LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 6.0

[ocman]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty

Posh New Boutique Opens at 11th and Hope in South Park, Downtown LA

http://brighamyen.com/2017/08/04/le-box-blanc-opens-first-brick-mortar-downtown-la/

If there has to be a parking structure, that pic is a great example of how they should develop the street. It looks more inviting than a lot of areas in DTLA. I wouldn’t mind seeing a law passed to require parking structures by itself, or attached to building, to have storefront to mitigate the effects they have on pedestrian activity.

[ConstructDTLA]

A few views from today:

Skyline from 10 & Figueroa by Hunter, on Flickr

Regional Connector by Hunter, on Flickr

Regional Connector by Hunter, on Flickr

Apex 2 by Hunter, on Flickr

[blackcat23]

Originally Posted by citywatch

ladowntownnews.com

The reason they can't pursue 4th & Hill "very aggressively" is because the project still isn't approved.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by blackcat23

The reason they can't pursue 4th & Hill "very aggressively" is because the project still isn't approved.

which is even more exasperating since the proposed apt tower has been opposed by the owner of the bldg next to it....the small bldg that fronts broadway. that's even more baffling since the opponent of the proj has helped dt through the yrs by opening & running a variety of nicer cocktail bars.

he should know better than most ppl that dt still has gaps that aren't too encouraging to potential customers of his pubs.

his opposition, along with changing mkt conditions that have made equity residential nervous about adding to dt's supply of apts, may have slowed down the proj so much that the beacon tower is now on the back burner.



• Video Link

[BraveNewWorld]

http://urbanize.la/post/four-finalists-emerge-angels-landing-site

Not sure if anyone's posted this yet. But I can't wait to see what happens here. Hoping M.A.D wins

"According to the Downtown News, the City has now selected four finalists to develop the site, which has been dubbed Angel's Landing.

Lowe Enterprises with GenslerOnni Group with Natoma ArchitectsPeebles Corporation,MacFarlane Partners and Claridge Properties withHandel ArchitectsTrammell Crow Company withMAD Architects

Finals plans must be submitted to the city for approval by October 16.  A final selection will occur later in the Fall."

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by BraveNewWorld

http://urbanize.la/post/four-finalists-emerge-angels-landing-site

Not sure if anyone's posted this yet. But I can't wait to see what happens here. Hoping M.A.D wins

"According to the Downtown News, the City has now selected four finalists to develop the site, which has been dubbed Angel's Landing.

Lowe Enterprises with GenslerOnni Group with Natoma ArchitectsPeebles Corporation,MacFarlane Partners and Claridge Properties withHandel ArchitectsTrammell Crow Company withMAD Architects

Finals plans must be submitted to the city for approval by October 16.  A final selection will occur later in the Fall."

My vote is for Trammell Crow Company/MAD architects for 2 reasons.

1. I believe MAD is the most daring architect in the finalists and can deliver us something new a unique and
2. By choosing Trammell Crow, we are supporting our home economy (1of5 city of LA Fortune 500 companies) as they are a subsidiary of downtown LA based CBRE

Go Local, Go Daring.

[colemonkee]

^ I couldn't agree more. We've had enough Gensler recently, and Handel is good, but pretty conservative. Not the best pick for such a high profile and high potential site. MAD would be my first choice, with Saitowitz | Natoma as a distant second. Saitowitz's work is very modular in nature, and if they put a good amount of thought into how the design reacts to the slope of the site could be pretty cool and unique, but I feel like their designs are more prone to value engineering since they are more modular.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

My vote is for Trammell Crow Company/MAD architects for 2 reasons.

1. I believe MAD is the most daring architect in the finalists and can deliver us something new a unique and
2. By choosing Trammell Crow, we are supporting our home economy (1of5 city of LA Fortune 500 companies) as they are a subsidiary of downtown LA based CBRE

Go Local, Go Daring.

Great post. Im in 100% agreement. MAD would be awesome. The last thing i want is a conservative box. This should be cutting edge, daring and interesting.. and very tall. I think we have a good shot at a 1000 footer here

[Mojeda101]

I wish these 4 devs would propose what they intend to do with the property. Imagine Onni wants to build 2 supertalls, but Holland only wants to build some 40 story. This lot literally has no limit for how tall you can build. Give it to someone who intends to build something massive.

I'm going to put my money on Onni. They're a proven developer that is willing to go all out in DTLA. They've proven themselves to get shit done and if there is anyone who i'd willingly want to own that property it would be Onni. Wouldn't be surprised if they fit 2 towers on that lot. They could very much change the entire landscape of the city. Give it a whole new perspective. Onni all the way.

[DTLA-Joe]

1200' + please

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

I wish these 4 devs would propose what they intend to do with the property. Imagine Onni wants to build 2 supertalls, but Holland only wants to build some 40 story. This lot literally has no limit for how tall you can build. Give it to someone who intends to build something massive.

I'm going to put my money on Onni. They're a proven developer that is willing to go all out in DTLA. They've proven themselves to get shit done and if there is anyone who i'd willingly want to own that property it would be Onni. Wouldn't be surprised if they fit 2 towers on that lot. They could very much change the entire landscape of the city. Give it a whole new perspective. Onni all the way.

