PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : LOS ANGELES | METRO Project Rundown 2.0 (non-downtown)



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

BrandonJXN
Aug 13, 2010, 6:21 PM
Yeah, one of the proposed Metro stations is actually at Constellation and Avenue of the Stars; it's even in the above rendering of the Century Plaza Hotel and proposed towers.

Maybe it's a 2 (or even 3) portal station?

:shrug:

In any event, I rode my bike to Century City yesterday and while as pretty and extremely clean as it is, there is NOTHING to do. It's very hard to get around as the streets are far too wide. The Century looks nice but as I said during construction that it belongs on Wilshire.

Speaking of Wilshire, after trudging up the Wilshire Corridor, 2 of the many condo towers stood out: The Carlyle, and The Wilshire. I know that The Carlyle is fairly new but I love it's shape. The Wilshire however is one of the more stunning towers I've seen. I love all of those condo towers (I love LA architecture from the 1980's).

JDRCRASH
Aug 13, 2010, 6:24 PM
^ That's a possibility, but still all evidence supports that the station box will be at AotS and Constellation.

pesto
Aug 15, 2010, 5:27 PM
300 Hundred: I hadn't thought of that, but you're right. The Wilshire condo corridor is actually very nicely done, architecturally; it managed to escape the bland modernism that many residential highrises in Eastern and Canadian cities got in huge numbers. You have to get lucky on when you chose to develop. Westwood office towers are also generally attractive, not counting the early ones from the 1960's.

BrandonJXN
Aug 15, 2010, 7:13 PM
Lol...300 Hundred.

bjornson
Aug 16, 2010, 3:10 AM
Pesto, I assume you're not a fan of modernism or anything stemming from it era (20s-60s) and you're more into postmodern stuff. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

colemonkee
Aug 16, 2010, 7:00 PM
Some good news on the stalled Madrone project in Hollywood, now known as "The Avenue", from the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-madrone-condos-20100816,0,5479839.story):


http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2010-08/55570442.jpg
Image Source: Los Angeles Times

Stalled Hollywood condo project gets new life
With new owners and funding, the development is changing to apartments and will include a triangular arrangement of five-, six- and seven-story buildings and space for shops on the ground floor.

The Los Angeles residential investment advisor bought the 180-unit project a year ago in a trustee sale. The original developer, veteran Irvine builder John Laing Homes, had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in February 2009 and stopped work on the Madrone. The company liquidated its assets the following June.

The padlocked project turned into an eyesore as the seven-story complex - clad in only sheetrock and surrounded by scaffolding - weathered in the elements. It was one of several large residential developments that languished in 2009 as the housing market collapsed.

Resmark intends to finish the Avenue by June, Goodman said. He predicts that the new building will be able to compete in the area's crowded apartment market.


Read the rest of the story here: http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-madrone-condos-20100816,0,5479839.story

BrighamYen
Aug 16, 2010, 7:42 PM
My comment on that story Colemonkee just posted on LA Times:


BrighamYen at 12:38 PM August 16, 2010

Glad to see this dense development take place in Hollywood where the infrastructure exists and will connect residents to the ever growing subway/light-rail network made possible by Measure R, Villaraigosa and his 30/10 plan.


The development's size and mass, from the air, looks no different than something you would find, a dime a dozen, in mature urban cities like Washington D.C., London, Paris, New York, Tokyo, Taipei, etc.


LA could use more of these mixed-use projects around the current and future subway stations to increase population density levels that support the ridership needed and businesses that follow to cater to that population density, which gives people more reason to use the subway to get to the things they need.

colemonkee
Aug 17, 2010, 3:44 AM
^ Good comments.

I see this project from the air and I see some serious green or solar roofage opportunities. Twould be a waste not to use that much roof space for good.

pesto
Aug 17, 2010, 6:03 AM
bjornson: correct. I find a few of them powerful for their sleekness, stability or elegance; but mostly I find them uninteresting. I admit it's all a matter of taste but I prefer color, shape, movement and detail. I cherish the Romanesques, Gothics, Churriguresque, deco, beaux arts, etc., especially since LA doesn't have a lot of them. Most the modernist I am happy to see go.

