LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[Mojeda101]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

What area? Metrolink?

I'd rather not say if you don't mind. Thank you.

Originally Posted by StethJeff

Your location is listed as "South Park, LA."

Doesn't mean I live there

[StethJeff]

Actually I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. But to each his own I guess.

[Mojeda101]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

Actually I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. But to each his own I guess.

I've seen people with multiple locations, how do you figure? Irrelevant.
Not everything on the internet is true bud

[Valyrian Steel]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

What area? Metrolink?

I live about 50 miles from DTLA and I take Metrolink, but mostly on the weekend when passes are $10 with unlimited rides including on the Metro system. It's too expensive for me on week days though.

[Kingofthehill]

Originally Posted by edluva

and our politicians have traditionally been crude becuase our populace has traditionally been crude. they are not as sophisticated as those of say Seattle, SF, Tokyo, or Chicago.

While people in LA do tend to be poorer, less educated and "cultured", and more working class than cities like SF, Tokyo, Boston, or Manhattan (which of these cities is nearly 50% poor Mexican and Central American immigrants? none), I think Chicago, as a whole, is far more blue collar and ghetto than LA. The good urban planning in the Loop area is the result of top-down urban planning, not because of the people there. LA has nothing as terrible, tragic, and utterly hopeless as the South and West sides of Chicago, of which are abandoned and crime-ridden.

London, NYC, Paris, Copenhagen, etc., have tons of immigrants, many of them poor and from legitimately f'd up countries. Part of the problem is the wealthy, nouveau riche people in LA, and their garish tastes, which tends not to favor things like good architecture, civic responsibility, education, etc., or other cosmopolitan ideas. In short: we have tacky rich people. I just got back from crisis-stricken Spain and Portugal (Lisbon, Madrid, Bilbao, San Sebastián, and Barcelona), and even with no jobs - and in Portugal's case, a per-capita GDP 50% less than our poorest state, Mississippi - people there have more class, dignity, and taste than 90% of the people back home.

[LMich]

Stay klassy, you two.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

While people in LA do tend to be poorer, less educated and "cultured", and more working class than cities like SF, Tokyo, Boston, or Manhattan (which of these cities is nearly 50% poor Mexican and Central American immigrants? none), I think Chicago, as a whole, is far more blue collar and ghetto than LA. The good urban planning in the Loop area is the result of top-down urban planning, not because of the people there. LA has nothing as terrible, tragic, and utterly hopeless as the South and West sides of Chicago, of which are abandoned and crime-ridden.

London, NYC, Paris, Copenhagen, etc., have tons of immigrants, many of them poor and from legitimately f'd up countries. Part of the problem is the wealthy, nouveau riche people in LA, and their garish tastes, which tends not to favor things like good architecture, civic responsibility, education, etc., or other cosmopolitan ideas. In short: we have tacky rich people. I just got back from crisis-stricken Spain and Portugal (Lisbon, Madrid, Bilbao, San Sebastián, and Barcelona), and even with no jobs - and in Portugal's case, a per-capita GDP 50% less than our poorest state, Mississippi - people there have more class, dignity, and taste than 90% of the people back home.

Totally. On my street, and adjacent streets, over the past few years, huge McMansions have been popping up. Garish, beige, hulking, disproportionate things, with little faux ornaments to give the illusion of class. And the worst part is, they consistently sell for like five, six, seven million dollars. I have a friend who, in his house, has framed an article from a magazine decrying huge, out of scale mansions being built in the Palisades. The photograph is of his house. I truly do not understand how people find those types of buildings attractive. At least, due to what I'm sure is sub-par construction, they won't last very long....

[202_Cyclist]

Kingofthehill:
" In short: we have tacky rich people."

But don't they live in Orange County?

[sings twin]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

Downtown is becoming costly for me to visit. Was given a parking ticket today for being late to my meter by less than 10 minutes. A few updates ago my window was smashed into. I can't keep up with this, I swear.

Leg cramped up midway through the update. Wasn't able to get the massive update as promised. Although I did get 8th/Grand, 8th/Olive, Wilshire Grand, Broad/Parcel, and Ava. With a little teaser for the Courthouse site.

Block 8 is just south of Ava right? If that's the case I think it broke ground. Otherwise, a new part of Ava is beginning to unfold. Photos should be up tonight.

Mojeda: I really enjoy your updates.

Bad news re the parking ticket. I am happy to contribute towards it .

[202_Cyclist]

Originally Posted by sings twin

Mojeda: I really enjoy your updates.

Bad news re the parking ticket. I am happy to contribute towards it .

