[Steve2726]

Just got this e-mail from Downtownnews.com

BREAKING NEWS: Maguire to Announce First Downtown Office High-Rise in 14 Years

Developer Rob Maguire is moving forward on a plan to build a 50-story office tower overlooking the Harbor Freeway, Los Angeles Downtown News has learned. According to local real estate sources, Maguire, who developed some of the tallest Downtown skyscrapers during the height of the 1980s commercial real estate boom, is about to formally announce a new structure directly west of the 777 Tower in the Financial District. Plans for the development site always included three office towers, a proposal that was long-delayed because of the downturn in the commercial real estate market. The project would complement the 777 Tower and what is now Ernst and Young Plaza and the 7+Fig mall. This would be the first new Downtown office high rise since Two California Plaza opened in 1992. Pasadena-based architecture firm Keating/Khang has reportedly been hired to handle the design. Maguire Properties owns six Downtown trophy buildings. Along with 777 Tower, its portfolio includes the Gas Com! pany Tower, KPMG Tower, U.S. Bank Tower, Wells Fargo Tower and One California Plaza. Maguire Properties, a publicly traded real estate investment trust, has been the subject of buyout speculation within the past year. Maguire’s office did not return phone calls.

The latest edition of L.A. Downtown News will be uploaded by 7:00 p.m. tonight at http://www.downtownnews.com.

So let the speculation begin. It appears this will be built on spec unless they announce a big tenant. Also, it will be a new design instead of the seemingly popular one that has been on the boards for a while now. Any chance we will see redevelopment of the 7+Fig mall?

[bobcat]

All I can say is :omg: I wouldn't have guessed a pure office building would be planned downtown for another year, but I guess since it takes so long to get these things finished in LA by the time it's completed office vacancy rates should be low enough to support new development.

[Damien]

Tell them to add 25 floors to the height and give the city the highest condos west of Mississippi at the top!

[yakumoto]

Beautiful. While its nice to have a residential population, its kind of a stopgap solution, as residents become NIMBYs. The main purposes of downtowns should be buisness, and city should be doing as much as it can to attract buisnesses downtown in order to increase the viability of metrolink and other transit services. Its working for every other sucessfull city...

[LA420]

:sly: Hum well i am not going to get excited, i hope they go through what they say. I don't want to be disappointed in the future hearing that it got canceled :( . Ill get excited when goes through the process and then breaks ground then ill get excited :D . "Citywatch" opened my eyes to some of the comments he had made regarding whether they will be built or scaled down and the worst completely canceled. I think the way the city has been moving in approving permits and going through the whole process is i think really discouraging :( for developers. It just take to damn long :slob: . I hope the changes that Mayor Villaraigosa has said in the last couple of day in speeding up the process and changing the law to make easier for them to build. :rolleyes:

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Ive been trying to post this for hours!! you beat me to it. great news. hopefully we'll get more details in the current edition at 5:00 pm.

[LAMetroGuy]

:sly: Hum well i am not going to get excited, i hope they go through what they say. I don't want to be disappointed in the future hearing that it got canceled :( . Ill get excited when goes through the process and then breaks ground then ill get excited :D . "Citywatch" opened my eyes to some of the comments he had made regarding whether they will be built or scaled down and the worst completely canceled. I think the way the city has been moving in approving permits and going through the whole process is i think really discouraging :( for developers. It just take to damn long :slob: . I hope the changes that Mayor Villaraigosa has said in the last couple of day in speeding up the process and changing the law to make easier for them to build. :rolleyes:

Is this citywatch???? don't worry, it will happen! :tup:

[WonderlandPark]

Out of the blue. I thought an office tower was at least 4-5 years away. Maybe the condo conversions have taken enough office space off the market and this area has become more desirable because of LA Live. Sweet if it happens.

[LA420]

[QUOTE=LAMetroGuy]Is this citywatch???? don't worry, it will happen! :tup:[/QUOTE

I hope so!!:yes: I want to see some renderings, damn it LOL :haha: .

[danparker276]

Isn't this metropolis?
"Plans for the development site always included three office towers"

[bobcat]

^No, this is part of the Maguire owned development which includes 777 Tower, Ernst and Young Tower, and the 7+Fig mall. Metropolis is a block south and owned by IDS.

[blogdowntown]

Isn't this metropolis?
"Plans for the development site always included three office towers"

No, it's the gap between 777 (the tower at the south side of 7+Fig) and the parking garage. Or at least part of that space. It really is a big site, and I think at points they've talked about two buildings in there.

[Westsidelife]

Finally a tower more befitting (height wise) for a city such as Los Angeles.

[ksep]

i hope they are going to design something outrageous. a glorious tower that pushes the envelope of modern architecture. a beacon for the future for all of los angeles.

[Steve2726]

Ive been trying to post this for hours!! you beat me to it. great news. hopefully we'll get more details in the current edition at 5:00 pm.

The server was fried, it took me half an hour to post. I saw your post on SSC at about the same time. :cheers:

[colemonkee]

Finally a tower more befitting (height wise) for a city such as Los Angeles.
With 50 floors, we're looking at 650 ft. minimum.

[citywatch]

Is this citywatch???? :haha:

LA420 may not be old enough to remember the early 1990s or before, when the saying.......

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

.......was forced into my way of thinking because of all the projs that got me excited on the day of their announcement in the press, but that because of their never seeing the light of day ended up making me feel like the biggest sucker ever born.

I like to think the era of false starts now is a thing of the past, & that when good news comes out today, we can take it at face value. However, I'm still :hell: over the proposed Medallion proj at 4th & Main, so who knows? However, in order to be kind of optimistic, I also try to keep in mind another saying:

It ain't over til the fat lady sings.