Steve2726
Aug 19, 2010, 4:47 PM
It looks like the Emerson College project on Sunset has all necessary approvals, here's another set of renders-

http://morphopedia.com/projects/emerson-college-los-angeles-center/gallery/images/1/

http://morphopedia.com/uploads/ELA_sunset_low-res-l.jpg

http://morphopedia.com/uploads/08-07-ELA_Render_Terrace-l.jpg

pesto
Aug 19, 2010, 4:59 PM
steve: thanks for the info. I find that these renderings really make me a fan of the building.

To repeat myself: the problem in that picture is not the Emerson, it's the rest of the picture. Sunset is one of two leading streets in the creative section of the creative center of the world and it looks like blah. There should be similarly bold buildings from the 101 to Highland. 10-20 stories is not even an issue, since there are already buildings of this size approved or built.

BrighamYen
Aug 20, 2010, 7:04 AM
steve: thanks for the info. I find that these renderings really make me a fan of the building.

To repeat myself: the problem in that picture is not the Emerson, it's the rest of the picture. Sunset is one of two leading streets in the creative section of the creative center of the world and it looks like blah. There should be similarly bold buildings from the 101 to Highland. 10-20 stories is not even an issue, since there are already buildings of this size approved or built.


Exactly, I completely agree. The problem isn't Emerson, it's the rest of the crap surrounding it.

JDRCRASH
Aug 21, 2010, 4:49 AM
About that Madrone project posted by Colemonkee...isn't Marshfield street a really old PE ROW?

sopas ej
Aug 21, 2010, 7:47 AM
:previous:

Yes it is. The Hollywood Blvd. PE line...

http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/chinese.JPG
uncanny.net

...continued west for a few blocks along Hawthorn Street and then veered back onto its own right-of-way diagonally southwest, going in between houses. If you look at the satellite map on Google for the intersection of Sunset and Gardner, you can clearly see the old PE right-of-way. In fact at that intersection, the right-of-way exists on the NE corner as a driveway into a parking lot behind the Moun of Tunis Moroccan restaurant.

Here's an old map from 1953:
http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/hollytopo.JPG
uncanny.net

1950s
http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/vista1.JPG
uncanny.net

Sunset and Gardner, 1950s:
http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/gardnercrossover.jpg
uncanny.net

JDRCRASH
Aug 22, 2010, 4:46 AM
Man that first picture is just beautiful. Too bad all that is gone. :(

BrandonJXN
Aug 31, 2010, 7:47 PM
From Curbed:

http://la.curbed.com/uploads/2010.08.nouveldirt.jpg
A reader sends in the following photo: "They have started to move dirt at 10000 Santa Monica, the bankrupt property that was to have the Jean Nouvel condo project. Any idea whats going on?" No idea what's going on! Last we heard, the site was tied up in litigation relating to SunCal and Lehman Bros.

JDRCRASH
Sep 1, 2010, 4:21 AM
Somebody on Curbed said that it needs to be cleaned up before a contract between the buyer and seller of the lot can close.

sopas ej
Sep 2, 2010, 6:22 AM
From the Los Angeles Times:

Architecture review: A bold landmark by the Expo Line

Eric Owen Moss' Samitaur Tower in Culver City will display video and artwork visible to transit riders on the light-rail line.
By Christopher Hawthorne, Los Angeles Times Architecture Critic
September 1, 2010

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2010-08/55896369.jpg


For the most part, the buildings designed for spots near new mass transit lines in Southern California have been pretty underwhelming architecturally. And it's easy to be cynical about many of them. After all, putting a new apartment building or mixed-use complex close to an existing transit line — or a transit line that may potentially, possibly be built in the future — often absolves developers of a range of architectural and urban-planning sins, including packing in far more density than a site can comfortably absorb.

