HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2441  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2012, 10:31 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is online now
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,213
There has been research done into what exactly happens when old projects in the city are torn down and their residents disperse into the suburbs. It's nice to talk about social pressure and conforming to some new middle class value system, but most of the time these people are still dysfunctional after they move.

Instead there really ought to be a more personal level of intervention, for better or worse maybe existing but renovated public housing developments makes that more realistic. Social services and outreach programs can be nearby. If kids aren't showing up to school, it's slightly easier if a truant officer can just go to the general vicinity of the projects and round them up.

Last edited by llamaorama; Jul 14, 2012 at 12:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2442  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2012, 11:18 PM
DistrictDirt's Avatar
DistrictDirt DistrictDirt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
An interesting experiment, at least in some aspects.

It's long been understood that the facilities are not the problem. The people are the problem: parents and neighbors that replicate children to be just like themselves. Anyone with hope for their kids gets out even if it means working night and day for decades.

The key is to convince a reasonable number of the people with an interest in improving their lives to stay in the projects. Eventually, these form a neighborhood where some social pressure can be brought to bear on the really anti-social elements (the addicts, criminals, lazy, insane, violent, etc.) and some demand for living there can be created.

Kind of funny to see that even here, some are worried about the projects "gentrifying". All this means is that the hopeless poor die off or move out and the new generation who are not quite as poor move in. Happens everywhere, every day, every city, all over the world. It's called "economic progress". Setting the beam too high (by hoping to make the current poor into rich) destroys the possibility of any progress.

btw, this sort of thing has been done in Latin America for a couple of decades now. It was noticed that when the residents of dilapidated projects were moved into new projects, they became dilapidated within years, sometimes months. Everything valuable torn out and sold off for dope and alcohol. Now, community building takes precedence over construction with very good results.

The problem with projects the way they've historically been done is that they concentrate poverty.

Hope VI projects are successful because they do the opposite- they create situations where income classes are mixed in the same housing development.
__________________
Urbanize LA - Covering real estate development, architecture and urban planning in the Greater Los Angeles Area.

Please follow on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2443  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2012, 4:08 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Generally agree with everything said, except for some details not material to this discussion.

Like it or not, the truly dysfunctional are unlikely to change; for sure they will not become middle class or rich. The real target is the new generation, and they are FAR more likely to do well in an old dilapidated building where there are community-minded people than in a brand new project with concentrated dope heads.

How you get there is not easy, and is a matter of practical thinking, setting the right incentives, putting a premium on self-reliance and a disincentive to stay in the welfare cycle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2444  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2012, 6:50 AM
Kingofthehill's Avatar
Kingofthehill Kingofthehill is offline
International
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Posts: 4,052
The 6-story woodframe special going up at Wilshire/Barrington:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2445  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2012, 6:26 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Odd for a busy corner; you would think that more demand than that existed for "Brentwood adjacent". Maybe people prefer quieter streets.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2446  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2012, 4:02 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
From the LA Times:

NBCUniversal scraps plan to build housing on Universal back lot

Instead of developing apartments and condos on Universal Studios land, it now suggests adding more film and TV production facilities, enhancing the theme park and building an extra hotel.



NBCUniversal's new $1.6-billion proposal does not include housing. (NBC Universal / July 16, 2012)

By Roger Vincent, Los Angeles Times
July 16, 2012, 6:10 p.m.

NBCUniversal has dropped controversial plans to build thousands of residences on its famous back lot and hopes instead to add movie and television production facilities and expand the Universal Studios Hollywood theme park.

The new $1.6-billion proposal was unveiled Monday just before the release of the final environmental impact report on the company's proposal to improve the sprawling studio and tourist attraction in the San Fernando Valley.

An earlier plan, valued at $3 billion, called for nearly 3,000 apartments and condominiums at the east end of the studio's property; they would have been served by proposed shops and restaurants. Many neighbors were opposed to the housing, and this year Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky called on NBCUniversal to ditch the residential component of its "Evolution Plan."

Housing development would have made economic sense for the company, Universal Studios President Ron Meyer said a meeting with The Times on Monday. Yaroslavsky and Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge, however, "urged us to focus on our core business," Meyer said, "and they are right."