:D

[Trae]

Ahh, my second home Los Angeles getting another tower. Very nice to hear about and can't wait to see a rendering :) .

[Buckeye Native 001]

BUILD THE FUCKING TOWER!

I mean, yay! :tup:

[bobcat]

I'm actually pretty optimistic about this thing getting built. After all, we're talking about Rob Maguire and not some rube who just fell off the turnip truck.

[LAMetroGuy]

Isn't this metropolis?
"Plans for the development site always included three office towers"

Nooo, this is not metropolis... this is the sight of the 755 Tower, next to the 777 towers. The three office towers are the Ernst & Young Tower, 777 Tower and now the THIRD tower... 755.

Look at this map and it shows you the sight for the 755 Tower versus Metropolis.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v600/rpulido/untitled-2.jpg

[Alta California]

Hmmm...is there market demand for such a large tower? If I remember correctly,the DT Class A market still has a double-digit vacancy rate. Maybe that would change once it's built, but call me skeptical.

[SunMonTueWedThuFriSa]

Nooo, this is not metropolis... this is the sight of the 755 Tower, next to the 777 towers. The three office towers are the Ernst & Young Tower, 777 Tower and now the THIRD tower... 755.

Look at this map and it shows you the sight for the 755 Tower versus Metropolis.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v600/rpulido/untitled-2.jpg

What's the "future development" across from 7th+Fig?

[ThreeHundred]

Nooo, this is not metropolis... this is the sight of the 755 Tower, next to the 777 towers. The three office towers are the Ernst & Young Tower, 777 Tower and now the THIRD tower... 755.

Look at this map and it shows you the sight for the 755 Tower versus Metropolis.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v600/rpulido/untitled-2.jpg

What's the proposed 'spa?'

[tujunga]

This is the now listed as canceled 755 design on the diagram, right?
click link
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=34094

[dragonsky]

This one?
http://www.ladowntownnews.com/articles/2006/10/16/news/news_briefs/at01.txt

[northbay420]

What's the proposed 'spa?'

my next home :)

[James Bond Agent 007]

We want a rendering. :mad:

[ReDSPork02]

http://www.rtkl.com/images/portfolio_images/755.jpg

[citywatch]

When it comes to talk about big bldgs like this, or Rodmark's/Titan's 2 tower condo proj at Olympic & 9th, I have mixed emotions. I definitely want to hear insider info & any news that's out there. OTOH if the timeline for a proj like a 3rd tower at 7th/Fig is going to be very slooooow, or worse, if all the talk remains nothing but talk, then this is like the carrot hanging from the end of a stick attached to a horse's forehead.

I sure hope there's more details & esp comments from the devlpr about his proposal in the near future.


March 2004:

Yet, except for the Grand Avenue space, which will include an office tower, there isn't much new office space planned for downtown L.A. The office-vacancy rate for the Los Angeles region edged up to 14.2% in last year's fourth quarter, from 13.9% in the third quarter, reports CB Richard Ellis. But the downtown office-vacancy rate stood at 17.4%, for a market with 32 million square feet.

On the other hand, downtown L.A. absorbed 58,952 square feet of new office space in the quarter, second only to West Los Angeles. CBRE's Los Angeles market report notes that "average asking lease rates in Los Angeles County increased $0.02 from the previous quarter to $2.09 per square foot." The firm attributed the uptick to "escalating asking lease rates in the downtown and Hollywood/Wilshire Corridor sub-markets."

One beneficiary of downtown L.A.'s revival has been Maguire Properties, the largest owner of trophy properties in the city's center. Maguire went public last year in an $800 million offering. Its shares, which began trading at 19, have since climbed to 25.

In November, Maguire completed the acquisition of One California Plaza for $225 million, giving the company a 60% market share in a premier downtown sub-market called Bunker Hill. Except for Arco Plaza, currently in redevelopment, the Class A office or premium market is doing well, says Robert Maguire, Maguire Properties' chairman and CEO. "Arco is the only building that isn't 90% leased in Class A," he notes.

Those numbers should only get better, as no new office construction is planned for the foreseeable future. "It costs about $4,000 a square foot to construct a new building here," Mr. Maguire says. "That would mean minimum net rents of $36 to $38 a square foot, excluding operating expenses. But downtown rents don't climb much higher than $20 net."

[Easy]

Hmmm...is there market demand for such a large tower? If I remember correctly,the DT Class A market still has a double-digit vacancy rate. Maybe that would change once it's built, but call me skeptical.

I'm not sure that the overall downtown vacancy rate is the most important factor in their decision. What's important is whether or not they will be able to lease this new building. IMO given this property's proximity to la live/south park I think that they will be able to lease it even if the current downtown vacancy rate stays about the same.

[bobcat]

Those numbers should only get better, as no new office construction is planned for the foreseeable future. "It costs about $4,000 a square foot to construct a new building here," Mr. Maguire says. "That would mean minimum net rents of $36 to $38 a square foot, excluding operating expenses. But downtown rents don't climb much higher than $20 net."

[/i]


I was just checking on the downtown class A office rents for the last 2 years at Colliers and what I found was pretty interesting. There has been an extraodinary jump in class A rents over the last two years and this may be what has prompted Maguire to pursue this project.

04Q3: $25.00
04Q4: $25.20
05Q1: NA
05Q2: $27.24
05Q3: $27.48
05Q4: $33.24
06Q1: $33.72
06Q2: $34.08
06Q3: $34.68

[Damien]

"It costs about $4,000 a square foot to construct a new building here," Mr. Maguire says.

