkee- i'm offering a dissenting opinion of downtown development. please address districtdirt's refusal to address the thread topic directly, and his persistently unconstructive attempts at character assasination

Edluva, why should we address your posts in a constructive way, when the ultimate purpose of your posts is to disrupt? I've never once seen you comment in a way that fosters conversation. You consistently post in a condescending, dismissive tone that is meant to inflame. In other words, troll.

And what would be the point to debate you anyway? In just the last several posts, you've made it clear that good nightlife is "shallow", award winning restaurants are "scenesy", and standard amenities like grocery stores and Targets are irrelevant. In your world, neighborhoods are judged by some arcane criteria that only you understand and that an LA neighborhood can never quite fulfull. Because that's the your whole point you always come around to, isn't it? That LA is inferior to other cities, and should be shat upon.

[edluva]

who said LA doesn't have neighborhoods? silverlake has a very unique identity, as do echo park, koreatown, west hollywood, leimert park, and so on. identities forged by residents who have personally owned and shaped their respective nabes over decades.

proclaiming dtla's arrival as some must-see nabe just doesn't hold any merit. just a decade ago there was barely a population to speak of. to proclaim such a young and barely established neighborhood as being one of the most noteworthy in our region is laughable. to a world traveler who has actually seen many really cool cities, such as myself, it reeks of tallest-guy-in-small-town parochialism and only emphasizes how backwater our metro can appear.

[blackcat23]

http://brighamyen.com/2013/05/20/badmaash-now-open-in-downtown-la/#more-10254

Now Open: New Indian Gastropub, Badmaash, Brings “Bombay Street Food” to Downtown LA

An exciting new Indian gastropub called Badmaash is now officially open at the historic Higgins loft building at 2nd/Main near Downtown LA’s Civic Center, right across the street from the LAPD unofficial dog park. Badmaash replaces what used to be Charcoal Grill (a nondescript and forgettable Mexican eatery that shuttered in 2011 without much notice).

[northbay]

Edluva's posts sound sociopathic. Best to leave sociopaths alone, as they only understand themselves

[brudy]

Originally Posted by edluva

who said LA doesn't have neighborhoods? silverlake has a very unique identity, as do echo park, koreatown, west hollywood, leimert park, and so on. identities forged by residents who have personally owned and shaped their respective nabes over decades.

proclaiming dtla's arrival as some must-see nabe just doesn't hold any merit. just a decade ago there was barely a population to speak of. to proclaim such a young and barely established neighborhood as being one of the most noteworthy in our region is laughable. to a world traveler who has actually seen many really cool cities, such as myself, it reeks of tallest-guy-in-small-town parochialism and only emphasizes how backwater our metro can appear.

So older always equals better? If that's so, you're the one that comes across as parochial. Many fantastic neighborhoods in cities all over the world have come from little or no population - former industrial zones, etc. While dtla has a way to go, it is certainly following in strong footsteps.

And if you're going to decry "hipster-daddy money", you'd be better be prepared to swear off pretty much all of Manhattan, large parts of Brooklyn, and most of San Francisco. Cities these days are expensive and trust fund kids are everywhere. But it's also clear you don't know anybody who actually lives downtown.

[ByTheBay]

I love LA! This is one San Francisco native who's going to come into LA's defense. Growing up in one of the more walkable neighborhoods in one of the more urban cities in the country (Marina district) there wasn't a lot to complain from an urban standpoint, yet there's always something about LA that's always been alluring to me. Maybe it's the beach culture, the carefree attitude, the eccentric fashion and architecture, the creative nature, the excitement of the entertainment industry or the unique entrepreneurial character where one can "only find in LA". LA may not be very "urban" in the traditional sense but IMO it sure has a lot of character to make up for it. LA started a lot of trends, unfortunately car culture was one of them (although I do enjoy driving around LA when there's no traffic, yes 'LA' and 'no traffic' can exist in a sentence).