Yaroslavsky and LaBonge attended the meeting at Universal and voiced support for what they called the "no-residential alternative" while stopping short of endorsing the new plan, which still faces city and county approval processes.

Eliminating a portion of the back lot to build housing would reduce television and motion picture production at Universal — potentially costing jobs — because there would be less room for filming, Yaroslavsky said. He also expressed sympathy for neighbors in the hills above the studio.

"If you lived over the back lot, you wouldn't want Park La Brea Towers erected in your backyard either," Yaroslavsky said, referring to a massive apartment complex in the mid-Wilshire area of Los Angeles.

LaBonge said he hoped Universal would continue to emphasize film and television production on the lot and the popular Universal Studios tour.

"This is an important tourist attraction," he said. "You see people outside smiling with anticipation."

Homeowner groups have been watching Universal's plans with interest over the years.

The president of the Hollywood Knolls Community Club, Daniel Savage, said dropping the housing component would be "a welcome change in terms of lessening the potential negative impacts on traffic and infrastructure such a housing complex would have, but also preserve to the greatest extent possible the historical Universal back lot and keeping it available for production, which is greatly needed in this city."

The new plan calls for adding 327,000 square feet of development to the theme park, which might include an expansion of the well-known tram tour and parking. The boundaries of the theme park would not grow.

The theme-park enhancements might seem to be a natural complement for the planned Wizarding World of Harry Potter, which NBCUniversal said in December would cost "several hundred million dollars" to create. The studio hopes to emulate the success of the attraction at Universal Studios Orlando in Florida.

But on Monday, NBCUniversal officials said they hadn't determined where they would place the "Harry Potter" attraction, which is expected to include a re-creation of the Hogwarts castle as well as Potter-themed rides, shops and restaurants.

A key revision of the proposal calls for construction of two 500-room hotels instead of one. The new plan also would bump up the amount of new production facilities and offices to 1.45 million square feet from 1.24 million square feet.

The revised plan calls for $100 million in transit and roadway improvements as originally proposed, said Thomas Smith, senior vice president in charge of real estate on the West Coast for NBCUniversal.

The budget would include a new ramp and other improvements on the 101 Freeway. About half the $100 million would be spent on improving traffic flow on nearby streets, intersections and freeways; the other half would be spent on transit programs, including shuttles, a Metro bus and employee and visitor incentives to forgo car trips.

The final EIR has deemed the no-residential alternative "environmentally superior," officials said, and NBCUniversal has asked the city and county to focus on that version of the plan for the upcoming approval process.

Comcast Corp., which owns a majority interest in NBCUniversal, supports the new plan, Meyer said. Public hearings on the final environmental impact report lie ahead. If the proposal is approved, construction will begin right away, he said.

The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., a business trade group, said it supports NBCUniversal's latest proposal, which would create thousands of construction jobs.

"Not only will these new attractions, destination spots and recreational options boost the economy around the Universal City facility, but they will significantly stimulate our entire region's hospitality and tourism industry," the group said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2447  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2012, 5:57 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
From CurbedLA:
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2448  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2012, 6:05 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by StethJeff View Post
"If you lived over the back lot, you wouldn't want Park La Brea Towers erected in your backyard either," Yaroslavsky said, referring to a massive apartment complex in the mid-Wilshire area of Los Angeles.
Uhhh, this is NOT Park La Brea. Try again, Zev.

Seriously, if the Times is so informative, why doesn't it correct guys like Yaroslavsky for making asinine statements like that?
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2449  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2012, 5:24 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Well, the real dynamic here appears to be that homeowners and landlords don't want additional housing in the area and the City Council is backing them.

From the careful wording, I am guessing that Universal isn't really expanding production much (if any); they certainly did not push that side for the last several years. Even hotel and office isn't assured since some homeowners will oppose that as well. However, the unions will be wholly behind it.

In general, this is center city land, which has no business being open air production facilities. The best uses are apparently in relatively dense housing or mid rise office, with the large production facilities moving further out. The only bright spots I see are the one hotel and some greater density in the amusement park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2450  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2012, 3:56 AM
Illithid Dude's Avatar
Illithid Dude Illithid Dude is offline
Paramoderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Santa Monica / New York City
Posts: 3,021
I drove by 8500 Burton Way the other day, and took some pictures. These were all taken from a moving car, so excuse the quality.









