LOS ANGELES | Central City Project Rundown 5.0

[brudy]

Originally Posted by alki

Not a bad design at all. TCA responsible? If so, it looks like its the developers who are responsible for the ones that are poorly designed and not necessarily TCA.

Developers lurking on this thread........step it up please.

The designer of anything commercial is ultimately responsible. As a graphic designer I learned long ago never to offer any designs that you can't live with or respect because sometimes terrible clients will pick the worst concept/idea you put in there as filler. I've said this before but architects have a special responsibility in this area as the projects last so long and affect the surrounding area.

[alki]

Originally Posted by brudy

The designer of anything commercial is ultimately responsible. As a graphic designer I learned long ago never to offer any designs that you can't live with or respect because sometimes terrible clients will pick the worst concept/idea you put in there as filler. I've said this before but architects have a special responsibility in this area as the projects last so long and affect the surrounding area.

In theory that's how it should be but in practice its a bit harder especially when you are a large firm and have a number of architects and draftsmen that need to get paid. A lot of the TCA projects we don't like were designed when construction was at a low level in LA. I bet firms like TCA were taking whatever they could get to keep their staffs busy. After all, you can't eat principles.

Developers know that and some like to low ball. When I did construction, architectural fees typically ran 8-10% of construction costs. I don't know where they are today but I would not be surprised if developers were offering fees less than 8% during the dark days of 2009-2012. When you are getting low balled, understandably, you don't put your best designers on the job.........and the resulting design shows it.

Ultimately, I think the blame rests with the developers. They are the ones who should be demanding and paying for good design but don't bother for a host of reasons. At least that's my take on it.

[jamesinclair]

Originally Posted by The Illusive Man

Too bad about Farmers Field. I really liked that one. It would have been awesome to easily take public transit to the stadium. It would have made an awesome convention center expansion component as well.

Maybe AEG can build the Galaxy a new stadium there and sell the existing stadium to the new LAFC team?

I put the odds of that happening at .002% though



Also, the talks of a tailgate culture are ridiculous. You give people 200 acres of parking 50 minutes from everything, and yes, people will drive and drink in the parking lot, because duh, what else is there to do?

But you give me a downtown stadium location and they will take transit and go to bars.

Look at USC football games. College is all about a tailgate culture! And yet the tailgate there is on campus, far, far away from any cars.

The choices people make are based off the environment they're in, not some culture magically ingrained at birth.


As for that new TCA building, the way it handles the subway portal is fantastic.

However, putting close to 500 parking spaces on top of a downtown subway station should be a crime punishable by loss of citizenship and deportation.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by Docjalby

I'm just saying there are plenty of options for the average downtowner and a lot of the buildings are being built for the average downtowner. You can get a 700 square foot one bedroom in Pegasis for $2,200.

speaking of which, I notice the apt towers proposed for 4th & hill will have low income units, presumably due to the owner getting partial funding from govt sources that require such type of pricing. The only bad thing about that is it suggests the devlpr may be grappling to come up with funds for the proj, since if he had enough totally private sector financing to depend upon, he'd probably not feel the need to include subsidized housing. however, that's good since it will allow some of the tower's units to not compete head on with higher priced units coming online over the next 3 to 4 yrs....& also allow ppl who aren't only upper income to move to dtla.

Feature presentation at DLANC Planning and Land Use Committee on 3/17.

4th and Hill: 33 story mixed-use building consisting of 428 residential apartment units and 2,894sf of commercial space with 433 parking spaces. The project includes a 5% very-low income and 20% workforce affordable housing component.

Originally Posted by Quixote

...

that is the first image of the more detailed version of the plans first released a yr ago. I'm a bit apprehensive since the model suggests some of the more complicated formations or layout of the rough draft concepts have been dropped.....perhaps to save money?



archdaily.com/gehrypartners



archdaily.com/gehrypartners

Originally Posted by jamesinclair

But you give me a downtown stadium location and they will take transit and go to bars. Look at USC football games. College is all about a tailgate culture! And yet the tailgate there is on campus, far, far away from any cars.

but you have to consider all the thousands & thousands of ppl like Gloria molina. her type will much more prefer something exciting & inspiring like this.....



cdn1.bostonmagazine.com


to something like this....


scottcommercialrealtor.com

[ThomJames]

Originally Posted by jamesinclair

Maybe AEG can build the Galaxy a new stadium there and sell the existing stadium to the new LAFC team?

