LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Gram3000

Dont forget about City West! I would like to see a hood "kickstarter" like a Kimpton or could you imagine a W (ground-up) somewhere on Wilshire or Bixel? I think a Le Meridien (ground up or adapt reuse w modern addition) across from MacAurthur Park along Wilshire would somehow bring back some of the old school 30's/40s sophistication Wilshire was known for before its downward spiral in that area.

I never quite understand the City West boosters who occasionally pop up on this forum. They've either never been there, don't understand that DTLA proper has a ton of work to do before anything BIG can happen in City West, or simply live in City West and can't wait for their neck of the woods to finally mature.

City West is going to remain condos/apts and maybe offices for the foreseable future barring something miraculous happening, like the 110 Cap Park. Without that, why would anyone build a 5-star hotel in City West over, gee I don't know, South Park, Financial District, Grand, Hollywood, WeHo, BH, SaMo, . . .

[Easy]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

I never quite understand the City West boosters who occasionally pop up on this forum. They've either never been there, don't understand that DTLA proper has a ton of work to do before anything BIG can happen in City West, or simply live in City West and can't wait for their neck of the woods to finally mature.

City West is going to remain condos/apts and maybe offices for the foreseable future barring something miraculous happening, like the 110 Cap Park. Without that, why would anyone build a 5-star hotel in City West over, gee I don't know, South Park, Financial District, Grand, Hollywood, WeHo, BH, SaMo, . . .

Just a few short years ago essentially the same thing could have been said of downtown boosters. I'm not a city west booster, but I think that people do tend to get too hung up on it being a different area than "downtown" just because it's separated by a freeway. It could be considered to be as much "downtown" as Little Tokyo and the Arts District and it's certainly more convenient to the higher paying jobs downtown than either of those two neighborhoods. It's not hard to imagine it seeing significant change over the next 10 years.

Now MacArthur Park OTOH...

[pwright1]

Originally Posted by citywatch

ty for that pic & post. Personal observations about dt always are the most helpful & interesting to me.

the success of stores like ralphs & the new target will help give confidence to other retailers to enter the hood. however, I do understand some ppl having doubts about the ability of more pricey stores to succeed in dt. So whether the hood will ever have the ability to support a nordstroms or certainly a bloomingdales, much less make the existing macys....which someone in a yelp review said was described by a sales clerk who helped her as being a 'ghetto' macys....less of a weak link, is open to question.

The dt Macy's is still one of the top grossing Macy's in the area. Doesn't seem any worse than any other Macy's in the area. The one in Century City is horrible and much worse imo.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Easy

Just a few short years ago essentially the same thing could have been said of downtown boosters. I'm not a city west booster, but I think that people do tend to get too hung up on it being a different area than "downtown" just because it's separated by a freeway. It could be considered to be as much "downtown" as Little Tokyo and the Arts District and it's certainly more convenient to the higher paying jobs downtown than either of those two neighborhoods. It's not hard to imagine it seeing significant change over the next 10 years.

Now MacArthur Park OTOH...

citywatch will remind you just how many parking lots that create and reactions from people remain throughout DTLA proper. This neighborhood has prime land for development seemingly everywhere. Prime land that will take multiple building booms to cover.

For someone wanting to build a 5-star hotel, what incentive would they have placing it in City West rather than DTLA other than $$$? 5-star hotels generally go for prime real estate so I don't see a situation where that would happen any time soon.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

For someone wanting to build a 5-star hotel, what incentive would they have placing it in City West rather than DTLA other than $$$? 5-star hotels generally go for prime real estate so I don't see a situation where that would happen any time soon.

I can't disagree with that, but I could envision city west getting less expensive hotels like Holiday Inn, Courtyard Marriott, or even Embassy Suites.

[Gram3000]

I never quite understand the City West boosters who occasionally pop up on this forum

Im not just a City West but DTLA booster who loves my city and wants the best from it, only thing is Im loving from afar as I currently live in the Dallas area.

They've either never been there, don't understand that DTLA proper has a ton of work to do before anything BIG can happen in City West, or simply live in City West and can't wait for their neck of the woods to finally mature.

Ive been through there a few times and yes it has alot to work on (as the whole of DTLA does), I normally stay within the freeway loop but as someone mentioned here, the prospect of having the 110 freeway cap would better solidify City West with the rest of DT proper as would the 101 cap will do for Chinatown, El Pueblo, Union Station areas.

