LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 6.0

[colemonkee]

Is that really why the Mitsui Fudosan tower sits at the center of it's site? I always figured it was due to placement of the amenity deck, particularly the pool, on the south end of the site, as that would get the most sun exposure for residents.

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Los Angeles city code no longer allows for significant blockages of view points on tall buildings in this close a proximity; which is why the other 8th and fig tower by Mitsui Fudosan is oddly in the center of its podium (mid-block) rather than on the corner, so as to not block 777 towers air rights. And if you look at the shape of the lot on an aerial google map, you will also see that the angle of 7th street also doesn’t allow the residential building to block the Ernst & Young tower.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

Is that really why the Mitsui Fudosan tower sits at the center of it's site? I always figured it was due to placement of the amenity deck, particularly the pool, on the south end of the site, as that would get the most sun exposure for residents.

I can’t imagine how it could be codified that the “air rights” of one tall building extend over and supersede the air rights of adjacent properties.

[bhunsberger]

Originally Posted by Doctorboffin

Totally agree. I also think if it turns out like the renders, it will be a great-looking tower. It is much more refined than the Vancouver-lite towers in South Park.

Amen. I’m glad Onni is on a roll downtown, but they could have done so much better in terms of simple design with the same exact materials. I hope they do a much better job with the LA Times development. Onni project renderings always look nice, but the real life projects fall short IMO.

[colemonkee]

^ Yeah, I'm really not a fan of the 12th and Flower towers. Awful finishes. And don't love how prominent they are on the skyline from the south.

[Niftybox]

Alright, I've changed my mind on Brookfield tower, after looking through Google maps and looking at some other renders, it's not going to be as big as I thought it would be. That one render does exaggerate it's length and overall size. It is actually quite narrow and not as long as I imaged it would be, which won't make DTLA look 'fat' like I thought it would. It also won't hide 777 from the freeway as much either. I've gone from disliking it to liking it.

And speaking of 12th (Hope) and Flower, I was 'hope'ful for that one, it looks about 2x worse than the render, if it looked even remotely like the render and had the color scheme shown I would have really liked it. It looks like generic early 2000's Miami condo towers.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

Is that really why the Mitsui Fudosan tower sits at the center of it's site? I always figured it was due to placement of the amenity deck, particularly the pool, on the south end of the site, as that would get the most sun exposure for residents.

It's not a pool deck thing for this one. Look at all new towers in relation to other towers around them; they are either staggered, or their mass is adjusted to spread the air rights. Examples to see are Metropolis, or google the 3D map of the relationship between Level/Atelier/825 S. Hill. The Mitsui Fudosan tower is actually on the same plane as the new Brookfield tower, which are both center/offset from the frames of the 2 existing 777/EY Towers. This actually gets me excited for the very skinny lot next to/north of the Mitsui Fudosan because this small lot is offset from the tower of Fudosan and on the other side are historical buildings. Look for a really tall one on this lot in the future.

Originally Posted by Easy

I can’t imagine how it could be codified that the “air rights” of one tall building extend over and supersede the air rights of adjacent properties.

This is exactly how air rights/building massing work in Los Angeles and the planning commission has a ton of say in this regard. Research the US bank tower and the Central Library. Our current *tallest* when it first opened was called the Library Tower and the only reason that building is able to achieve its height in its particular location is because it purchased air rights from the Library across the street, thereby giving it its first name. And Los Angeles isn't the only city with air rights... New York City has them, San Francisco has them. I imagine maybe Miami doesn't and Houston for sure doesn't have them because they flaunt their lack of zoning code

[colemonkee]

But air rights don't have anything to do with where the towers are placed on the site plan, at least in terms of Los Angeles building code. There are codes that place minimum distances between existing residential windows and new structures being built on adjacent lots, but nothing I've seen in the LA County or City building code that mandates that tower massings must be staggered for adjacent properties, much less on adjacent blocks.

The placement of this tower likely has more to do with sight lines and sun/shadow studies than anything mandated by local ordinance.

[BaldwinDPB]

I noticed that both tall projects: Figueroa Centre (925 Building) and 1300 Figueroa (City Lights Building) were removed from the proposed building list for downtown LA and placed on the cancelled list. Was this because both projects did not renew their applications to the city planning commission? I would sure hate to see these projects cancelling out. To bad 1300 could not be relocated one block east in order to spare the condominiums already built there.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

But air rights don't have anything to do with where the towers are placed on the site plan, at least in terms of Los Angeles building code. There are codes that place minimum distances between existing residential windows and new structures being built on adjacent lots, but nothing I've seen in the LA County or City building code that mandates that tower massings must be staggered for adjacent properties, much less on adjacent blocks.

