LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 6.0

[citywatch]

urbanize.la

Tony Hoover
Chetrit who owns Trinity owns the lot next to this and they said they will never develop that parking lot and will want it for parking for the hotel and staging for film crews where they make a ton of money. I’m betting this is why the developer has signage on that side as they know that lot won’t get developed and can make a ton of money with outdoor advertising.

chetrit strikes again!

[38 Geary]

^ That project has gone from a 340 ft, 29-story building with 205 units and 286 stall 7-story parking podium to a 200+ ft, 19-story building with 329 units (36 of which are affordable) with 14 stalls of subterranean parking, to a 108 ft, 8-story building with 334 studio units (37 of which are affordable) with no on-site parking.

The height reduction is unfortunate but the latest proposal is actually the most urban minded of the three with no parking, something that I've been waiting for LA to start doing for quite some time. It's also the iteration that is probably going to be the most affordable for the average Angeleno.

The first one, although cool from a skyscraper enthusiast standpoint, was the least urban and least affordable, especially if we're talking about a high rise, likely luxury building, with many 2 and 3 bedroom units.

The second one is my favorite out of the three, especially from an aesthetic standpoint and the fact they minimized the parking and placed it underground, but also wasn't going to be as affordable as the latest proposal.

[citywatch]

^ My guess is the proj has been downsized for cost reasons. Capital is increasingly harder to find, & banks dealing with consumers are reportedly cutting back on things like limits on credit cards, car loans & mortgages. The same thing has to be happening to large commercial businesses too.

I'm assuming the structure on Hill St will now be wood instead of just steel. Maybe concrete & steel on the first floor, but wood above that.

Although this focuses on the cost of building a single family house, I believe the price factor for larger bldgs still applies...

Wood vs Steel Building Cost [Benefits & Drawbacks]

The cost of framing a 1,500-square-foot structure with steel is between $14,250 and $16,500. You can compare that to the cost of framing a 1,500 wood structure, which is between $1,500 and $7,500. That being said, wood framing has higher-finish costs.

A steel frame for a 1,500-square-foot house can cost between $14,250 and $16,500 in materials alone. Materials for a wooden frame of the same size would cost between $1,500 and $7,500. But if you’re looking into building a barn or a similar outdoor structure, steel would likely be a cheaper option. For example, a steel barn will cost between $25 and $35 per square foot on average. But a wooden barn costs $45 to $65 per square foot on average.

For example, steel frames are super durable. The material doesn’t warp overtime at all and it will never rot on you. That means with a steel frame, you’re basically paying extra upfront to minimize your repair bills down the road. Steel is also stronger than wood and isn’t flammable. There are a few drawbacks to picking a steel frame for your home as well. Cost is obviously number one. But steel frames are also worse at keeping a home insulated than wood ones. That means homes with steel frames could have higher heating and cooling costs.

[scania]

Originally Posted by homebucket

^ That project has gone from a 340 ft, 29-story building with 205 units and 286 stall 7-story parking podium to a 200+ ft, 19-story building with 329 units (36 of which are affordable) with 14 stalls of subterranean parking, to a 108 ft, 8-story building with 334 studio units (37 of which are affordable) with no on-site parking.

The height reduction is unfortunate but the latest proposal is actually the most urban minded of the three with no parking, something that I've been waiting for LA to start doing for quite some time. It's also the iteration that is probably going to be the most affordable for the average Angeleno.

The first one, although cool from a skyscraper enthusiast standpoint, was the least urban and least affordable, especially if we're talking about a high rise, likely luxury building, with many 2 and 3 bedroom units.

The second one is my favorite out of the three, especially from an aesthetic standpoint and the fact they minimized the parking and placed it underground, but also wasn't going to be as affordable as the latest proposal.

This is actually great for DTLA. We have a plethora of high rises being built and more in the pipeline. Everyone can't pay $3k for a high rise studio apartment. I think it'll be great to have more of these type of developments in DTLA. It's a win win for everyone. And again...wooohooo for the possibility of 8th and Grand start of construction. It's my favorite in the pipeline and for the new ones that have just recently been built and that are going up now.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by scania

This is actually great for DTLA. We have a plethora of high rises being built and more in the pipeline. Everyone can't pay $3k for a high rise studio apartment. I think it'll be great to have more of these type of developments in DTLA. It's a win win for everyone. And again...wooohooo for the possibility of 8th and Grand start of construction. It's my favorite in the pipeline and for the new ones that have just recently been built are going up now.