One of many great things I got from the article, Ten Transportation Lessons from Portland to San Francisco (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=117485), posted in this forum was this:

Portland also recognizes that it is counterproductive to its traffic management, quality of life, and affordable-housing goals to force developers to build more parking than is needed. In fact, Portland’s regional government has outlawed local jurisdictions from creating minimum parking requirements. This means that any development project can be built anywhere with no parking at all. San Francisco, meanwhile, requires developers to build twice as much residential parking as existing demand warrants in many neighborhoods, adding up to 25 percent more costs for each unit, and reducing the number of units that can be built on a typical parcel by up to 20 percent.

I bet the same is true in downtown L.A. Soon after completion of Expo Phase II, Downtown LA will have rail lines coming from all four corners of the county into Downtown LA. It's time to do something serious about parking down there.

[bobcat]

This is from a recent article from LABJ concerning building office towers on spec:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_13_28/ai_n16124174

"...L.A. has seen little speculative construction because the market hasn't been strong enough to support monthly office rents of about $3 a foot, the point when a project makes financial sense. However, rents in Westside now often top $3 a foot."

According to the latest Colliers report (http://colliers.com/Content/Repositories/Base/Markets/LosAngeles/English/Market_Report/PDFs/OFFCLA06Q3.pdf), rates in top tier buildings Downtown are asking as high as $38 PSF per annum. So by that measure at least it may very well make sense for new office development.

[citywatch]

^ Thanks for that link, bobcat. Good to know that rental rates may be getting high enough to support new construction. However, whenever I see a breakdown of the specific trends in leasing in the hood, I continue to notice that while they may get stronger during one part of the yr, they also may decline during another part of the yr. That teeter totter effect has been occurring for over 12 yrs.

OTOH, other hoods like around Century City or farther west, near UCLA or SaMo, not only don't see as much volatility, they also have gotten more businesses to fill up space well before the same thing finally started happening in DT. Even so, there still remains more space for lease in DT than in many other hoods in LA.

:gaah:


DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES

Class...No of bldgs...Total SF.......Direct Vac......Sublease Vac....Total Vac.....Total Vac (Prior qtr).......Absorption (current qtr) (YTD)............Rents

A.......15.......14,755,600......11.9%..........2.2%........14.1%.........11.6%.....................-363,900........-402,200..........$34.68

B.......40.......15,555,700......16.2%..........0.9%.........17.1%........17.9%........................19,200..........448,000..........$25.44

C........6...........970,500......18.2%...........0.4%........18.7%.........20.0%.......................12,700..............1,900..........$21.96

Subtotal

........61.......31,281,800.......14.3%........1.5%..........15.7%.......15.0%.......................-232,000............47,700.........$28.95

[ksep]

maybe they have already some major prospective tenants lined up. companys that are looking for a shiny new tower to slap their logo on.

[bobcat]

Major Tower Planned in L.A.
Robert F. Maguire wants to develop the 50-story structure at a cost of more than $300 million.
By Roger Vincent
Times Staff Writer

October 17, 2006

Developer Robert F. Maguire said Monday that he planned to build a high-rise office building in downtown Los Angeles, the first significant addition to the city's skyline in 14 years.

The proposed 50-story tower at Figueroa and 7th streets might also signal the beginning of a round of office development that would expand the city's financial district.

The building, to be called 7+Fig, also would extend recent downtown development that includes billions of dollars of residential and entertainment projects.

"We think it will be a stunning building in a terrific location. We think it can do very well," said Maguire, who developed some of the best-known buildings of the last downtown development boom, including U.S. Bank Tower, the tallest skyscraper in the West at 72 stories.

Maguire "has always been one of the great visionaries of downtown," said real estate broker Chris Cooper of Cushman & Wakefield. "He built so much of the skyline that he appreciates the new model emerging there."

Los Angeles architect Richard Keating of Keating/Khang Architecture has prepared a preliminary design for the building that Maguire said would cost more than $300 million. Keating also designed Gas Co. Tower, a Bunker Hill high-rise Maguire completed in 1990.

Keating said he was striving to create "a dignified, elegant building" that would "stand in contrast to the cacophony of our everyday lives. We'd like to establish a new image for downtown L.A."

The proposed building would be one of the largest in the area, with almost 1 million square feet of space. Maguire said he intended to get tenants to sign leases for at least 40% of the space before starting construction and hoped to have it ready to be occupied within three years.

Maguire said he would not recruit tenants from his existing buildings.

The site, currently an empty lot, is owned by Maguire Properties Inc., a real estate investment trust Maguire heads as chief executive. It is four blocks north of Staples Center, and has long been zoned for a high-rise office building.

Complicating development plans are widespread reports that Maguire Properties may be sold because the hot market for investment-grade office buildings has made its properties worth more than the company as a whole.

The planned tower would need city approvals. Word of it was first reported in the Los Angeles Downtown News.

Large investors have been drawn to office properties in recent years as the improving economy has filled buildings with tenants paying rising rents and growing land prices and construction costs have limited competing developments. Southern California is among the U.S.' top commercial real estate investment markets.

By creating a viable development plan for the site, Maguire would increase the value of his portfolio, said a real estate executive who asked not to be identified because he didn't want to jeopardize future business dealings with Maguire.

"If there is no development concept, there is no way to monetize" the potential of the site, the executive said. "They're not anywhere near building."

High construction costs present a substantial hurdle to profitable office development. Downtown rents would have to reach unprecedented highs by the time the building hit the market in order to justify the expense of new construction, the executive said.

That office market is tightening, however, said Cooper of Cushman & Wakefield. He predicted that the vacancy rate, now about 15%, would fall into single digits in the next two or three years — about as long as it would take to build a new skyscraper. Developers generally consider a market with a vacancy rate below 10% as ripe for new construction.