[Jun]

Imagine a MAD designed supertall

[black_crow]

MAD is hit-and-miss, but I agree. That would be interesting.

Trammell Crow (+ MAD) was always one of my favorites and they have a very realistic chance.
Natoma is also top-notch and Onni doesn't waste any time.

Gensler did a good job with the Shanghai Tower, but is Lowe Enterprises ready for it?
The Handel Architects Group ... well I like their "Aykon City-Design", but still pretty average. With all due respect, I don't think that MacFarlane Partners is the best choice for a 1000+ skyscraper.

Long story short -> Trammell or Onni (in that order).


edit:

Question: Is there a metro tunnel below that one?

[Quixote]

If the site is 2.4 acres and the project is entitled for 1.3 million SF max, then we're likely not looking at a new tallest. The tower would have to have a small footprint in relation to the site and taper off at the top. I could be wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

[black_crow]

Originally Posted by Quixote

If the site is 2.4 acres and the project is entitled for 1.3 million SF max, then we're likely not looking at a new tallest. The tower would have to have a small footprint in relation to the site and taper off at the top. I could be wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

It is possible to go well over the 1.3 million.

Density Bonus = Units over the allowable density number. You have to comply with rules for housing needs.
That side has potential, but I would be happy with 800+.

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by Quixote

If the site is 2.4 acres and the project is entitled for 1.3 million SF max, then we're likely not looking at a new tallest. The tower would have to have a small footprint in relation to the site and taper off at the top. I could be wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Depends on the use. If it's office, I can't image the standard floor plates would be smaller than 25,000sf, which would mean a tower topping out at about 50 stories (non including any non-usable spire).

However, if it's residential, that's a whole different ballgame. Consider that two of Onnis towers, 820 Olive and 1000 Hill, have floor plates averaging 10,800sf and 9,800, respectively. Building one of those towers on this site would theoretically allow for a 130 story tower. Obviously they aren't going to build 130 stories, but if it went residential, then zoning would allow for a new tallest. Personally though, I don't see anyone building a 1,000ft+ residential tower right now, even if it includes a hotel as well.

[112597jorge]

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

Depends on the use. If it's office, I can't image the standard floor plates would be smaller than 25,000sf, which would mean a tower topping out at about 50 stories (non including any non-usable spire).

However, if it's residential, that's a whole different ballgame. Consider that two of Onnis towers, 820 Olive and 1000 Hill, have floor plates averaging 10,800sf and 9,800, respectively. Building one of those towers on this site would theoretically allow for a 130 story tower. Obviously they aren't going to build 130 stories, but if it went residential, then zoning would allow for a new tallest. Personally though, I don't see anyone building a 1,000ft+ residential tower right now, even if it includes a hotel as well.

This tower has the possibility of including hotel residential retail and office. Add density bonus and we are looking at a massive project. Hoping this is a new tallest. +400m is my hope.

[Blesha13]

If they intend to build a new tallest in the city, I hope they go 1300 ft and top it off with a 200 ft spire and this time IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TOWER, NOT ON THE SIDE. That is all.

[Future_Manifested]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

I wish these 4 devs would propose what they intend to do with the property. Imagine Onni wants to build 2 supertalls, but Holland only wants to build some 40 story. This lot literally has no limit for how tall you can build. Give it to someone who intends to build something massive.

I'm going to put my money on Onni. They're a proven developer that is willing to go all out in DTLA. They've proven themselves to get shit done and if there is anyone who i'd willingly want to own that property it would be Onni. Wouldn't be surprised if they fit 2 towers on that lot. They could very much change the entire landscape of the city. Give it a whole new perspective. Onni all the way.

Onni has a proven track record, but their designs are utterly boring and conservative . Have you seen their boring Vancouver glass towers? I wanna see something tall and innovative. My pick is MAD.

[BraveNewWorld]

Originally Posted by Blesha13

If they intend to build a new tallest in the city, I hope they go 1300 ft and top it off with a 200 ft spire and this time IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TOWER, NOT ON THE SIDE. That is all.

This might be surprising, but I actually like the way the spire is on the Wilshire Grand. The way the building curves in as it rises, and the spire being the pinnacle of that. For that reason I really do see it as the tallest in the skyline. I'm not sure everyone would agree with that though. When it's in the middle on a flat roof, it comes off a little forced to me. At least in my opinion.

But here's the real question. While Mad seems like they'll produce the most interesting design, which group/developer is likely to build a tower that really alters the skyline?

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by Quixote

If the site is 2.4 acres and the project is entitled for 1.3 million SF max, then we're likely not looking at a new tallest. The tower would have to have a small footprint in relation to the site and taper off at the top. I could be wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

They can build bigger & taller if they buy & transfer development rights from another parcel like Library Tower (US Bank Tower) did from the Central Library parcel. It may take the council to agree, but they did it with Library Tower. That established the precedent. Maybe develpment rights could be shifted from a low rise city government building. The city can always use more money. 1250-1300 feet, 80-90 story mixed use super-tall would be great! Could name it "Olympic Tower" in time for 2028, with a winged angel spire/statue on top.