LOS ANGELES | METRO Project Rundown 2.0 (non-downtown)

[ChelseaFC]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

That's some quality stuff. That could be built in the 1920s and people wouldn't know the difference.

Pasadena Planning Commission is very particular about architectural design. Architects often have to go back and make changes multiple times.

This one in particular is on a major intersection across from PCC and has been under review for years: https://www.pasadenanow.com/main/des...-specific-plan

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by Quixote

The problem with LA, particular LA city, is that it has both an unkempt appearance and a sparse feeling.

A city or hood can be either nice looking with not too many ppl strolling around. Or it can be rundown looking but have lots of ppl walking around. What no city or hood should want is to look both unkempt & feel sparse.

Areas around the Coliseum, including the rundown sections of the expo pk area, come alive & seem less sketchy when events are taking place & lots of ppl are walking around. In comparison, notice how Sunset blvd looks fairly nice, but its sidewalks aren't full of ppl.

https://youtu.be/vVAZcqe9Yto

Compare that with the the most publicized cities of the world often filled with pedestrians. I can live with LA being car centric instead of sidewalk centric, but I don't have patience with it being rundown or seedy looking....much less issues with the city's crime rate or homeless encampments.

I prefer this to a typical big urban setting 24/7/365 associated with an east coast city or parts of europe or Asia. So LA shooting for having hoods that are along this line...one several miles to its south....or nearer around Pasadena, etc, is more realistic or the way to go.

https://youtu.be/tm4EY7Z9otM

[HeySparky]

Looks like one of the worst strip malls in the city at Vermont and Hollywood Blvd will get redeveloped with 3 towers.

https://www.jzarch.la/project/olive-hill/

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by HeySparky

Looks like one of the worst strip malls in the city at Vermont and Hollywood Blvd will get redeveloped with 3 towers.

https://www.jzarch.la/project/olive-hill/

Wow, that would be so amazing. I've walked by that so many times and wondered why it wasn't redeveloped.

How real is this?

Edit
Only 9 stories? Eh. I guess.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

That would be a tremendous improvement compared to whats there now.

Btw, i dont think things need to be very tall to make an area urban or better looking. In my opinion, the best looking urban stretch in LA might just be Hollywood blvd between Western and St Andrews. If we could have all our major streets look like that, it would be a tremendous victory.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

That would be a tremendous improvement compared to whats there now.

Btw, i dont think things need to be very tall to make an area urban or better looking. In my opinion, the best looking urban stretch in LA might just be Hollywood blvd between Western and St Andrews. If we could have all our major streets look like that, it would be a tremendous victory.

Sure, but it would be nice to have a few 20 story towers or so near a metro stop in a popular neighborhood. Not everything needs to be 5-8 or 9 stories. Its bad enough the zoning for Vermont is just trash, allowing no highrises below a subway corridor.
One of the dumbest things LA's ever done. Also the "gentrification" fear crap doesn't help either.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Sure, but it would be nice to have a few 20 story towers or so near a metro stop in a popular neighborhood. Not everything needs to be 5-8 or 9 stories. Its bad enough the zoning for Vermont is just trash, allowing no highrises below a subway corridor.
One of the dumbest things LA's ever done. Also the "gentrification" fear crap doesn't help either.

Its nice to have high-rises in certain areas; but, there is no way the City of Los Angeles is going to allow 15-20+ story buildings to loom over and behind its only UNESCO World Heritage site.

Originally Posted by HeySparky

Looks like one of the worst strip malls in the city at Vermont and Hollywood Blvd will get redeveloped with 3 towers.

https://www.jzarch.la/project/olive-hill/

Great find Sparky! I'm curious who the developer behind this is... it says entitlements on the way, but is this just to sell the project as fully entitled or to actually develop it?

The Hollywood site of what used to be the Ametron building


What was once proposed


What we are getting

[Easy]

I don't see anything submitted to city planning for 1601 N Vermont. Maybe this is aspirational and to be used to sell the land?

[Easy]

LABJ is reporting that the city will likely be entering into exclusive negotiations with Hudson Pacific Properties for the Marlton Square redevelopment. They've indicated that the project will include a number of community-based and black-owned businesses, but Hudson is pretty high end. This project along with the Baldwin Hills Mall redevelopment next door will add enough jobs to make gentrification inevitable. Whether that's good or bad is up to you.

https://labusinessjournal.com/develo...h-l-a-project/

https://la.urbanize.city/post/city-l...-baldwin-hills

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Sure, but it would be nice to have a few 20 story towers or so near a metro stop in a popular neighborhood. Not everything needs to be 5-8 or 9 stories. Its bad enough the zoning for Vermont is just trash, allowing no highrises below a subway corridor.
One of the dumbest things LA's ever done. Also the "gentrification" fear crap doesn't help either.

I agree with you on both those points

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

The Hollywood site of what used to be the Ametron building

What was once proposed

What we are getting

What we are getting is far better than what was proposed. Sure it's shorter, but it's much better urbanism. The street is met by nice retail and then residences starting on floor two. In contrast, the original proposal had a gigantic parking podium. I'd rather have nice street interaction and eyes on the street directly above the street level than height.

Generally, I think height is overrated on here. Most of the cities with the best urbanism are largely midrise (think Paris, Madrid, etc.). I'd prefer consistent mid rise throughout our urban core than high rises with parking podiums. Sure, high rises look cool and it's nice to have a skyline, but that's not what makes a city nice or livable.

[Radio5]

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

What we are getting is far better than what was proposed. Sure it's shorter, but it's much better urbanism. The street is met by nice retail and then residences starting on floor two. In contrast, the original proposal had a gigantic parking podium. I'd rather have nice street interaction and eyes on the street directly above the street level than height.