The placement of this tower likely has more to do with sight lines and sun/shadow studies than anything mandated by local ordinance.

You are correct in that building placement is not explicitly written in ordinance while air rights are and I get that when I said “air rights” that threw the conversation off as it was not exactly what I was speaking to... What I’m speaking to are neighborhood plans and master plans done by the city. Sight lines, sun, shadows, the effect a building has on the skyline,height, massing, parking minimums... this is all put into consideration and adjusted when the planning commission of the city gets involved and makes requests to each project that a developer must adhere to.... hello 3 times revision Times mirror square!! Mutsui being placed in the north center has everything to do with the unique environmental planning codes that the city of Los Angeles requires.

Most of downtown is under a master plan that gets adjusted over time. The master plan that the city is studying for the civic center is displaying not what exactly the buildings will look like, but where the city wants the massing in relation to city hall. One building is diagonal so not to block city hall from certain views and none of which will go taller than the city hall.

You can also look at the amount of space Staples Center requires. Do a google view above it. Look at the circle ⭕️ of Staples Center’s roof and imagine that circle expanding outward. Look at how Oceanwide plaza and Circa’s towers are pushed away almost in an exact circle from Staples, AND their podiums are the exact height of staples center/LA Live... Even the new Moxy Hotel under construction next to Circa has a podium at the exact same height as the rest and even the Ritz Carlton massing in relation to the Lower JW Marriott is in this same circle. This was all part of the Staples Center area master plan dictating building massing and tower placement

[Easy]

There are two different concepts here. The basic principle is that when you buy real estate you own everything below ground towards the center of the earth and everything above ground towards the sky. Those rights come with the property and what you own above ground are called "air rights". Nobody can build something that hangs over your property because that air/space belongs to you. It's as simple as a neighbor's fruit tree branches reaching over your fence.

Air rights can also be sold, just as below ground mineral rights are. A property owner may allow a building to extend over their property and can sell that part of their property separately.

The second concept and what may not exist everywhere is the practice that air rights can be detached from the property and sold separately as a commodity. This happens because those air rights are allowed to be used to increase FAR.

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by Easy

There are two different concepts here. The basic principle is that when you buy real estate you own everything below ground towards the center of the earth and everything above ground towards the sky. Those rights come with the property and what you own above ground are called "air rights". Nobody can build something that hangs over your property because that air/space belongs to you. It's as simple as a neighbor's fruit tree branches reaching over your fence.

Air rights can also be sold, just as below ground mineral rights are. A property owner may allow a building to extend over their property and can sell that part of their property separately.

The second concept and what may not exist everywhere is the practice that air rights can be detached from the property and sold separately as a commodity. This happens because those air rights are allowed to be used to increase FAR.

I know about buying and selling air rights. But I have a question. Can someone buying air rights from another parcel not using them go ahead and build a higher/bigger tower, or do they ALSO need to get planning commission/city council approval? Are there many hoops, or is buying the air rights sufficient to build taller? Besides the US Bank ("LIbrary") tower, have other buildings in DTLA used air rights to build taller? Wilshire Grand?

[plinko]

Library Tower, 550 S Hope, and the Gas Company Tower each used air rights from the Central Library.

[hughfb3]

Downtown from Hollywood today. Grand Avenue being the first of many to establish a slope on the north side of downtown

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]



Other Images showing our beautifully and carefully crafted skyline in relation to and purposefully mimicking the San Gabriel Mountains and Hollywood Hills peaks and slopes.
The invisible hands are real. A new skyscraper downtown has to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right massing to get approved in this skyline.
The below pictures show you how the city imagines its skyline as a reflection of the natural backdrop.

Developers will come and go and they will propose this and that. Until the next masterplan comes out; or until the perfectly located assembly of lots becomes available, the US Bank tower will be the central focus in the skyline for a while, with all other towers set to fill in for a perfectly peaked skyline from EVERY angle, including the elongated view from Hollywood. Gotta remember, this is a movie town and L.A. is crafting the picture perfect backdrop.