Back to City West, there is tons of potential there and as we all saw with the proposals on the 1st page, developers envisioned it as well, I wouldve loved to see 1111 Wilshire and 1027 Wilshire in their original designs but its ok theres still more land avail for those types of development. A "W" or some kind of mid or high-end boutique hotels would definitely ignite the area OTOH, I understand that because of its close proximity to the FIDI that it should also have more corp. housing and possibly more mix-use development (office/ res.) as market permits. Also making many of C.west streets more ped friendly would enhance its desirability so Never say Never!!. Anyhow, Im soo pro DTLA that Im contemplating leaving Dallas after a 5 year stint, and coming back home to LA!

glad to be on this forum and contribute whatever I can!

[StethJeff]

NFL Really Wants Football in Dodger Stadium's Chavez Ravine
Monday, October 22, 2012, by Adrian Glick Kudler

Will the Downtown NFL stadium project ever have a non-dramatic moment? Now the NFL is saying it doubts the Farmers Field project (which also includes an LA Convention Center overhaul) will ever get built and that they're feeling very good about a new football stadium in Chavez Ravine, aka the home of Dodger Stadium. CBS Sports reports on an update from the NFL's Los Angeles committee--first the bad news, "the NFL essentially ruled out a move for next season," so no matter what, LA won't get a team until at least 2014. Now the crazy news: One highly-connected source maintained that Dodger Stadium has been and still is 'the preferred choice' of all the current [Los Angeles football stadium] options." This isn't the first time the idea's been floated, but it's probably a little surprising to all those city officials who have been pushing the hell out of the Downtown project.

Farmers Field developer AEG is up for sale and apparently the league is skeptical that whoever buys it "would be willing to pour massive amounts of money into the downtown project, as the current deal for prospective funding required AEG to do" and furthermore "there remain significant issues regarding parking and infrastructure in this area" (the project includes several parking structures, plus upgrades to the 101 and the nearby Metro station). Chavez Ravine, on the other hand, has "abundant" parking and space (largely owned by disastrous former Dodgers own Frank McCourt) and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell "called it 'a terrific site' and seemed enthused about the possibility."

The NFL is also still keeping an eye on the plans in Industry and Carson.

..................................................................................

Personally, I'm all for this. I've always thought that Chavez Ravine is perfect for an NFL stadium. Chavez Ravine has plenty of land with ample parking and is still in the heart of LA. A new stadium would create a terrific sports complex that would better justify developing remaining land for retail and most importantly could spur faster development of rail along Sunset/Chavez. As it currently sits, Chavez Ravine is totally underused considering the amount of land, distance to DTLA, and density/development of the surrounding areas.

I think most of us have lived with Farmer's Field because, frankly, we've been desperate for both a) revitalization and development in DTLA as well as b) bring the NFL back to LA. Farmer's Field accomplishes both despite the fact that it's an imperfect option for a lot of reasons. Even though I'd kill to see Farmer's Field because it's still infinitely better than Industry/Carson/Coliseum/Rose Bowl, the parking issue, underdeveloped Light Rail station, convention center overhaul, and AEG sale are all serious problems with this proposal.

As much as I'd hate to delay the NFL's return to LA, I think it'd be worth it if an NFL stadium could be built in Chavez Ravine, igniting this area with future retail, rail, and activity.

[Chef Boyardee]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

NFL Really Wants Football in Dodger Stadium's Chavez Ravine
Monday, October 22, 2012, by Adrian Glick Kudler

Will the Downtown NFL stadium project ever have a non-dramatic moment? Now the NFL is saying it doubts the Farmers Field project (which also includes an LA Convention Center overhaul) will ever get built and that they're feeling very good about a new football stadium in Chavez Ravine, aka the home of Dodger Stadium. CBS Sports reports on an update from the NFL's Los Angeles committee--first the bad news, "the NFL essentially ruled out a move for next season," so no matter what, LA won't get a team until at least 2014. Now the crazy news: One highly-connected source maintained that Dodger Stadium has been and still is 'the preferred choice' of all the current [Los Angeles football stadium] options." This isn't the first time the idea's been floated, but it's probably a little surprising to all those city officials who have been pushing the hell out of the Downtown project.