Wow, we actually agree!

Homebucket’s observation of this proposal having the most housing units and zero on-site parking is something completely lost over in the comments on ULA.

I consider any housing development, especially one proposed to have 334 units, with no parking a major win. The design also makes accommodation for an adjacent development by not having balconies or windows on the south-facing side.

That said, it would be nice if they could use metal or fiber cement panels instead of stucco for the two street-facing sides.

[Charmy2]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

^ 1000 S. Hill is going vertical, but still on the base. Should take off any time now.

A Q1 start of 8th and Grand would be amazing. If it stays at 50 stories - and based on the skyline rendering - we're looking at yet another 600 footer.

Awesome! Thanks for the update. It really feels like California's cities aren't being gifted enough new skyscrapers.

[112597jorge]

Originally Posted by Charmy2

Awesome! Thanks for the update. It really feels like California's cities aren't being gifted enough new skyscrapers.

Its because our local and state governments make it very difficult to build and get adequate return on investments for developers looking to do business here unfortunately.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Charmy2

Awesome! Thanks for the update. It really feels like California's cities aren't being gifted enough new skyscrapers.

We, or at least LA, needs more developments like the one depicted above... 8-story building with 334 units and zero parking. Bonus points if it's modular and/or pre-fabricated (e.g. shipping containers). While it's a horizontal skyscraper, its height is greater than its width. It's much quicker to build that en mass and therefore urbanize quicker, all while doing a better job of attenuating the housing affordability crisis.

The ideal environment though is a mix of mid- and high-rise, and Downtown is one of the few places where you can build tall buildings in LA. On the one hand, DT is a bit of an island because of the freeway loop. But it's that "island effect" that makes skyscraper-building logical. The DTLA 2040 plan makes provisions for an additional 175,000 residents, but that would only render a population of 225-250,000. We really should aim for 400-450,000, or around 10% of the city population living in that 4-4.5-square-mile area. That, along with densification and gentrification in Westlake, Koreatown, and Hollywood would be enough to achieve a critical mass of urbanism and urbanites to fundamentally change the nature of the city.

[RuFFy]

Originally Posted by Easy

I don't usually respond to these types of posts but I think that the expression "don't feed the trolls" is a good one to follow. IMO there is only one persistent troll and I have had that person's posts blocked for a decade as 90% of their posts are not about DTLA development I only see the back and forth and quotes and I see a lot of that. I guess that some disagree with my approach and feel the need to feed trolls.

In general I find the large majority of posts here to be off topic. Lots of troll posts, responses to troll posts, random LA YouTube videos, and skyline shots. Posts about downtown development are often lost in the mix, if they are even there at all. I try not to contribute to the mess, so this is all that I'll have to say.

Sadly I have been reading this forum consistently since 2007 but after the same person you have blocked has flooded the threads with relentless off topic posts it has also attracted others that do the same. So for that reason I just browse now and don't post. This was by far my favorite forum at one time and was so nice when there were plenty of contributors and new former eager to learn about the growing community but that time seems to have passed. Still, I always hold out hope that a new group of active contributors will find interest in DTLA and flood out the google street view, power line and that one time I took my friend to DTLA posts.

[LA21st]

Don't forget the dumb right wing you tube videos.

[scania]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Don't forget the dumb right wing you tube videos.

Those people aren't happy with their own personal lives...so those type of people become a cancer to this forum. I wish I had the time to be a moderator. I know the moderators are busy with their personal lives.

[citywatch]

Some of the NE corner of 4th & Hill St is controlled by the MTA, but I don't know who now owns the parking lots & vacant food stand around the agency's property. Whoever does, they have at least painted over all the older tagging from months ago. The other side of the intersection is where the angel's landing proj is supposed to go up.

A few yrs ago, I thought it was almost a given that 4th St & Hill would be an active construction site. A demo permit around 2020 was issued for the land...for the old Taco House #1 stand....but Equity residential's plans for an apt tower never went forward. At least if they had cleared out the land, that would have helped. Not sure if Covid spooked the investors or whatever.