Los Angeles is one of the last remaining central peak skylines left in the World. San Francisco is trying to create a new rolling peak skyline with Transbay and its surrounding master plan. New York is attempting in its historical centers with WTC in downtown, and JDS Brooklyn. Everywhere else is just a big blob of high rises




[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]





Notice how the photographer shot this picture in a way that the trees somewhat mimick the skyline. Gotta think like an artist/director in this town as even they are directing the artistic direction of our skyline

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]
[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^^Look for the fill in on the north east with the Angels Landing towers, Onni Times Mirror, and Tribune tower to smooth out the gap between city hall and the main towers to create a perfectly crafted peak skyline from this view.^^^



[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^One of the most famous views of the Skyline which is constantly shown on reality TV is from the northwest, many times including the hills in the foreground... In this illustration of the (on hold) Olympia project, you will see a cultivated skyline meant to mimic the famous rolling Hollywood Hills silhouette into Griffith.



[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Downtown from Hollywood today. Grand Avenue being the first of many to establish a slope on the north side of downtown

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]


Other Images showing our beautifully and carefully crafted skyline in relation to and purposefully mimicking the San Gabriel Mountains and Hollywood Hills peaks and slopes.
The invisible hands are real. A new skyscraper downtown has to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right massing to get approved in this skyline.
The below pictures show you how the city imagines its skyline as a reflection of the natural backdrop.

Developers will come and go and they will propose this and that. Until the next masterplan comes out; or until the perfectly located assembly of lots becomes available, the US Bank tower will be the central focus in the skyline for a while, with all other towers set to fill in for a perfectly peaked skyline from EVERY angle, including the elongated view from Hollywood. Gotta remember, this is a movie town and L.A. is crafting the picture perfect backdrop.

Los Angeles is one of the last remaining central peak skylines left in the World. San Francisco is trying to create a new rolling peak skyline with Transbay and its surrounding master plan. New York is attempting in its historical centers with WTC in downtown, and JDS Brooklyn. Everywhere else is just a big blob of high rises




[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]





Notice how the photographer shot this picture in a way that the trees somewhat mimick the skyline. Gotta think like an artist/director in this town as even they are directing the artistic direction of our skyline

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]
[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^^Look for the fill in on the north east with the Angels Landing towers, Onni Times Mirror, and Tribune tower to smooth out the gap between city hall and the main towers to create a perfectly crafted peak skyline from this view.^^^



[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^One of the most famous views of the Skyline which is constantly shown on reality TV is from the northwest, many times including the hills in the foreground... In this illustration of the (on hold) Olympia project, you will see a cultivated skyline meant to mimic the famous rolling Hollywood Hills silhouette into Griffith.



[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^^
If some developer who purchased air rights from another parcel came along and wanted to build a super tall outside of the "central peak" of the skyline, they couldn't? Are there height zones in DTLA, or some "planning czar" who must give approval? Or has the skyline shape evolved by chance? Looking at the lower 2 pics, it looks like 2 peaks are evolving, a south peak and the taller north peak. Maybe tall infill will bridge them. Or maybe multiple peaks are OK, because it mirrors the mountains with multiple peaks? Why just one peak? Too chaotic? I'm not necessarily disagreeing, just asking why one peak is better. Maybe L.A. is big enough to have 2 or 3 peaks downtown, and more outside like Mid Wishire/Korea Town, Miracle Mile and Century City. But I kind of agree with you that one of the peaks should be biggest and tallest, the area between Bunker Hill and 7th.

[hughfb3]

^^In the plans, Los Angeles will likely have multiple peaks still centered around a focal point. No where in recent plans have we allocated space for a dominating new super tall center outside of current form. Recent proposal are already pointing to the next central peak with recent 65+ story renderings coming out from Crescent Heights, Olympia, and others along the Olympic bl corridor. My guess is by the time South Park fills out, there will be a new community update which will allow for a new Central dominating peak somewhere between South Park and Financial District, 8th & Olympic.

We all have the opportunity to contribute our voice in these plans by the way, whenever the city hosts community outreach for newly updated/created neighborhood plans. Hollywood most recently has been going through this process and there are literal conversations on how people want new high-rises in hollywood to be massed in relation to the hills and neighboring buildings. I've been to these meetings in Hollywood over the past several years. Most developers already know what they are getting when they purchase a property as part of their research into the plans/codes. If someone wants to go outside of the plans, they would have to get special variances, or go big and lobby for the city to create a whole new plan/district (AEG/Staples/South Park).