Maguire's timing is daring but should be rewarded, said real estate broker John Cushman, chairman of Cushman & Wakefield.

"Many developers get started too late in the cycle. The first office buildings out of the ground in markets with vacancy below 10% will score home runs," Cushman said, quoting a report he will help deliver at a national real estate event this week.

"The location is pretty damn ideal," Cushman added.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called the development "a big-time project which will beautify and modernize the Los Angeles skyline. The new high-rise will stand as a shining symbol that the L.A. economy is back and stronger than ever."

Changing the downtown environment are thousands of new apartments and condominiums that have been completed or are on the way. The $2.5-billion L.A. Live project under construction north of Staples Center is slated to have 2,000 residential units, a 54-story hotel and condo tower, a 7,100-seat live performance theater, broadcast facilities, a 15-screen movie theater and nearly a dozen restaurants and clubs.

Plans are being reviewed for a $1.8-billion residential-retailhotel-office complex on Grand Avenue atop Bunker Hill by New York developer Related Cos.

"Downtown has always been a part of the city that has been a 'wannabe' San Francisco or Chicago," Cooper said. "Now it's redefining itself as a vibrant place" with more appeal for office workers as the number of things to do after sundown grows.

The blocks around Staples Center near Maguire's property are seeing some of the fastest change. His lot is next to the 52-story 777 Tower, which his company owns, and the 41-story Ernst & Young Plaza owned by Brookfield Properties Corp.

New York-based Brookfield also owns a shopping center there called 7th & Fig. Brookfield plans a "significant retail repositioning" of the 20-year-old mall next year, said Anthony Manos, senior vice president. He declined to elaborate.

[Westsidelife]

I want to see that preliminary design!!!

[LosAngelesBeauty]

When I was at the DCBID, I met with Trizec several times pushing for them to redesign the mall. I even found a developer from Asia that specialized in vertical malls in Japan and China that was initially interested, but like most ideas for Downtown, it sizzled. Of course, I don't think Trizec even knew Brookfield was buying it at the time. With new owners come new ideas (just like if CIM bought Macy's Plaza, it would be a lot different today). I am not familiar with anyone at Brookfield, so I'm curious to meet them at some time to see what they have in store.

Anyway, it's pretty obvious that mall needs to be COMPLETELY repositioned if it wants to remain even a blip on the radar as LA Live finishes. PLUS, forget about this whole mentality of "this or that." It's not just LA Live, it's everything in Downtown LA that's gonna make it the "Center of it all."

I'm almost just as excited to see what they'll do with the mall as the new design for the tower!

[Steve2726]

I want to see that preliminary design!!!

There is a render in the paper with the article.
[edit] posted below, thanks!

[DJM19]

7+Fig render!

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2006-10/25943429.jpg

Major Tower Planned in L.A.
Robert F. Maguire wants to develop the 50-story structure at a cost of more than $300 million.
By Roger Vincent, Times Staff Writer
October 17, 2006

Developer Robert F. Maguire said Monday that he planned to build a high-rise office building in downtown Los Angeles, the first significant addition to the city's skyline in 14 years.

The proposed 50-story tower at Figueroa and 7th streets might also signal the beginning of a round of office development that would expand the city's financial district.

The building, to be called 7+Fig, also would extend recent downtown development that includes billions of dollars of residential and entertainment projects.

"We think it will be a stunning building in a terrific location. We think it can do very well," said Maguire, who developed some of the best-known buildings of the last downtown development boom, including U.S. Bank Tower, the tallest skyscraper in the West at 72 stories.

Maguire "has always been one of the great visionaries of downtown," said real estate broker Chris Cooper of Cushman & Wakefield. "He built so much of the skyline that he appreciates the new model emerging there."

Los Angeles architect Richard Keating of Keating/Khang Architecture has prepared a preliminary design for the building that Maguire said would cost more than $300 million. Keating also designed Gas Co. Tower, a Bunker Hill high-rise Maguire completed in 1990.

Keating said he was striving to create "a dignified, elegant building" that would "stand in contrast to the cacophony of our everyday lives. We'd like to establish a new image for downtown L.A."

The proposed building would be one of the largest in the area, with almost 1 million square feet of space. Maguire said he intended to get tenants to sign leases for at least 40% of the space before starting construction and hoped to have it ready to be occupied within three years.

Maguire said he would not recruit tenants from his existing buildings.

The site, currently an empty lot, is owned by Maguire Properties Inc., a real estate investment trust Maguire heads as chief executive. It is four blocks north of Staples Center, and has long been zoned for a high-rise office building.

Complicating development plans are widespread reports that Maguire Properties may be sold because the hot market for investment-grade office buildings has made its properties worth more than the company as a whole.

The planned tower would need city approvals. Word of it was first reported in the Los Angeles Downtown News.

Large investors have been drawn to office properties in recent years as the improving economy has filled buildings with tenants paying rising rents and growing land prices and construction costs have limited competing developments. Southern California is among the U.S.' top commercial real estate investment markets.

By creating a viable development plan for the site, Maguire would increase the value of his portfolio, said a real estate executive who asked not to be identified because he didn't want to jeopardize future business dealings with Maguire.

"If there is no development concept, there is no way to monetize" the potential of the site, the executive said. "They're not anywhere near building."

High construction costs present a substantial hurdle to profitable office development. Downtown rents would have to reach unprecedented highs by the time the building hit the market in order to justify the expense of new construction, the executive said.

That office market is tightening, however, said Cooper of Cushman & Wakefield. He predicted that the vacancy rate, now about 15%, would fall into single digits in the next two or three years — about as long as it would take to build a new skyscraper. Developers generally consider a market with a vacancy rate below 10% as ripe for new construction.