But a few genuinely thought-provoking responses to the region's hard-won progress on the mass-transit front are beginning to emerge. Among them is the recently completed Samitaur Tower, a 72-foot-high weathered-steel structure designed by Eric Owen Moss for a site at the corner of National Boulevard and Hayden Avenue in Culver City.

The tower is a campanile — an unorthodox and modestly sized one, to be sure — for a new stage of urbanism in Southern California, which thanks to the slowly growing transit network, among other cultural shifts, is beginning to emerge as a less atomized and more public place than the old clichés would have you believe.

The tower will overlook the new light-rail Expo Line, which is under construction from downtown through Culver City and will open next year. (A planned second phase would extend the line to Santa Monica.) A section of the rail line runs alongside National Boulevard, practically at the tower's feet, with a pair of stops within easy walking distance. The tower's developers, Frederick and Laurie Samitaur-Smith, see it as a prototype and hope to build seven more along the Expo Line.

The open-air tower, which according to the Samitaur-Smiths won't open to the public until early next year, consists of five platforms wrapped in screens made of translucent acrylic. The screens are designed to display a range of video and artwork, making the structure, which Moss has called an "information tower," an island of alternative signage in L.A.'s sea of commercial billboards.

Once it's fully in operation, it will likely play host to a mixture of parties, art exhibits and openings, as well as serving as a symbolic gateway to the Hayden Tract, a former industrial area that the Samitaur-Smiths, with help from Moss, have been patiently and inventively redeveloping for more than two decades.

[...]

Read the rest by clicking this (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-moss-tower-20100901,0,178362.story?track=rss).

BrighamYen
Sep 2, 2010, 9:17 AM
I'm getting goose bumps just thinking about riding the Expo Line next year!!!

colemonkee
Sep 2, 2010, 2:38 PM
^ What sucks is my office is two blocks from that Samitaur tower, but in December, before the Expo Line opens, we're moving our offices to El Segundo. I soooooo could have taken the Expo Line to work every day once it reached the La Cienega stop. But noooooooo! :(

BrighamYen
Sep 3, 2010, 8:18 AM
^ What sucks is my office is two blocks from that Samitaur tower, but in December, before the Expo Line opens, we're moving our offices to El Segundo. I soooooo could have taken the Expo Line to work every day once it reached the La Cienega stop. But noooooooo! :(


I am hoping that more CEOs will choose to locate their companies within access to rail when our system expands further.

I truly believe that companies (in addition to tax breaks/strict economics) base their decisions on a number of other factors - some more emotional than you would expect.

For example, CNN in Hollywood had planned to leave and lease a space on Wilshire/San Vicente (near the Jewish center), but soon afterward, Hollywood started to reach a critical mass of substantiality (new restaurants, clubs, mixed-use, entertainment venues, etc.) that translated into positive energy. This cluster of good energy actually caused CNN to reconsider and they decided to renege on their relocation efforts and INSTEAD, signed a NEW LEASE in their old location AND upgraded the property with new signage and more interesting street front design, contributing to that pot of good energy that begets more.

That simple concept means that if more areas of LA serviced by rail evolve toward the direction of Hollywood, by becoming their own areas of substantiality, it means it attracts more companies.

Think about it.

What about Miracle Mile?

In less than a decade, it will hopefully be serviced by two subway stops (La Brea and Fairfax). With a great stock of historic buildings along Wilshire and charming historic multi-family housing branching off in the side streets (Cochran, Detroit, etc.), how will the area be viewed by companies? Will more restaurants want to open there? Will more galleries and shops want to open next to LACMA? Will the Miracle Mile become somewhat of an amalgam of cultural institutions and creative new culinary establishments?

And at the geographic center of LA (West Central), will more companies choose to lease office space there due to the cultural prestige associated with a Miracle Mile address?


All these questions will be answered in the coming years, but it's not too hard to imagine LA evolving into a mature urban city as people start to realize how much more enjoyable it is to walk the streets instead of driving them.