This can be tricky, especially in these times as we've seen a recent scandal with our councilman Huizar being ousted for bribery where he was receiving something from developers in exchange for green lighting projects not allowed under current plans. This has been a point of contention for some time as many of the neighborhood plans haven't been updated in decades; yet the city has doubled in population since they were last refreshed, leaving many projects to be outside of variance. Target Husk in Hollywood is an example of a 3 story building on Sunset bl in Hollywood being 3-6 feet higher than the very old community plans allowed requiring the city to give a special variance. This gave ammunition to La Mirada HOA to sue both Target and the City saying the city is giving special "handouts" to powerful interest. It then triggered the city to quickly and hastily update the community plan as Target sat idle for 7 years until the new plan was verified. Target finally opened in October of last year.

Garcetti has put emphasis on updating all neighborhood plans since he got into office.


Today's update


Mr Brookfield

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]


Ms Moxy

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

The twinz

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]



[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

... and what should we call this one?? Oceanside Husk? OceanDry...? The 3 Stooges

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

... and what should we call this one?? Oceanside Husk? OceanDry...? The 3 Stooges

^^^ Starting to look like that half finished hotel at the north end of the Vegas Strip. But I think some group will take it over and finish it. Whole lot of bargaining probably going on. Pretty sure it will get done in a year or two. Now that the pandemic is hopefully winding down, could see some movement.

If L.A. were allowed to have one casino downtown, this would be the ideal location. Detroit has casinos, Chicago has casinos, Philadelphia has casinos, Kansas City and St. Louis have casinos. L.A. could have one big casino downtown at Oceanwide right in the Staples entertainment district. Would help get this project finished. Of course the tribal casinos and Nevada would probably object to the competition. The heck with them. The revenues would at least stay in town.

There must be some Tongva ("Gabrieleno") tribal members left in the area. Proclaim Oceanwide the "Tongva-Yangna reservation" ('Yangna' was the big Tongva tribal village near DTLA at the river), partner up with the Oceanwide owners and build a casino and complete Oceanwide. The Tongva descendents would become rich and buy penthouse units, Oceanwide would get done, tax revenues would surge and L.A. gets another fun place to gather, right across from Staples smack dab in the heart of the entertainment district. Win win win win.

[black_crow]

Originally Posted by CaliNative

^^^ Starting to look like that half finished hotel at the north end of the Vegas Strip. But I think some group will take it over and finish it. Whole lot of bargaining probably going on. Pretty sure it will get done in a year or two. Now that the pandemic is hopefully winding down, could see some movement.

I think this had nothing to do with the pandemic. I know that Oceanwide used that excuse for other US projects (like the "Oceanwide Center Project" in San Francisco) as well. There were a lot of rumors about project related crimes including bribery, money laundering, and extortion.

I don't think that Oceanwide will sell that project to another competitor. They started as the Shenzhen Nanyou Property group, became the Guangcai Construction Group, and switched a couple more times afterwards. You heard about all the subsidiaries? It's just a big gamble and I don't think we will see progress in 2021.

PS: To all of you who blamed Trump.. The US-China relationship will get even worse under Biden, but to be honest, I am not sad about that.

[SkokieSwift]

Originally Posted by CaliNative

If L.A. were allowed to have one casino downtown, this would be the ideal location. Detroit has casinos, Chicago has casinos, Philadelphia has casinos, Kansas City and St. Louis have casinos. L.A. could have one big casino downtown at Oceanwide right in the Staples entertainment district. Would help get this project finished. Of course the tribal casinos and Nevada would probably object to the competition. The heck with them. The revenues would at least stay in town.

There are no casinos in Chicago.

[IMBY]

Originally Posted by SkokieSwift

There are no casinos in Chicago.

Why put so much weight on a casino in DTLA?

You realize that the number of gamblers that come to Las Vegas is now down to 1 out of 4?

The Millennials don't gamble, as a rule, and the Casino moguls in Las Vegas asked them what it would take to get them to come to Las Vegas and? Voila! Night clubs up and down the Strip, Xcess and Surrender at Wynn. Taos at the Venetian, and many others. It was, largely, the Baby Boom generation that fueled the explosion of casino's nationwide, and now that they're dying off....

Perhaps an Observation tower like they have in Toronto would be a better idea, or like the Stratosphere tower in Las Vegas. How about 1800 feet high! And!!! Have Calatrava design it!

[BillinGlendaleCA]

Originally Posted by IMBY

It was, largely, the Baby Boom generation that fueled the explosion of casino's nationwide, and now that they're dying off....

The oldest Boomer will be 75 this year, the youngest 57. Hardly a demographic that's going to keel over en mass in the next few years.

"A Boomer is someone older than you that you disagree with, a Millennial is someone younger than you that you agree with."