Maguire's timing is daring but should be rewarded, said real estate broker John Cushman, chairman of Cushman & Wakefield.

"Many developers get started too late in the cycle. The first office buildings out of the ground in markets with vacancy below 10% will score home runs," Cushman said, quoting a report he will help deliver at a national real estate event this week.

"The location is pretty damn ideal," Cushman added.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called the development "a big-time project which will beautify and modernize the Los Angeles skyline. The new high-rise will stand as a shining symbol that the L.A. economy is back and stronger than ever."

Changing the downtown environment are thousands of new apartments and condominiums that have been completed or are on the way. The $2.5-billion L.A. Live project under construction north of Staples Center is slated to have 2,000 residential units, a 54-story hotel and condo tower, a 7,100-seat live performance theater, broadcast facilities, a 15-screen movie theater and nearly a dozen restaurants and clubs.

Plans are being reviewed for a $1.8-billion residential-retailhotel-office complex on Grand Avenue atop Bunker Hill by New York developer Related Cos.

"Downtown has always been a part of the city that has been a 'wannabe' San Francisco or Chicago," Cooper said. "Now it's redefining itself as a vibrant place" with more appeal for office workers as the number of things to do after sundown grows.

The blocks around Staples Center near Maguire's property are seeing some of the fastest change. His lot is next to the 52-story 777 Tower, which his company owns, and the 41-story Ernst & Young Plaza owned by Brookfield Properties Corp.

New York-based Brookfield also owns a shopping center there called 7th & Fig. Brookfield plans a "significant retail repositioning" of the 20-year-old mall next year, said Anthony Manos, senior vice president. He declined to elaborate.

[LAMetroGuy]

at 50 floors, it looks taller than the taller 52 floor 777 tower? it looks nice, very nice~

[kenratboy]

Those numbers should only get better, as no new office construction is planned for the foreseeable future. "It costs about $4,000 a square foot to construct a new building here," Mr. Maguire says. "That would mean minimum net rents of $36 to $38 a square foot, excluding operating expenses. But downtown rents don't climb much higher than $20 net."

[/i]

Bullshit. It does not cost $4 BILLION DOLLARS to build a 1,000,000 sq. ft. building.

[yakumoto]

This just in: The metro center, a class A office building at 7th and hope, is being converted to housing!

[RAlossi]

^CIM has planned that for a while, but they hadn't released anything specific. Have they?

[yakumoto]

They've just filed for permits

[Steve2726]

This just in: The metro center, a class A office building at 7th and hope, is being converted to housing!

:previous:
http://www.cimgroup.com/imgs/props/Metro_Center_lg1.jpg

[DJM19]

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/1-1.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/2-1.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/3-1.jpg

[Westsidelife]

There's something about the design that's not working for me. Probably the curved facade.

[LA420]

Nice job Djm19 :tup: its soooo much easier to visualize the building with the rest of them. :banana:

[kenratboy]

I like it - however, it will not make much of an impact.

[WesTheAngelino]

Hideous.

But good news for the office market!

[Westsidelife]

I like the old 755 Tower design better than this new one!

http://www.rtkl.com/images/portfolio_images/755.jpg

[innov8]

Is there a hole in the middle of the top 10 or 12 floors?

I like the nice blue glass and the curve.

[Westsidelife]

I like the height and the blue glass but the design is all wrong. It's too chunky! Please go back to the drawing board and make some serious alterations!

[LosAngelesBeauty]

:previous:
http://www.cimgroup.com/imgs/props/Metro_Center_lg1.jpg


The Metro Center is NO LONGER owned by CIM Group.

And just because a permit is being filed DOES NOT mean a developer actually exists.

Just a little info. ;)

[Buckeye Native 001]

I like the old 755 Tower design better than this new one!

http://www.rtkl.com/images/portfolio_images/755.jpg

What the fuck is that?

[LosAngelesBeauty]

BTW, 7+Fig is going to be using the new elevator shaft technology to LA that will allow the building to receive the variance to forsake a pretty useless helipad. This was initially pursued by Rodmark, and I assume now that many other developers will start to consider this in their plans to create more interesting designs.

Now, remember guys, this is a VERY preliminary drawing done by Keating, so let's not get TOO RILED up! If you don't like it, you should call the architect's office and let them know. I mean, if a TON of people call and say they don't like it, it could alter the design possibly?

[Westsidelife]

^^What's your take on the design?

[DaveofCali]

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/1-1.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/2-1.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/3-1.jpg

I dunno, the design looks to offset the balance and harmony of Downtown L.A.'s skyline. But as with many skyscrapers realistically, the skyscraper can grow on you.

[citywatch]

I definitely don't want to get too much into the design of this bldg when (as LAB says) (1) the drawings may be of very preliminary work, & (2) when no one is really sure how likely this proj will break ground anytime soon.

Someone says that a news report on ABC claims the tower will be underway by early 2007----which, if correct, would be FANTASTIC!!!!!-----but the LA Times article makes it sound like it's an iffy proposal, possibly even a ploy by Maguire to boost the value of his company's holdings before they're sold.

But in terms of the design, I think what appears to be an all glass surface makes the tower look too retiring or kind of weak next to all the neighboring bldgs with their facades of glass interspersed with granite. That's why I agree with westsidelife, in that the earlier concept looked like a bldg that would have fit in better with the surrounding towers.