LAsam
Sep 3, 2010, 6:57 PM
^ What sucks is my office is two blocks from that Samitaur tower, but in December, before the Expo Line opens, we're moving our offices to El Segundo. I soooooo could have taken the Expo Line to work every day once it reached the La Cienega stop. But noooooooo! :(

Hey, at least El Segundo is still served by light rail!

colemonkee
Sep 3, 2010, 9:28 PM
Meh, my office is on the other side of El Segundo from the El Segundo Green Line stop. And with 2 transfers (Red to Blue, Blue to Green), it's not really a reasonable daily commute. It will be quicker to drive.

LAofAnaheim
Sep 4, 2010, 7:11 AM
colemonkee...I highly recommend the Silver Line to Green Line connection if you can. It's actually about 15 minutes faster than the existing Red - Blue - Green connection. It takes the I-110 carpool lanes and gets you 2 stops closer to the western portion fo the Green Line. Try it out someday!

Kingofthehill
Sep 7, 2010, 8:06 AM
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/4967189558_04209d886f_b.jpg

RAlossi
Sep 7, 2010, 5:25 PM
Am I crazy for kinda liking that new building shown above? I pass by it all the time and it looks to be pretty well done.

BrighamYen
Sep 7, 2010, 5:44 PM
No you are not crazy because it actually looks pretty nice for Streamline Moderne! You just feel crazy because most buildings that go up in LA trying to emulate past architectural designs end up miserably in vain.

BrandonJXN
Sep 7, 2010, 6:58 PM
^ I agree. I think that those 'post streamline' (my new architectural term ;) ) works very well. It looks at the past while remaining modern and not retro. Unlike Palmer's plagues which do NOT belong downtown. The only place where I could see his faux Italian buildings would be in Beverly Hills.

Avalon Wilshire is a perfect example of post streamline architecture that works extremely well.

http://www.rent.com/media/property/778/444/7784447.jpg
http://www.rent.com/media/property/778/444/7784447.jpg

Quixote
Sep 7, 2010, 10:29 PM
Looks pretty good. I only have one complaint, and it's a general one. Why can't these new developments ever make use of the back alleyway for the parking entrance(s)?

SD_Phil
Sep 7, 2010, 11:55 PM
^

Just a guess but I think that alley would be hard pressed to handle the traffic of what look to be several dozen units (each with probably 1.5 cars). I could be wrong here of course.

BrandonJXN
Sep 8, 2010, 12:08 AM
Looks pretty good. I only have one complaint, and it's a general one. Why can't these new developments ever make use of the back alleyway for the parking entrance(s)?

I wondered that myself. A lot of buildings on Wilshire have their parking lots/garages/entrances behind the building. But quite a few residentials have their parking entrances on the front which makes it very hard to enter/exit on the ever busy Wilshire Blvd.

colemonkee
Sep 8, 2010, 2:45 AM
^ Most buildings on Wilshire will have vehicular entrances on the side streets perpendicular to Wilshire, which is where they should probably be. Alleys should be reserved for loading/unloading of trucks for the commercial spaces.

Kingofthehill
Sep 12, 2010, 5:58 AM
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/4981906056_5c851f36f4_b.jpg

colemonkee
Sep 12, 2010, 6:25 PM
What's this??? A building not finished with stucco! Bravo! And nice shot, KOTL, especially the reflections lighting up the street.

Kingofthehill
Sep 12, 2010, 7:45 PM
Hmm, KOTL? What does that stand for?

Anyways, the building in mention is the Echo 1030 (http://echo1030.com/), a LEED Platinum live/work space building nearing completion in Echo Park. One of the few, high-quality infill projects outside of Santa, Monica, Venice or WeHo. Too bad stuff like this is exception, and not the norm (salmon stucco-clad, faux-Mediterranean/Tuscan residences are).

Quixote
Sep 12, 2010, 10:16 PM
Echo 1030 shares a bit of a resemblance to that new building on Bronson you shared with us. Is it really true that Echo Park is gentrifying? Or is this anomalous building simply out of place?