Generally, I think height is overrated on here. Most of the cities with the best urbanism are largely midrise (think Paris, Madrid, etc.). I'd prefer consistent mid rise throughout our urban core than high rises with parking podiums. Sure, high rises look cool and it's nice to have a skyline, but that's not what makes a city nice or livable.

Agreed. Especially in this instance where you have balconies, ie eyes on the street, and private outside space for residences. Something nice seeing people or plants/objects on balconies.

[Illithid Dude]

The real winner is that this (potentially fantastical) Vermont proposal features 1200 residential units. That's the kind of ambition LA could use more of!

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Easy

It will set things in motion assuming that they vote yes. Either way I see this as being decades out to even start. I imagine that with the current D line extension, with the existing E line, and with the planned Sepulveda line that the westside is already getting more than most areas. Yes it's needed, but I don't see this happening before there is a rail line down Vermont and that's already decades away.

It gets the conversation started again after formal talks having basically ended nearly 15 years ago. This is a 3.5-mile, 4-stop extension. Since it’s a straight alignment, I’d peg the cost at $3.75-4 billion. But because it will connect with Sepulveda and Crenshaw (which can both be factored into cost-benefit analysis since they’re planned and have funding) and because Santa Monica is both job rich and a popular destination in general, I think it would be cost-competitive enough to receive federal funding. So the project really costs us $2 billion-ish.

There are potential local funding mechanisms like parcel taxes, lifting the Prop A/C subway ban, amending A/C/R/M to decrease highway capital and allocate more for grade-separated rail and a portion specifically for subway, etc. The word “subway” has instant appeal (for the most part), and “grade-separated” could mean subway or elevated. Unlike R/M, A/C don’t allocate funding for specific projects. This language would force us to commit to spending more on rail projects, and that’s the point. The most expensive rail corridors are also the ones that are the most cost-effective and have the greatest potential to reshape travel patterns. In particular, subway corridors which would provide direct routes from one area to another that currently require multiple freeway changes (e.g. a branch of the Vermont corridor going up Alvarado and underneath Echo Park or Silver Lake to Colorado/Brand in Glendale) are competitive with car travel at all times of the day.

But instead Metro wants to focus on a $7.9-billion extension of the Gold Line, which has already been truncated. Ridiculous.

[Illithid Dude]

New tower proposed for the corner of Wilshire and Barrington.



https://la.urbanize.city/post/23-sto...vard-brentwood

Always interesting to see a high rise proposed for the far west side. Perhaps this means the last one California Landmark constructed has leased well.

[LAisthePlace]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

New tower proposed for the corner of Wilshire and Barrington.

Always interesting to see a high rise proposed for the far west side. Perhaps this means the last one California Landmark constructed has leased well.

Pretty nice design! Love the mix of office + housing + retail in the same building.

Brentwood is evolving from a few skyscrapers into a proper skyline even before the Purple Line gets close.

[citywatch]

I recall when the area around hollywood & vine was full of parking lots & tired retail strip bldgs. I recall the properties to the east of the Pantages theater, for example, being covered with asphalt for cars & an auto parts store. Given the old time publicity of 'hollywood & vine,' the setting wasn't ready for prime time.

In 2022, it finally moves closer to where it should have always been...

• Video Link

[ocman]

Originally Posted by citywatch

I recall when the area around hollywood & vine was full of parking lots & tired retail strip bldgs. I recall the properties to the east of the Pantages theater, for example, being covered with asphalt for cars & an auto parts store. Given the old time publicity of 'hollywood & vine,' the setting wasn't ready for prime time.

In 2022, it finally moves closer to where it should have always been...

• Video Link

It’s notable how much a place improves when there aren’t rows of buskers/sellers trying to sell you shit. Although this guy’s videos tend to be highly edited, meaning they leave all that out including the homelessness. These areas desperately need parks and plazas to break up the monotony. (The cactus area looked like it had potential and then he turns the corner and it’s just hardscaping in front of a parking structure exit area). It’s just walking endlessly on sidewalks from place to place and it’s punishing. You’re constantly forced to keep moving. You can see there are few places around this area to just sit, relax, and just take in the city without ducking into a business/store.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by ocman

It’s notable how much a place improves when there aren’t rows of buskers/sellers trying to sell you shit. Although this guy’s videos tend to be highly edited, meaning they leave all that out including the homelessness. These areas desperately need parks and plazas to break up the monotony. (The cactus area looked like it had potential and then he turns the corner and it’s just hardscaping in front of a parking structure exit area). It’s just walking endlessly on sidewalks from place to place and it’s punishing. You’re constantly forced to keep moving. You can see there are few places around this area to just sit, relax, and just take in the city without ducking into a business/store.

Capping the 101 and putting greenspace on top of it could certainly help with this.

[HeySparky]

I live off Vine and it is worse in 2022 than it was in 2012 by a huge margin. In fact, most Hollywood locals avoid walking down Vine ever since the pandemic started. Many businesses have closed on the street like APL, Soprano, Starbucks (x2), WeWork, The Black Cat, the fancy Walgreens....hell even the Dollar Tree, said it was not safe to continue operating on Vine and have closed their doors. Bed Bath & Beyond which occupies a massive footprint is the next store that is set to close. Vine has fallen on very hard times lately, it is regressing, it has not improved at all.

Originally Posted by citywatch

I recall when the area around hollywood & vine was full of parking lots & tired retail strip bldgs. I recall the properties to the east of the Pantages theater, for example, being covered with asphalt for cars & an auto parts store. Given the old time publicity of 'hollywood & vine,' the setting wasn't ready for prime time.

In 2022, it finally moves closer to where it should have always been...

• Video Link