[Marrson]

NEWEST L.A. TOWER UPDATED, KABC 7, LOS ANGELES, 6 PM, 10/17/06, Eyewitness News showed latest rendering of Maguire-Keating 755 Tower, Very 21st Century, With some very striking angles. I SAW THAT'S IT'S TALLER THAN 777 Tower. I feel, that Everybody will enjoy this latest design!!!! THANK YOU DJM19/DAVEOFCALI FOR THE PICS(Same design seen on KABC7LA). COMPLETION 2009!!!

[LosAngelesBeauty]

^^What's your take on the design?


From the picture, the design doesn't JUMP OUT at me as something spectacular. However, just looking at a building in a picture does absolutely no justice. Many buildings look pretty bland in pictures, like 444 S. Flower St., but in real life, they look a lot better in my opinion. 444 S. Flower's windows have a wonderful quality about them that allows them to change color based on the hue of the sky. I can see 7+Fig Tower as being spectacular looking from the ground up with its curved top.

For me, I would also actually like a building that gives off the presence of something taller than what it is. The best example is the AON TOWER. The reason why I like that building is because it looks so much taller than what it really is.

Anyway, I don't love or dislike the tower based on the renderings, but I think it has potential to become something really spectacular. The lighting at night will also make a huge difference.

[tujunga]

^I've always thought that too. I wish they would redo Aon's glazing to a golden tint to lighten it up a little.

[LAMetroGuy]

I love it... I really do!

[colemonkee]

^ Aon's glazing is way too dark. At times it looks like a giant screen instead of glass. I like black glass towers like IBM in Chicago, but AON is just too dark.

[SunMonTueWedThuFriSa]

??? - according to curbed, this might perhaps be a ruse and that Maguire is just using the renderings to attract buyers to buy the property.

[bjornson]

Here's what Curbed posted:

And on to the latest information from one of our inside sources concerning Maguire’s proposed 50-story tower downtown:

News here is that the "7+Fig" tower is actually a ruse-- Maguire doesn't plan on actually constructing the thing; they want to get bought out by Brookfield (who owns the Ernst & Young Plaza tower in the complex, as well as the tower at 6th & Fig) and this is their way of trying to generate interest/attention in their portfolio. People are really doubting it's ever going to get built. At least, that's the rumor from the brokers.

[LA420]

:hell: :dunno: :grrr: :gaah: :pissed: :( :irked: :whatthefuck: thats all i have to say!

[ThreeHundred]

Can you say it in words and not 50 smilies?

[DJM19]

Ill wait for real confirmation

[tujunga]

Is there and square opening near the top of the structure, is it a thru opening?

[ferneynism2]

I welcome it as a new addition to our LA skyline, so just build it!

[cookiejarvis]

I dunno, the design looks to offset the balance and harmony of Downtown L.A.'s skyline.

I picked up on that too. It's facing toward the Westside. Most of the downtown skyscrapers are built with a North/South axis, at least that's the impression I get when driving northbound on the 110. Perhaps most of the buildings are aligned that way for HVAC cost saving measures? Less building massing exposed during sunset/sunrise? :shrug:

[colemonkee]

^ Most of the buildings on Fig have a north/south orientation, but Union Bank Tower and Wedbush Tower have a east/west orientation, addressing thier proximity to the 110. This tower will continue that east/west orientation further south along the 110, which will be continued further south by the Ritz Carlton tower at LA Live, also designed with an east/west orientation. Add to that the new towers planned along Fig (LA Central and Figeuroa South) that really don't have a specific directional orientation, and the effect that this tower will have on "throwing off" the balance of LA's skyline should be considerably diminished.

[LAMetroGuy]

I wouldn't put too much faith in anything that curbedla has to say, they are like debbie downer from Saturday Night Live... ha!

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

a little correction from the LA Times. the project it called 755 fig until a major tenant is signed,not 7+ Fig.

[citywatch]

What is it going to take so that this type of proposal isn't just pie in the sky? What is it going to take to keep something like this on track, so its groundbreaking isn't, oh, 5, 10, even 15 yrs from today?:

A lot more of this (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=2405809&postcount=11), a lot more of that (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=2405035&postcount=1), & a lot less of this (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=2387454&postcount=35)!!

:brickwall:

I see certain trends in this town & then certain trends in other towns (which shall go unnamed), & I laugh when certain ppl here in LA (who also shall go unnamed) buy into the notion that the grit & grime of, for example, Broadway (the one in this part of the country, not the one in THAT part of the country) is good cuz it's keeping things real, & oh, isn't it horrible how we're not doing a lot more to keep all the poor ppl in LA from being pushed out, or imposed upon, by those snooty ppl who have a few bucks in their pocket, yuppies included.

[tujunga]

^Amen!

[LosAngelesBeauty]

^^ Amen citywatch!

People who like to "keep it real" think they're helping the problem, but they're not.

[citywatch]

^ What really burns me is when some of those ppl are the very ones who eventually decide to pick up & move to the burbs or some other city, never to be seen or heard from again.

When it comes to their idealism, talk is cheap. And so when the kids need a decent school, when the fear of crime becomes too tiring, when the supply of good jobs isn't plentiful enough, when the grit, grime & homeless problem finally starts to become too depressing even for the cool urban hipster----when cities like NYC or Seattle (or Chicago or SF---see below) start to look too interesting & shiny as alternate places to call home-----where will the ppl who claim to love LA's lowlife grit & loser funkiness be then?

I guess I'm really pissed off right now because I was talking to a friend earlier tonight, back from a trip visiting an old high school chum in Chicago. My friend is a native of LA & in all the yrs I've known her here she's never----never!----tinkled all over her hometown the way she tinkled all over Chicago. She said she "looooooved" Chicago & would "looooove" to live there.