I put the odds of that happening at .002% though



Also, the talks of a tailgate culture are ridiculous. You give people 200 acres of parking 50 minutes from everything, and yes, people will drive and drink in the parking lot, because duh, what else is there to do?

But you give me a downtown stadium location and they will take transit and go to bars.

Look at USC football games. College is all about a tailgate culture! And yet the tailgate there is on campus, far, far away from any cars.

The choices people make are based off the environment they're in, not some culture magically ingrained at birth.


As for that new TCA building, the way it handles the subway portal is fantastic.

However, putting close to 500 parking spaces on top of a downtown subway station should be a crime punishable by loss of citizenship and deportation.

I really don't have a problem with developers adding as much parking as they want. I'm an avid user/ supporter of public transport, but at the end of the day most people are going to have at least one car. A lot of people in NYC have at least one car, even if is only for weekend excursions.

[ThomJames]

Originally Posted by alki

In theory that's how it should be but in practice its a bit harder especially when you are a large firm and have a number of architects and draftsmen that need to get paid. A lot of the TCA projects we don't like were designed when construction was at a low level in LA. I bet firms like TCA were taking whatever they could get to keep their staffs busy. After all, you can't eat principles.

Developers know that and some like to low ball. When I did construction, architectural fees typically ran 8-10% of construction costs. I don't know where they are today but I would not be surprised if developers were offering fees less than 8% during the dark days of 2009-2012. When you are getting low balled, understandably, you don't put your best designers on the job.........and the resulting design shows it.

Ultimately, I think the blame rests with the developers. They are the ones who should be demanding and paying for good design but don't bother for a host of reasons. At least that's my take on it.

I think the blame rests on the developers too. If I have a client that wants to spend $2 sq ft on a hard wood floor I try my best. If someone can spend $10-$20 obviously things get much more amazing. This doesn't only apply to exterior finishes. Avant garde designs also many times use more materials/ have dead spaces, which can significantly increase construction costs.

I think The projects on Olympic Blvd are really a case of monkey see, monkey do. Those developers saw other TCA projects and decided they could save money with off the shelf plans, and decided the product was 'good enough'. From a business perspective they are probably right, since already opened TCA buildings have leased up fast.

And I agree with your take on the architects too. I personally know quite a few architects and business was just horrible during those years. When you have to stay afloat, you pretty much have to take which ever projects you can get, and just be thankful you are able to pay your staff.

[Docjalby]

Originally Posted by brudy

The "experts" say you could be spending up to 30-33% of your income on housing, but that's net, not gross. Docjalby is talking gross, which is wrong. I agree with you - 100k/yr does not put you in the luxury category.

Wrong. It's gross, not net:

http://www.housingconnections.org/index.php?option=com_calculator

http://badmoneyadvice.com/2010/10/what-percent-of-your-income-to-spend-on-rent.html

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/mortgages/how-much-house-can-you-buy--1.aspx

[ocman]

Originally Posted by Quixote

It's not like they're incapable of producing decent designs, as many of their projects feature quality glass and metal panels. A good amount of blame deserves to be placed on the cheapy developers who commission these designs in the first place.

Imagine how nice this building would be if the silver face was just continuous throughout, and excluding that protruding gray wall and the green-gray box above and those 2 weird-looking P-shaped anchors. Design-wise, LA is still stuck in the 80s.

[colemonkee]

LA Downtown News has an article in the print edition (that I can't find online) about Fig Central having a ground-breaking ceremony this Thursday. Expect things to (hopefully) pick up shortly afterward. Work to date has been demo of existing buildings on the property, which included an underground vault.

[blackcat23]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

LA Downtown News has an article in the print edition (that I can't find online) about Fig Central having a ground-breaking ceremony this Thursday. Expect things to (hopefully) pick up shortly afterward. Work to date has been demo of existing buildings on the property, which included an underground vault.

http://www.ladowntownnews.com/news/huge-...1137fac-c9c3-11e4-92db-1f4221da6bc7.html

Huge Project Breaks Ground in South Park This Week

[brudy]

Originally Posted by alki

In theory that's how it should be but in practice its a bit harder especially when you are a large firm and have a number of architects and draftsmen that need to get paid. A lot of the TCA projects we don't like were designed when construction was at a low level in LA. I bet firms like TCA were taking whatever they could get to keep their staffs busy. After all, you can't eat principles.

That's very true and a great way to say it, although I'm not going to absolve them of responsibility. My brother in a law is an architect and I know how it tough it was during the recession. Still, some of TCA's designs are just so awful (with the worst being that huge one Wilshire).