It looks like they are cladding the base in marble slabs?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2451  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2012, 5:54 AM
Kingofthehill's Avatar
Kingofthehill Kingofthehill is offline
International
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Posts: 4,052
I recently biked past a fairly large multifamily development being framed out on the NW corner of 4th St. and Gramercy Place, just inside of Koreatown. The three venerable Craftsman homes on the site appear to have been knocked down for a larger, more urban apartment complex.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2452  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2012, 3:41 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Pretty much inevitable in that area. Generally, only blocks with no existing apartment buildings should be strongly protected.

May they rest in peace in Craftsman heaven.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2453  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2012, 6:44 AM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is offline
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 9,102
Drove by the Emerson College building on Sunset today. There's a crane up and rebar columns are above ground on both sides of the building, but the majority of the overall floor area of the lot is still below ground. Still, this one should get visually interesting over the next few months. No pictures as I was driving in pretty heavy traffic.
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2454  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2012, 8:16 AM
213 213 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto
In general, this is center city land, which has no business being open air production facilities. The best uses are apparently in relatively dense housing or mid rise office, with the large production facilities moving further out.
The land in question is elevated, remote and not easily connectable to areas surrounding it. Development would be isolated within the boundaries of the 101, Universal Studios and the Barham slope, with traffic funneled through two access points. Nothing built there is going to enhance or unify the urban fabric, or bring appreciable impact apart from several thousand additional cars. All considered, film production is not only an appropriate use of the land, but fairly ideal.

It bears note that Universal's housing plan had been on paper for many years, since well before the real estate crash. Given the current and foreseeable market, it probably took little effort to dissuade them of it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2455  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2012, 3:37 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by 213 View Post
The land in question is elevated, remote and not easily connectable to areas surrounding it. Development would be isolated within the boundaries of the 101, Universal Studios and the Barham slope, with traffic funneled through two access points. Nothing built there is going to enhance or unify the urban fabric, or bring appreciable impact apart from several thousand additional cars. All considered, film production is not only an appropriate use of the land, but fairly ideal.

It bears note that Universal's housing plan had been on paper for many years, since well before the real estate crash. Given the current and foreseeable market, it probably took little effort to dissuade them of it.
I understand your point but it doesn't seem that relevant. The developer proposed housing and seems to still want to do it. It would have been nice for it to be "urban" but that's not important. This is new quality housing within yards of Hollywood instead of in Santa Clarita.

Outdoor film production is a very doubtful use in this location. Again, most of the outdoor production lots are long gone from Hollywood. Intensive uses such as indoor shooting, production and post-production are fine, of course.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2456  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2012, 11:27 PM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by colemonkee View Post
Drove by the Emerson College building on Sunset today. There's a crane up and rebar columns are above ground on both sides of the building, but the majority of the overall floor area of the lot is still below ground. Still, this one should get visually interesting over the next few months. No pictures as I was driving in pretty heavy traffic.
thanks for the heads up, that definitely'll deserve a drive by at some point toward the end of this summer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2457  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2012, 9:31 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,129
The Vermont/Wilshire towers are in full swing, drove by it just now, tower cranes are going up as we speak and the rebar for both building cores is above the fence height.



__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2458  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2012, 11:24 PM
Mojeda101's Avatar
Mojeda101 Mojeda101 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: DTLA
Posts: 1,460
They've made much faster progress than the Courtyard marriott in Downtown, i'll tell you that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2459  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2012, 1:56 AM
a9l8e7n's Avatar
a9l8e7n a9l8e7n is offline
Los Angeles Aficionado
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojeda101 View Post
They've made much faster progress than the Courtyard marriott in Downtown, i'll tell you that.
I wish we had a webcam for the wilshire towers project so we can actually see how much progress is actually being made.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2460  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2012, 2:57 AM
Mojeda101's Avatar
Mojeda101 Mojeda101 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: DTLA
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by a9l8e7n View Post
I wish we had a webcam for the wilshire towers project so we can actually see how much progress is actually being made.
Agreed.

Are both towers being built at the same time or is one being focused on first? 22 and 28 stories are pretty tall for the area after all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:39 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.