Dealing with her & that ridiculous woman from India several days ago (the one who looooved SF but wasn't so thrilled with LA) is really starting to take a toll on me :cool:

[LosAngelesBeauty]

^ I know what you mean citywatch, people who bring up the race card as a way to somehow justify the low-end slums' existence and their need to be somehow protected against the "evil white man" are getting.........old.

[WonderlandPark]

^ I know what you mean citywatch, people who bring up the race card as a way to somehow justify the low-end slums' existence and their need to be somehow protected against the "evil white man" are getting.........old.

aww, LAB you got rid of your pretty self as your avatar :)

[LosAngelesBeauty]

LOL


Stalkers had me scared...

[WonderlandPark]

LOL


Stalkers had me scared...

heh. just noticing, not stalking. :)

[LosAngelesBeauty]

I know, I'm JK. :D

[SC_00_05]

^Amen!
I'll second that

[WesTheAngelino]

Good God, can we have ONE thread that doesnt turn into a "let's bash on the most vulnerable members of society because we're rich, white, and we can hahahah" thread. Honestly, it's becomming annoying. I think it's enough that every Broadway thread comes to that, this one doesnt have to do the same.

[POLA]

edit

[Wright Concept]

What really burns me is when some of those ppl are the very ones who eventually decide to pick up & move to the burbs or some other city, never to be seen or heard from again.

When it comes to their idealism, talk is cheap.

No kidding, so does someone harping about power lines and never does anything about them. Isn't it ironic, Don't you think?

And so when the kids need a decent school, when the fear of crime becomes too tiring, when the supply of good jobs isn't plentiful enough, when the grit, grime & homeless problem finally starts to become too depressing even for the cool urban hipster.....where will the ppl who claim to love LA's lowlife grit & loser funkiness be then?

I think the last items address a much bigger issue that is relevant to the whole discussion on the city as a whole. BTW there's a difference between grit and lowlife.

When you have poorer or working class areas that are surrounded by those lack of things and political leaders starve it's own people of some basic services and then all of a sudden a new plan comes along that will bring all the nice elements to the area but here's the caveat it would involve moving and displacing the some of the very people who've stayed with it through thick and thin.

What does that lead?

Cynicism?

Distrust?

Resentment?

A little anger, perhaps?

Take a look at Leimert Park now with Save Leimert and you'll understand exactly what I mean. Then go back to the '65 Riots.

Because yeah you're adding an influx of new people but you're moving those who want to move up in the world another hurdle to set them back? Where will they move to? What areas will take them? They could morgage and max out their credit to the til to stay but that would put them in a situation where the slum is they only place they can go.

This whole thing of gentrification is never a race issue, it is a class/status issue. The media loves using race as the issue because it gains viewers and ratings to advertise and sell more crap to the viewers notice how the LA Times uses the "white people". It also helps to set-up this wonderful statistic called a demographic. Demographics those wedge issues that politicians love to use to figure out where the fence sitting 60% will go. If this was about class or status then news media would lose money because during election years news outlets earn big $$$ to spew these issues so it can piss off the 60% fence people off so that they don't vote thus dwindling the numbers and polarize the votes. Or do it in such a way they'll say screw it and vote out of emotion rather than of ration. Sounds like the High School gossip/instigator to me.

Here's an idea, how about job programs and apprentice/vocational learning in High Schools for those who are or are not ready for college. These things will bring real world skill and re-inforce the value of education. Vocational programs have dropped in the last 2-3 years. How about after school programs for kids to go for positive reinforcement? Or just adding additional parks and playgrounds so that the kids have a safe place to play.

Is this some dreamy idealism? A weak wristed liberal fantasy? A vision with no sense of reality, perhaps? But it's a start. This isn't a Downtown or Hollywood or Broadway or South Central or East LA only thing, this involves ALL of LA.

[SC_00_05]

Good God, can we have ONE thread that doesnt turn into a "let's bash on the most vulnerable members of society because we're rich, white, and we can hahahah" thread. Honestly, it's becomming annoying. I think it's enough that every Broadway thread comes to that, this one doesnt have to do the same.
That's so big of you to help protect the "most vulnerable members of society" as you call them, as condescending as that is. I'm sure they sleep better at night knowing that such humanitarians are out there looking out for them, since they obviously can't help themselves :rolleyes: .

I guess we "rich, white" people (of which I'm neither BTW) just can't get enough of bashing them.

[WesTheAngelino]

Ok, Mr. 7 Post noob....glad to have new people on the forum, but with all due respect, I have been arguing about this subject with fellow SSPers for literaly years now. So, I really don't feel a need to tell my life story, which has much in common with the people who live in the hoods we are discussing, and explain myself to someone who obviously cares little for what I have to say about it anyways and seems only concerned with finding ways to bash me and put words in my mouth. You can extrapolate all you want, but I didn't say anything along the lines of what you are saying I did. It is a fact: these people are one lost job, one major illness, one major financial hardship etc away from total ruination, so yes, they are the most vulnerable. I should know, I spent most of my life in their situation. Unlike others here I see their lives through a very different lens and am not content to allow them to be shat upon.

[northbay420]

This isn't a Downtown or Hollywood or Broadway or South Central or East LA only thing, this involves ALL of LA.

^ well said! this isnt about WHERE they are but WHY theyre there (and how they got there). its easy, once u know why something happens, you can work to solve it.

ok, lets see, theres underpriviledged people in society because.... ok yea, maybe it isnt so easy. :)

basically, yes, there needs to be (a lot) more economic equality (im not advocating communism)

[bjornson]

^ What really burns me is when some of those ppl are the very ones who eventually decide to pick up & move to the burbs or some other city, never to be seen or heard from again.