With all of the good comes all of the bad, the gangs, the traffic, urban blight, "ugly architecture", homelessness, sprawl, lack of mass transit are some of the things people in LA have to deal with but guess what? These are the exact same things most cities have problems with and complain about their own cities as well. Think skid row is bad? Try walking down Sixth Street or the Tenderloin in San Francisco. Now LA could've done a lot better when it comes to urbanity and connectivity but the result is the outcome of past mistakes, LA's urban fabric was tied into a knot when the city and county focused heavily on private automobiles and single family homes versus mass transit and multi-family homes. When LA's streetcar network was bought and paved over, it was like taking ten step backwards, but it's very clear that a lot of measures are currently being done to right the ship and I think that's commendable. They're taking baby steps but they're the steps in the right direction towards something to look forward to. From the construction of Metro in the 80's, to Hollywood gentrifying in the 90's, to Downtown's renaissance in the 2000's, the foundations have been layed to build a city that functions to its true potential. It's a painfully slow process but each and every project that comes off the ground is very exciting IMO.

When something like City Target opens up, that's a cause for celebration, not an opportunity for comparison. Guess what? San Francisco opened a City Target in downtown the exact same time and people here made a big deal out of it too *shock*. You know what's even more shocking? NYC opened their first Manhattan Target a few years back (parking garage included) and actually rolled out a celebrity filled red carpet for its grand opening, shocking right? I mean how dare The Big Apple stoop to LA's level and make a fuss about opening a big box chain store *sarcasm inserted*. If LA were to be compared, it should be compared to itself, is downtown better off than it was 10/20 years ago? Or the whole city for that matter? I think the answer would be an emphatic YES! And that's all that matters really, LA isn't like Detroit on life support, LA is a young adult who's paying the price of mistakes made as a teenager by learning from it and making itself better by improving. There's still an enormous amount of work to be done to make the urban fabric whole again and everybody knows that but in the grand scheme of things, LA is getting there and has a lot going for it.

Sorry for the rant everyone, I love coming here to check for updates on projects but when people turn something positive into negative it really gets on my nerves.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by edluva

who said LA doesn't have neighborhoods? silverlake has a very unique identity, as do echo park, koreatown, west hollywood, leimert park, and so on. identities forged by residents who have personally owned and shaped their respective nabes over decades.

proclaiming dtla's arrival as some must-see nabe just doesn't hold any merit. just a decade ago there was barely a population to speak of. to proclaim such a young and barely established neighborhood as being one of the most noteworthy in our region is laughable. to a world traveler who has actually seen many really cool cities, such as myself, it reeks of tallest-guy-in-small-town parochialism and only emphasizes how backwater our metro can appear.

Just because DTLA is new does not mean that it isn't a great neighborhood or at a minimum on the right trajectory. Not sure why you have such a problem with that. Pudong and Puerto Madero are both surrounded by neighborhoods hundreds of years older with generations of families and significantly more edluva-defined "human fabric" yet each is noteworthy for its respective metro.

[ByTheBay]

I'd like to add that I don't think it's fair to judge DTLA as a "new" neighborhood because if it was people would be all over it. People like new and shiny and that's why a lot of people have flocked to the suburbs, Irvine is new, DTLA is not. In fact DTLA was the first "it" neighborhood in all of SoCal way before any hills were named Beverly. The problem is that it was abandoned, and just like with anything abandoned and neglected, it needs rehabilitation. People avoid DTLA not because it's new, but because it's old...trying to rebuild something is much more difficult than building it from scratch. Like I said, LA's urban fabric and core was tied into a knot, and the process you are seeing right now is the untying of that knot. Ever had a knot so jumbled that you had to untie it one thread at a time? Yeah, kinda like that. But DTLA has the "bones" for it, it was once the center of activity for the entire region and there's no reason why it can't eventually function as the regions main hub, that's what makes DTLA's potential that much more attractive.

[RuFFy]

If people can get past their personal distaste for Edluva and actually examine what he's saying, they might find he's 100% spot on.

[brudy]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

If people can get past their personal distaste for Edluva and actually examine what he's saying, they might find he's 100% spot on.

I'm generally not a DTLA cheerleader, even though I live here and mostly like it. I agree with some of what he's saying but his tone is condescending and he's not 100% correct (despite what he thinks). I'd love to hear what neighborhoods in other cities he/she likes - just so we know what's acceptable to him.