Agreed and I fail to see how it is relevant at all where you live.

[202_Cyclist]

edluva:

LA's planners are powerless because LA's politicians have traditionally not "gotten it". this is why LA looks as stupid as it does. LA is banking its urban aspirations on the backs of tasteless hand-picked suburban developers and architects who themselves don't "get it"

Sure, some of the new buildings under construction or recently completed could look better but many of them are good enough. Sure, better architecture and buildings are preferable but this is not really what is important if you want a vibrant downtown.

What is important is how the building interacts with the street. Things like larding up buildings with two parking spaces per unit and excessive curb-cuts and setbacks from the street are more important than the quality of the architecture. Whether the building has ground-floor retail and the type of retail is more important than what the next 6-10 floors above it look like. Having sidewalks that are safe to walk on and visually interesting are also arguably more important.

[alki]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

I have a friend who, in his house, has framed an article from a magazine decrying huge, out of scale mansions being built in the Palisades. The photograph is of his house.

That's funny.....has he asked his parents why they bought the house; why they like a mcmansion?

[Wilcal]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

I've seen people with multiple locations, how do you figure? Irrelevant.
Not everything on the internet is true bud

Mojeda,
it doesn't matter where you live, you give a lot to this forum with your efforts. I live 65 miles from downtown, but distance does not always correlate to true interest or involvement. In reference to your car break-in and parking ticket, I'm sorry, "it's the shits." Sometimes, I too, go through periods of "no good deed goes unpunished." Hang in there, and take care of your leg.

[brudy]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

While people in LA do tend to be poorer, less educated and "cultured", and more working class than cities like SF, Tokyo, Boston, or Manhattan (which of these cities is nearly 50% poor Mexican and Central American immigrants? none), I think Chicago, as a whole, is far more blue collar and ghetto than LA. The good urban planning in the Loop area is the result of top-down urban planning, not because of the people there. LA has nothing as terrible, tragic, and utterly hopeless as the South and West sides of Chicago, of which are abandoned and crime-ridden.

London, NYC, Paris, Copenhagen, etc., have tons of immigrants, many of them poor and from legitimately f'd up countries. Part of the problem is the wealthy, nouveau riche people in LA, and their garish tastes, which tends not to favor things like good architecture, civic responsibility, education, etc., or other cosmopolitan ideas. In short: we have tacky rich people. I just got back from crisis-stricken Spain and Portugal (Lisbon, Madrid, Bilbao, San Sebastián, and Barcelona), and even with no jobs - and in Portugal's case, a per-capita GDP 50% less than our poorest state, Mississippi - people there have more class, dignity, and taste than 90% of the people back home.

You're talking about serious cultural differences which can't be simply reduced to bad taste, a lack of "class" or becoming suddenly wealthy. I'm not saying I disagree with you exactly, but this a simplified view.

[Wilcal]

Notice the intersection of this photo. If you referenced old photographs of third and main you would find that at one time this was probably near (if not) the peak intersection of the late 1800's downtown. The Victorian architecture was astounding, now all gone. Its ironic that Los Angeles is never given credit for having had a substantial downtown in the late 1800's. Not true. It's just that except for a few buildings, all have been demolished.

[MarshallKnight]

Originally Posted by Easy

That doesn't seem beneficial unless they are somehow also noted that the car is still there.

They're working on that. But they're also working on mobile apps that will alert you when you're running out of time, so that development isn't totally one-sided.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by alki

That's funny.....has he asked his parents why they bought the house; why they like a mcmansion?

I haven't. I never wanted to seem rude. They are actually all really nice people, despite living in a house that looks like a Four Seasons circa 1995.

[Wilcal]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

While people in LA do tend to be poorer, less educated and "cultured", and more working class than cities like SF, Tokyo, Boston, or Manhattan (which of these cities is nearly 50% poor Mexican and Central American immigrants? none), I think Chicago, as a whole, is far more blue collar and ghetto than LA. The good urban planning in the Loop area is the result of top-down urban planning, not because of the people there. LA has nothing as terrible, tragic, and utterly hopeless as the South and West sides of Chicago, of which are abandoned and crime-ridden.

London, NYC, Paris, Copenhagen, etc., have tons of immigrants, many of them poor and from legitimately f'd up countries. Part of the problem is the wealthy, nouveau riche people in LA, and their garish tastes, which tends not to favor things like good architecture, civic responsibility, education, etc., or other cosmopolitan ideas. In short: we have tacky rich people. I just got back from crisis-stricken Spain and Portugal (Lisbon, Madrid, Bilbao, San Sebastián, and Barcelona), and even with no jobs - and in Portugal's case, a per-capita GDP 50% less than our poorest state, Mississippi - people there have more class, dignity, and taste than 90% of the people back
home.