Farmers Field developer AEG is up for sale and apparently the league is skeptical that whoever buys it "would be willing to pour massive amounts of money into the downtown project, as the current deal for prospective funding required AEG to do" and furthermore "there remain significant issues regarding parking and infrastructure in this area" (the project includes several parking structures, plus upgrades to the 101 and the nearby Metro station). Chavez Ravine, on the other hand, has "abundant" parking and space (largely owned by disastrous former Dodgers own Frank McCourt) and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell "called it 'a terrific site' and seemed enthused about the possibility."

The NFL is also still keeping an eye on the plans in Industry and Carson.

..................................................................................

Personally, I'm all for this. I've always thought that Chavez Ravine is perfect for an NFL stadium. Chavez Ravine has plenty of land with ample parking and is still in the heart of LA. A new stadium would create a terrific sports complex that would better justify developing remaining land for retail and most importantly could spur faster development of rail along Sunset/Chavez. As it currently sits, Chavez Ravine is totally underused considering the amount of land, distance to DTLA, and density/development of the surrounding areas.

I think most of us have lived with Farmer's Field because, frankly, we've been desperate for both a) revitalization and development in DTLA as well as b) bring the NFL back to LA. Farmer's Field accomplishes both despite the fact that it's an imperfect option for a lot of reasons. Even though I'd kill to see Farmer's Field because it's still infinitely better than Industry/Carson/Coliseum/Rose Bowl, the parking issue, underdeveloped Light Rail station, convention center overhaul, and AEG sale are all serious problems with this proposal.

As much as I'd hate to delay the NFL's return to LA, I think it'd be worth it if an NFL stadium could be built in Chavez Ravine, igniting this area with future retail, rail, and activity.

Wait, so for the Lakers, Clippers, Kings, concerts, etc. the "infrastructure" is fine, but for an nfl team it isn't? I'm not a huge sports fan, so i don't get this need to have an NFL team here. A rebuilt/new convention center? Sure. NFL stadium? Not really. LA is not some podunk town in the middle of nowhere that has to justify being a "big league" town by having an NFL team. Let's leave that to Jacksonvilles and green bays of the world.

As for dodgers stadium land, that's never gonna happen. Dodger owners have said it's not gonna be for a long time until they even look at all that land. And Mccourt doesn't have the money or the political connections to make anything happen. So, city of industry it is. NFL's model for the last 20 years or so has been to build tadiums in the burbs.

[RuFFy]

The NFL is doing what it always does, it attempts to lure competing bids to use as leverage in their negotiations locally and nationally. Locally because pitting Roski on AEG on the investors at Dodger Stadium and Frank McCourt yields the opportunity to negotiate more favorable terms. Also, having a red hot return to LA discussion on the table allows them to hijack tax payers in other cities afraid of losing their team to LA for new stadiums and stadium improvements. LA should just walk away from the table. Over the years over and over again the NFL has done this. I don't know why anybody would be surprised, it should be expected as a regular play from the NFL play book. I'd like to see AEG move on on the idea of the NFL and serve them a dish of their own medicine. LA, plainly and simply, just doesn't need the NFL the way the NFL needs LA.

[ConstructDTLA]

Chavez Ravine isn't as good an idea as South Park. I highly doubt it'll happen out there, this looks like much fuss about nothing..

I hope its built here in Downtown. And that traffic is worse than even the biggest naysayers are saying it could be. And that all the proposed developments on these vacant lots go through. And I hope gas prices rise significantly. People need to get the f*** over themselves and wise up to see the automobile isn't the only way to get around.

A catalyst for change is in order.

[Rail Claimore]

Originally Posted by Chef Boyardee

Wait, so for the Lakers, Clippers, Kings, concerts, etc. the "infrastructure" is fine, but for an nfl team it isn't?

NFL game attendees skew suburban, and many are tailgaters, meaning they bring their RVs with them: having lots of parking around a stadium is pretty much a must. All the new downtown football stadiums (not talking about other sports here) that have been built in the past 20 years have huge garages around them and have done practically nothing to spur urban development in their immediate vicinity. I say let them build it next to Dodger Stadium: Downtown LA doesn't need something that's going to be used only 8 Sundays a year take up valuable space in the form of a stadium and the necessary surrounding infrastructure.