When it comes to their idealism, talk is cheap. And so when the kids need a decent school, when the fear of crime becomes too tiring, when the supply of good jobs isn't plentiful enough, when the grit, grime & homeless problem finally starts to become too depressing even for the cool urban hipster----when cities like NYC or Seattle (or Chicago or SF---see below) start to look too interesting & shiny as alternate places to call home-----where will the ppl who claim to love LA's lowlife grit & loser funkiness be then?

I guess I'm really pissed off right now because I was talking to a friend earlier tonight, back from a trip visiting an old high school chum in Chicago. My friend is a native of LA & in all the yrs I've known her here she's never----never!----tinkled all over her hometown the way she tinkled all over Chicago. She said she "looooooved" Chicago & would "looooove" to live there.

Dealing with her & that ridiculous woman from India several days ago (the one who looooved SF but wasn't so thrilled with LA) is really starting to take a toll on me :cool:

I see where you're coming from Citywatch. My uncle and aunt are some of the very ones that eventually decide to pick up & move to the burbs or some other city, never to be seen or heard from again.

What really pissed me off was a conversation we were having after seeing San Francisco being awarded best US city by Conde Nast on ABC7. My uncle talked about how beautiful SF was and that I should have visited Fisherman's Wharf and all that jazz. Now, like I said, he's lived in the L.A. area for over 20 years and he's never ever once said anything nice about it. Then after the SF rant, he went on to say that, "you know what, I think SD was a little better. San Diego was one of the best cities of I've ever visited." But never once did he ever give credit or kudos to L.A. That's because he's never explored it. He told me about how he's never even been to a lot of the areas that the tourists go to. He only goes where he "needs to go." That's what irritates me the most. But anyhoo. No one will care and just shrug it off.

[citywatch]

No kidding, so does someone harping about power lines and never does anything about them. Isn't it ironic, Don't you think?And you somehow know more about what I do in my life than what I know about you? Are you a psychic?

What does that lead?
That leads to what's going on in the better, wealthier, healthier cities in this country or world. Places like NYC, Chicago or SF. Conversely, if a town doesn't have much or any of that, it leads to something like this (http://sstrudeau.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/05/welcome%20to%20detroit.jpg).


Is this some dreamy idealism? A weak wristed liberal fantasy? Yea, probably about as meaningful, constructive & sincere as this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limousine_liberal).

[citywatch]

Now, like I said, he's lived in the L.A. area for over 20 years and he's never ever once said anything nice about it. Then after the SF rant, he went on to say that, "you know what, I think SD was a little better. San Diego was one of the best cities of I've ever visited." But never once did he ever give credit or kudos to L.A. I've experienced similar reactions through the yrs among members of my own family, including relatives from Canada & even Detroit, no less. When I notice things like that & then read comments from SSPers about their fav cities in the US----where they often never mention LA-----& also read about surveys that rank LA very low, I know there's something seriously wrong.

It was bad enough a long time ago when this town would be dissed & come up short when compared with SF, but now the same thing is happening when it's being compared with the upstart city to our south, San Diego. So LA now is turning out to be a big joke coming & going, from points both north & south of here.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

lol The Limousine Liberal sounds a lot like some of the people on this forum. Well actually just one.

[Wright Concept]

[/b]And you somehow know more about what I do in my life than what I know about you? Are you a psychic?

Let me look at my crystal balls.

First I see a person who is posting this message typing this in the back of his 60' limosuine called the Red Rapid Bus. We approach a stop light and I see a couple of people car next to it. The window opens and someone politly
asks "Pardon me, Do you have any Grey Poupon".

Next, I see large green pieces of broccoli stand up on the street. Oh wait, wait, those are lush trees softening the view of the powerlines.
BTW San Fran and Chicago also have powerlines running through near their downtowns to that are zoned industrial. But somehow, a lot of trees along those corridors tend to soften the edge and look of them for some reason.


That leads to what's going on in the better, wealthier, healthier cities in this country or world. Places like NYC, Chicago or SF. Conversely, if a town doesn't have much or any of that, it leads to something like this (http://sstrudeau.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/05/welcome%20to%20detroit.jpg).

Conversely with those cities they didn't neglect their middle/working class neighborhoods from the start. When you starve those areas it will lead to the decline that we all desperately don't want. If those services are distributed equitably and not a lot here to their campaign contributors and the hell with everyone else. Then things like projects like improving the Central Core won't come with such resentment.

Chicago for example had went through a rut in the Seventies and Eighties, right when Richard M Daley, became mayor, he followed his dad's- Longtime Mayor Richard J Daley- advice which was "Take care of the taxpayers, and take care of them well. Because when they see things like garbage collected frequently, Streets landscaped and cleaned, Police on the beat on the street. They'll feel comfortable paying their business or property taxes even when you have to increase that tax."

The very first plans Daley worked on was street and park maintenance and beautification. It wasn't sexy like a new subway line or new high rises everywhere but it was practical and can be done within an election cycle and the residents can see the improvements and it is what will lead to those other items like more mass transit infrastructure and high rises.

The irony here is the run around the bureaucrats give to the working/middle class when it comes to things like street beautificationon City owned property BTW. If they were to do something on it that actually helps the City will do everything in their power to stop it or block it. But when the residents ask the city to do it, the city pats them on the head and say ok and does nothing.

[WesTheAngelino]

PV: question for you......

Me and a lot of the other residents of my building park on Main Street between Washington and 23rd.....there is garbage freakin everywhere on the street and sidewalk. Whom do I bitch to? I have no idea whose council district i'm in....hope it ain't Parks...

[Wright Concept]

^ I think it's Jan Perry (CD9). If not her, then it's Jose Huizar (CD14) because the boundaries around that area get a little confusing. But you definitely not in the "Great 8" with Bernard Parks.