I'm inclined to agree with much of your observation. I think your comment about the nouveau riche of Los Angeles has some justification, but there is a lot of vulgar taste in any city. I have another observation which is based upon Los Angeles' sprawling geography. Historically in this nation the rich have essentially been the "city builders." In fact, there was a good book published many years ago with this same title about the subject. As far as Los Angeles is concerned, think of all the billionaires (I think according to the latest LA Business journal tally there were about 25 who make Los Angeles their home [or at least partly]). The only names that I see that are civically involved are Eli Broad, the Resnicks, David Geffen, perhaps a few more. But not as much as in other major national cities. And only Mr. Broad I think is truly interested in downtown. As far as many of the others, some have probably never stepped foot in downtown. They wouldn't be "caught dead" there. It seems as if many are isolated from downtown and are satisfied with their environs of Bel Air, Beverly Hills, Malibu and the like. At one time the big wealth of the city lived (on a consecutive timeline) on Bunker Hill, in Chester Place, Westlake, (you wouldn't know it today, but Westlake was one of the toniest areas of the city in the teens), Hancock Park, and so on, all moving west further away from downtown. Aslo at one time the wealthy in the city had tremendous influence on the growth of downtown. Evidence of this included the founding of the California Club, the Los Angeles Athletic Club, The Jonithan Club, and so on--all still downtown. They were the hang-outs for the wealthy, the wheeler dealers who influenced (and probably bribed) politicians. They decided on what and where to make their investments. Buildings, roads, streets, rail spurs, factories, housing, etc. All elements, the remnants of which, make-up our downtown today. As these people moved west of downtown, it literally became "out of sight--out of mind." I can think of many U.S, cities which still have major wealth near their cores. Nob Hill, Pacific Heights, Beacon Hill, Back Bay, North Michigan ave., and so on. For the most part downtown Los Angeles is basically surrounded by either a low income or poverty stricken population. No offense to these poorer populations--but they are not the city builders. That's just a fact.

[Munchitup]

Interesting piece that relates to some of the conversations had on here about new development in DTLA and elsewhere, from Which Way LA on KCRW: http://www.kcrw.com/media-player/mediaPlayer2.html?type=audio&id=ww130717high-rise_low-rise_a

[ConstructDTLA]

Originally Posted by Wilcal

I'm inclined to agree with much of your observation. I think your comment about nouveau riche of Los Angeles has some justification. But I have another observation which is based upon Los Angeles' sprawling geography. Historically in this nation the rich have essentially been the "city builders." In fact, there was a good book published many years ago with this same title about the subject. As far as Los Angeles is concerned, think of all the billionaires (I think according to the latest LA Business journal tally there were about 25 who make Los Angeles their home [or at least partly]). The only names that I see that are civically involved are Eli Broad, the Resnicks, David Geffen, perhaps a few more. But not as much as in other major national cities. And only Broad, I think, is truly interested in downtown. As far as many of the others, some have probably never stepped foot in downtown. They wouldn't be "caught dead" there. It seems as if many are isolated from downtown and are satisfied with their environs of Beverly Hills and Malibu. At one time the big wealth of the city lived (on a consecutive timeline) on Bunker Hill, in Chester Place, Westlake, (you wouldn't know it today, but Westlake was one of the toniest areas of the city in the teens), Hancock Park, and so on, all moving west further away from downtown. At one time the wealthy in the city had tremendous influence on the growth of downtown. Evidence of this included the founding of the California Club, the Los Angeles Athletic Club, The Jonithan Club, and so on--all still downtown. They were the hang-outs for the wealthy, the wheeler dealers who influenced (and probably bribed) politicians. They decided on what and where to make their investments. Buildings, roads, streets, rail spurs, factories, housing, etc. All elements, the remnants of which, make-up our downtown today. As these people moved west of downtown, it literally became "out of sight--out of mind." I can think of many U.S, cities which still have major wealth near their cores. Nob Hill, Pacific Heights, Beacon Hill, Back Bay, North Michigan ave., and so on. Downtown Los Angeles is basically surrounded by poverty. No offense to the poorer populations--but they are not the city builders. That's just a fact.

Great writeup Wilcal - and so true. When you look at the big picture of Downtown LA you start to realize that it will never be one of the great Downtowns of the nation. All this development is nice, but in the end Downtown will be more of a neighborhood - and less of a true downtown. Thats just the way LA is, I'm not being negative or positive about it.