[brudy]

Originally Posted by Docjalby

Wrong. It's gross, not net:

http://www.housingconnections.org/index.php?option=com_calculator

http://badmoneyadvice.com/2010/10/what-percent-of-your-income-to-spend-on-rent.html

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/mortgages/how-much-house-can-you-buy--1.aspx

That may be, but you should have read that whole badmoneyadvice post, where he says he thinks that percentage is crap. It also says that most of these articles say 25-30%. While this is buying not renting, here's a quote:

Dave Ramsey is fairly typical in his recommendation of renting as a useful temporary stage before you save up enough to buy a place. Once you buy, he says to make your housing costs no more than 25% of your take-home pay. Presumably, he would recommend an even smaller percentage for rent.

[brudy]

Originally Posted by ThomJames

I really don't have a problem with developers adding as much parking as they want. I'm an avid user/ supporter of public transport, but at the end of the day most people are going to have at least one car. A lot of people in NYC have at least one car, even if is only for weekend excursions.

This is from 2012, but the percentage of people having cars in Manhattan is 16-25%, at least from midtown south:



http://www.nycedc.com/blog-entry/new-yorkers-and-cars

As colemonkee noted above, parking adds huge costs to the project which are then passed on to the renters and buyers.

[ThomJames]

Originally Posted by brudy

This is from 2012, but the percentage of people having cars in Manhattan is 16-25%, at least from midtown south:



http://www.nycedc.com/blog-entry/new-yorkers-and-cars

As colemonkee noted above, parking adds huge costs to the project which are then passed on to the renters and buyers.

I really don't think that there are many developers that are willing to skimp on parking. They would be taking a major risk. For most tenants/ purchasers, parking is the first question out of there mouths.

[retina]

Originally Posted by blackcat23

http://www.ladowntownnews.com/news/huge-...1137fac-c9c3-11e4-92db-1f4221da6bc7.html

Huge Project Breaks Ground in South Park This Week

Amazing news! Have to hand it to the Chinese, they waste no time. Also, happy to hear Flower St won't be ignored but I don't believe we have seen any renderings of that elevation. I know Fig South is planning to have retail on Flower.

The article mentions that Metropolis hasn't broken ground on Phase 2 but it sure looks like initial shoring/granding has started on the webcams. Is this correct?

[brudy]

Originally Posted by retina

Amazing news! Have to hand it to the Chinese, they waste no time. Also, happy to hear Flower St won't be ignored but I don't believe we have seen any renderings of that elevation. I know Fig South is planning to have retail on Flower.

The article mentions that Metropolis hasn't broken ground on Phase 2 but it sure looks like initial shoring/granding has started on the webcams. Is this correct?

Yeah, you can clearly see shoring going on at the northern end of phase 2! So it's on the way...

[brudy]

Originally Posted by ThomJames

I really don't think that there are many developers that are willing to skimp on parking. They would be taking a major risk. For most tenants/ purchasers, parking is the first question out of there mouths.

The developers can't skip on parking because of zoning regs. They have little choice. But look at all the conversions in the core that don't have parking, both rental (like the Chester Williams) and condo (like Rowan). Neither have their own parking and both are full. So while people might need/want parking, it's not keeping them from buying or renting (like in any other city) at these properties. This is life in most cities. You walk to your car.

I'd wager that developers would love to get rid of parking since it adds so much to the cost and time of construction. This is also keeping lease rates higher.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Work on the Broadway trade center has started! Old awnings being taken down as I type. (they actually started that last friday) very excited for this

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by brudy

The developers can't skip on parking because of zoning regs. They have little choice. But look at all the conversions in the core that don't have parking, both rental (like the Chester Williams) and condo (like Rowan). Neither have their own parking and both are full. So while people might need/want parking, it's not keeping them them from buying or renting (like in any other city) at these properties. This is life in most cities. You walk to your car.

I'd wager that developers would love to get rid of parking since it adds so much to the cost of construction.

Exactly. It's most egregious at 7th / 8th / 9th and Olive / grand / Hope... There are 9 stand alone garages existing or under construction and then you have the massive parking lots under the 8th and grand project, the carmel partners project, Ralph and 8th and hope. Way ,wayyyy too much supply. It's just not done correctly

[retina]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Work on the Broadway trade center has started! Old awnings being taken down as I type. (they actually started that last friday) very excited for this

Now if we can just get Apple to make that announcement we're all waiting for....