Instead of people writing as though they're more interested in this being a forum for The Jerry springer show, I wish someone with insiders knowledge about dtla could give an update about what occurred to Equity's proj....

https://youtu.be/q0LomWxV5QY?t=826

[craigs]

Saw this photo on LA Reddit and I'm drawing a blank--does anyone know what this project is?

[scania]

I noticed that on my way to the arts district. I can't remember what it is though. It's online somewhere on the internet.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Thats the Weingart towers in Skid Row at 6th and San Pedro

[craigs]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Thats the Weingart towers in Skid Row at 6th and San Pedro

Thanks! I don't remember seeing any rendering from this angle. I figured it was a known project, but I couldn't place it.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by craigs

The SSP guys in my prior city had regular forum "meats" for a good 15 years, which initially featured a ton of drinking and a 'no photos' policy, then morphed over the decades into group bike rides, pub crawls, European travel, etc. A good dozen of us are lifelong friends, like "come stay for a few days at our house" friends, and "part of the wedding party" friends. Being like-minded folks, many of those guys now work in architecture, transportation planning, development, city government, etc. And our spouses are also friends. My husband has asked why the LA gang isn't like that, and I don't know what to tell him other than there's a ton of negativity about LA in this subforum. Even today there's a post that includes harping on a violent crime committed inside a downtown business, and how local government supposedly has us on the precipice of civic doom, transit fail, and the loss of billions of investment dollars. Who wants to invite that kind of compulsive, perennial negativity into their off-forum life?

I'd be down to have a meet in person

In other news... Beaudry looks gorgeous. The material choices are outstanding. They still do have quite a few windows to install or replace.



This side will be covered with vines and plants that are already in place and that will grow into this wall. Also, the 7th+Fig shopping complex seems to be doing quite well. I'd say it's about 85% occupied with only 4 small stalls empty on the basement floor and in the food court. The old department store on the 8th street side and the 7th street glassy entryway retail space is currently occupied as the construction office and storage of Webcor for Beaudry is just waiting to be repurposed. I wonder what Brookfield will do with these spaces once Webcor moves out within the next couple months.


The roof of the department store is at plaza level and just waiting to be covered with some type of activity. I wish they would allow Gold's gym to occupy the outdoor plaza like during the 2020-2022 indoor shutdowns. I loved working out in the fresh outdoor air with views of high rises. Right now, it's just open and sparsely used


Mitsui's crown & ground are coming along



Onni's 1000 Hill


As a bonus, I found this on Instagram. Love the skyline peak from the North. The Grand is sized just right for the north easterly downslope of the skyline from its bunker hill elevation and the gap between it and Perla will be filled nicely with Onni Times Mirror and Tribune Tower. The City planning suggested/allowed Tribune to scale up their tower from its previously shorter thicker height into a taller/slimmer treat

[citywatch]

^ that's the type of post I like seeing in this forum....both pics & some written details, such as about the space that bullock's dept store once occupied on 8th St. (If a post doesn't interest or thrill me, I don't spend my time bitching about blocking or trolling. I just move to the next one....that's easier than turning the page of a book.)

The beaudry's webpage lists around 160 available apts out of around a total of 785. I don't know how Brookfield is releasing the bldgs's units to the public, so I'm not sure if the 160 apts do or don't indicate how quickly the tower is filling up. however, I like to think the demand is that strong.

https://www.beaudrydtla.com/availability/

meanwhile, I notice that urbanize la has a post about the opening of the moxy & AC hotel on Fig St.


urbanizela.com

[craigs]

hughfb3, thanks for the photo updates! It's especially great to see progress on 1000 S. Hill. That's the one to watch now that Beaudry is finished and 8th+Fig wraps up.

[Mojeda101]

If you guys had to guess, which project should be next to break ground? 2nd phase of Moxy? 8th/Hope tower? Perhaps the JW expansion or even Times Mirror Square?

I understand Onni likes to build their downtown projects one at a time so i'd imagine they'd do that after Olympic tower is finished. I haven't kept up with the scene lately so i'm curious what you guys think is the most optimistic or promising.