[Just-In-Cali]

More News from CurbedLA On the Wilshire Grand

Work Officially Begins at Site of LA's Second Tallest Tower



Tuesday, October 23, 2012, by Adrian Glick Kudler

The 1952 Wilshire Grand hotel finally started for-real coming down today at a big press event at which officials "cut a ceremonial beam out of the building's iconic entrance on Wilshire Blvd." (The building's been closed since last year.) Korean Air is redeveloping the site with an enormous tower (scaled back from two towers)--it'll be 70 stories with a lobby on the top floor and have 900 hotel rooms, 400,00 square feet of office space, and "exciting new restaurants," according to a press release. Those 70 stories will make it second tallest in Los Angeles only to the US Bank building. AC Martin is designing the building, but so far renderings are still pretty sketchy. Deconstruction should take about a year as the building is "dismantled piece-by-piece to allow for recycling of raw materials and [to] reduce traffic impacts to neighbors." The new Wilshire Grand is set to open in 2017.

Looking promising. It may have only 70 floors, but that crown and spire easily top 1000'.

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

NFL Really Wants Football in Dodger Stadium's Chavez Ravine
Monday, October 22, 2012, by Adrian Glick Kudler

Will the Downtown NFL stadium project ever have a non-dramatic moment? Now the NFL is saying it doubts the Farmers Field project (which also includes an LA Convention Center overhaul) will ever get built and that they're feeling very good about a new football stadium in Chavez Ravine, aka the home of Dodger Stadium. CBS Sports reports on an update from the NFL's Los Angeles committee--first the bad news, "the NFL essentially ruled out a move for next season," so no matter what, LA won't get a team until at least 2014. Now the crazy news: One highly-connected source maintained that Dodger Stadium has been and still is 'the preferred choice' of all the current [Los Angeles football stadium] options." This isn't the first time the idea's been floated, but it's probably a little surprising to all those city officials who have been pushing the hell out of the Downtown project.

Farmers Field developer AEG is up for sale and apparently the league is skeptical that whoever buys it "would be willing to pour massive amounts of money into the downtown project, as the current deal for prospective funding required AEG to do" and furthermore "there remain significant issues regarding parking and infrastructure in this area" (the project includes several parking structures, plus upgrades to the 101 and the nearby Metro station). Chavez Ravine, on the other hand, has "abundant" parking and space (largely owned by disastrous former Dodgers own Frank McCourt) and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell "called it 'a terrific site' and seemed enthused about the possibility."

The NFL is also still keeping an eye on the plans in Industry and Carson.

..................................................................................

Personally, I'm all for this. I've always thought that Chavez Ravine is perfect for an NFL stadium. Chavez Ravine has plenty of land with ample parking and is still in the heart of LA. A new stadium would create a terrific sports complex that would better justify developing remaining land for retail and most importantly could spur faster development of rail along Sunset/Chavez. As it currently sits, Chavez Ravine is totally underused considering the amount of land, distance to DTLA, and density/development of the surrounding areas.

I think most of us have lived with Farmer's Field because, frankly, we've been desperate for both a) revitalization and development in DTLA as well as b) bring the NFL back to LA. Farmer's Field accomplishes both despite the fact that it's an imperfect option for a lot of reasons. Even though I'd kill to see Farmer's Field because it's still infinitely better than Industry/Carson/Coliseum/Rose Bowl, the parking issue, underdeveloped Light Rail station, convention center overhaul, and AEG sale are all serious problems with this proposal.

As much as I'd hate to delay the NFL's return to LA, I think it'd be worth it if an NFL stadium could be built in Chavez Ravine, igniting this area with future retail, rail, and activity.

I agree. It makes A LOT more sense to put the NFL at Chavez Ravine and Dodger Stadium at LA Live. Football goers LOVE to tailgate so they need all that parking spaces for it, IT IS a suburban sport after all.. Baseball doesn't, its an urban sport. San Diego is a perfect example... Petco Park is in downtown SD next to the Gaslamp Quarter, while Qualcomm stadium is north east of downtown in mission valley surrounded by A LOT of parking spaces BUT connected to downtown by rail.... Everyone is happy! LA could even do better and do light rail connection and/or streetcars. Baseball Stadiums are used more than football stadiums so its better for the football one to be left surrounded by the dead lots than the busier baseball stadium.. which will be better for LA live and downtown area

[RuFFy]

Perhaps the Angels are the best choice for Downtown.