[blackcat23]

Originally Posted by brudy

I agree with some of what he's saying but his tone is condescending and he's not 100% correct (despite what he thinks). I'd love to hear what neighborhoods in other cities he/she likes - just so we know what's acceptable to him.

Co-sign me on this.

[pwright1]

Bottom line is DTLA is improving in leaps and bounds and I'm thrilled. And when historic buildings are brought back to life from the dead like the United Artist and others, I'm double thrilled.

[easy as pie]

i think the upshot of the exchange is that dtla is improving and that the continued growth there needs to happen in a good pedestrian-scale way that'll encourage neighborhood development and a unique local identity. there are some parts of dtla that'll end up being very posh and others that won't, but luckily dtla has a vast amount of land and potential with which to work. with a sustained miami or toronto-style boom, i could easily see 10k units coming online there annually from 2015 or so, pretty much indefinitely. there's just so much land and vertical potential. you really just need the planning to make it work and, obviously, the demand.

[RuFFy]

Originally Posted by brudy

I'm generally not a DTLA cheerleader, even though I live here and mostly like it. I agree with some of what he's saying but his tone is condescending and he's not 100% correct (despite what he thinks). I'd love to hear what neighborhoods in other cities he/she likes - just so we know what's acceptable to him.

The problem is the list he could generate is extensive. Just to throw one out, the Art Deco district on South Beach. I was there 2 weeks ago and all I kept thinking was how nice it would be if the Historic Core had a sustained level of energy radiating from it like the Art Deco District. The energy is so sustained that even in the middle if the night when the streets are near empty, it's radiating energy. So even as a born and raised Angelino reading this thread every single day, gettin excited of the exponential growth DT LA has seen, I get back in town... And I'm a tad disappointed. A little more than a tad. South Beach is an undisputed center. DT LA, not so much. Granted, there are obvious improvements, but in LA the same could be said for Compton. There have been significant improvements In Compton over the years and I'm sure nobody disputes that. But that's what transplants fail to see. The multiple cores that aren't exactly competing against DT LA, but instead are growing to compliment it. Anybody remember Hollywood before the red line?

[brudy]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

The problem is the list he could generate is extensive. Just to throw one out, the Art Deco district on South Beach. I was there 2 weeks ago and all I kept thinking was how nice it would be if the Historic Core had a sustained level of energy radiating from it like the Art Deco District. The energy is so sustained that even in the middle if the night when the streets are near empty, it's radiating energy. So even as a born and raised Angelino reading this thread every single day, gettin excited of the exponential growth DT LA has seen, I get back in town... And I'm a tad disappointed. A little more than a tad. South Beach is an undisputed center. DT LA, not so much. Granted, there are obvious improvements, but in LA the same could be said for Compton. There have been significant improvements In Compton over the years and I'm sure nobody disputes that. But that's what transplants fail to see. The multiple cores that aren't exactly competing against DT LA, but instead are growing to compliment it. Anybody remember Hollywood before the red line?

So according to the interwebs, the Art Deco District began its restoration in the late 1970s. So they're really aren't comparable. In 20 years, dtla will be at least at the level of Art Deco area and feel more like a city.

And nobody is saying DTLA is fully realized at this moment. But the history of cities is that neighborhoods rise and fall, and then rise again. Right now, DTLA is a fairly hot neighborhood of LA, as evidenced by the 98% leased rate for apartments, the constant stream of new restaurants, the amount of development occurring here. It's a cultural center of the city with several museums, the Music Center, etc. People are clambering to live here as it facilitates a lifestyle that's difficult to have elsewhere in LA. Show me another neighborhood in LA that in 13 years the population has gone up over 500% (or whatever (2500 in 1999 to 55k today equals).

People just need to have realistic expectations about the current state of dtla. Did none of you ever go to Brooklyn in the 90s? It was a similar mess of unconnectedness and pockets of cool places surrounded by crap. It's still like that in some ways despite Williamsburg having peaked on the coolness scale. The development of dtla is happening at a rapid pace, but people need to have grounded ideas about what it's like to walk around here. Comparing South Beach to DTLA is like doing East and West Berlin right after the wall came down. Give it some time.

[DistrictDirt]

Met up with a friend for lunch at the 7th+Fig Mendocino Farms. The whole complex was fairly packed.