[blackcat23]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesDreamin

I agree. It makes A LOT more sense to put the NFL at Chavez Ravine and Dodger Stadium at LA Live. Football goers LOVE to tailgate so they need all that parking spaces for it, IT IS a suburban sport after all.. Baseball doesn't, its an urban sport. San Diego is a perfect example... Petco Park is in downtown SD next to the Gaslamp Quarter, while Qualcomm stadium is north east of downtown in mission valley surrounded by A LOT of parking spaces BUT connected to downtown by rail.... Everyone is happy! LA could even do better and do light rail connection and/or streetcars. Baseball Stadiums are used more than football stadiums so its better for the football one to be left surrounded by the dead lots than the busier baseball stadium.. which will be better for LA live and downtown area

I've also come around to this line of thinking much more in the past few days. I know AEG wants the NFL since it's so damned lucrative, but a baseball stadium would be much more beneficial for the surrounding businesses in South Park.

[DIESELPOLO]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

The NFL is doing what it always does, it attempts to lure competing bids to use as leverage in their negotiations locally and nationally. Locally because pitting Roski on AEG on the investors at Dodger Stadium and Frank McCourt yields the opportunity to negotiate more favorable terms. Also, having a red hot return to LA discussion on the table allows them to hijack tax payers in other cities afraid of losing their team to LA for new stadiums and stadium improvements. LA should just walk away from the table. Over the years over and over again the NFL has done this. I don't know why anybody would be surprised, it should be expected as a regular play from the NFL play book. I'd like to see AEG move on on the idea of the NFL and serve them a dish of their own medicine. LA, plainly and simply, just doesn't need the NFL the way the NFL needs LA.

::stands up and proceeds to slow clap::

[Mojeda101]

Originally Posted by Just-In-Cali

Will be one of LA's most ionic buildings! Hope this inspires other towers to step it up and begin construction.

[Quixote]

Some of you guys are forgetting that Farmers Field would double as convention center space and play host to Super Bowls, Final Fours, etc. It would be a multi-purpose venue.

The topic of a stadium in Chavez Ravine has long been discussed, but no concrete proposals have ever come forth. The only reason why this idea has resurfaced is because of the situation surrounding the sale of AEG. It should be noted that the NFL has never expressed dissatisfaction with the idea of Farmers Field (they would much rather have that than Grand Crossing). I think they know in their hearts that a Chavez Ravine stadium isn't going to happen. We'll see.

And as a rabid sports fan, I take offense to anyone who suggests that LA doesn't need an NFL team. I'm sure LASF does too.

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

Perhaps the Angels are the best choice for Downtown.

Wouldn't it be awesome if the NFL were to move to Chavez Ravine and the Angels were to move to the AEG site?? South Park would get an even bigger boost, and Chavez Ravine could become a new hub of activity. Also, as LosAngelesDreamin mentioned, it could spur the development of a light rail line along chavez/sunset. I've always thought there needed to be a rail line along that corridor.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by Chef Boyardee

Wait, so for the Lakers, Clippers, Kings, concerts, etc. the "infrastructure" is fine, but for an nfl team it isn't? I'm not a huge sports fan, so i don't get this need to have an NFL team here. A rebuilt/new convention center? Sure. NFL stadium? Not really. LA is not some podunk town in the middle of nowhere that has to justify being a "big league" town by having an NFL team. Let's leave that to Jacksonvilles and green bays of the world.

As for dodgers stadium land, that's never gonna happen. Dodger owners have said it's not gonna be for a long time until they even look at all that land. And Mccourt doesn't have the money or the political connections to make anything happen. So, city of industry it is. NFL's model for the last 20 years or so has been to build tadiums in the burbs.

Whether you like it or not, sports teams are huge and Angeleno sports fans would kill to have an NFL team. I don't think that point can be overstated.

The infrastructure needed for the NFL is vastly different from that of other sports teams. The number of fans is much bigger in the NFL and tailgating is an enormous part of football culture. Go to USC on a Saturday. Although Farmer's Field is a brilliant location for a variety of reasons (DTLA location, LACC renovation/upgrade, Staples adjacent, LA Live restaurants/bars adjacent, rail connections, etc.), one of its biggest drawbacks is a big one and that is having enough parking space for thousands of tailgaters.

An upgraded Chavez Ravine is about as close to DTLA as you can get and still have massive amounts of available parking with the added benefit of spurring new rail/retail in the area.

Whether Chavez Ravine is ever able to happen because of McCourt or the Dodgers in another story. Maybe its able to happen, maybe its not, but that doesn't change the fact that the site makes a lot of sense for an NFL stadium.