I also am admittedly a fan of some of the Mediterranean-inspired stuff going up. Not all, just some.

BrandonJXN
Sep 12, 2010, 10:58 PM
Meh. I still like the post streamline stuff. Especially in more denser areas.

Kingofthehill
Sep 13, 2010, 3:59 AM
Echo 1030 shares a bit of a resemblance to that new building on Bronson you shared with us. Is it really true that Echo Park is gentrifying? Or is this anomalous building simply out of place?

I also am admittedly a fan of some of the Mediterranean-inspired stuff going up. Not all, just some.
The building's size and current vintage are indeed out of place compared to the rest of the nabe. However, that's not to say that EP isn't gentrifying (amidst the recession, too!). Based on what I've seen, in EP, the gentrification manifests itself in the form(s) of bungalow renovations, new coffee shop and restaurant openings, along with the ever-ubiquitous kitschy thrift stores and nighttime hipster hang-outs, far more often than it does in new condo developments. Hipster transplants and people priced out of Silverlake/Los Feliz seem to especially be leading the now well-established gentrification process. Interestingly enough, yuppies are now pricing out many original pioneers, of whom are now moving into the frontiers of Highland Park, Boyle Heights, EHO and Koreatown. I think it's safe to say that, for the most part, small-scale renovations and adaptive re-uses (even among Mid-Century Modern!) tend to characterize LA's unique brand of gentrification.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4113/4981909452_81959a65aa_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/4981903666_d1d2dd46a4_b.jpg

Meh. I still like the post streamline stuff. Especially in more denser areas.
LOL, where besides Wilshire between Hauser and La Brea can you even find "post-streamline" architecture? Assuming you're referring to the style exemplified in the previous building I posted, that is.

Quixote
Sep 13, 2010, 4:25 AM
Interesting. I'd love to see some more examples of such gentrification in your future photo threads.

colemonkee
Sep 13, 2010, 6:13 AM
Hmm, KOTL? What does that stand for?

KOTL = KingOfTheHill

What can I say? I like to shorten things. ;)

northbay
Sep 13, 2010, 4:09 PM
KOTL = KingOfTheHill

What can I say? I like to shorten things. ;)

shouldnt it be 'koth'? or am i totally missing something here?!?

nice developments pictured here, post streamline and not ;)

colemonkee
Sep 13, 2010, 5:43 PM
^ Ha! Yeah, it should be koth. Gotta get that dyslexia out checked. ;)

On a totally different note, the LA Times has some GREAT photos of the new LAUSD school campus on the former site of the Ambassador Hotel. While I still lament the loss of what should have been a landmarked building, the new buildings aren't bad at all.

http://framework.latimes.com/2010/09/12/new-schools-rise-from-ambassador-hotel-site/#/0

BrandonJXN
Sep 13, 2010, 11:52 PM
LOL, where besides Wilshire between Hauser and La Brea can you even find "post-streamline" architecture? Assuming you're referring to the style exemplified in the previous building I posted, that is.

It isn't found many places (unless there are examples of that type of architecture that I haven't seen). But it should be.

Muji
Sep 15, 2010, 9:55 PM
Hey everyone. I recently moved to LA (Koreatown) a couple of weeks ago after a few years in Philadelphia, so it looks like I'll be joining this and the Downtown development threads. Anyhow, here's a few photos I took today and yesterday of the very newly opened Robert Kennedy Inspiration Park, next to Wilshire along the old Ambassador Hotel site.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/4994343974_bdd741e29a_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4151/4994344222_982e3590c7_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4993739083_56bb860cbe_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/4993739607_c58c2d36fa_b.jpg
From Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/brianhhsu/)

DistrictDirt
Sep 15, 2010, 10:30 PM
Hey everyone. I recently moved to LA (Koreatown) a couple of weeks ago after a few years in Philadelphia, so it looks like I'll be joining this and the Downtown development threads. Anyhow, here's a few photos I took today and yesterday of the very newly opened Robert Kennedy Inspiration Park, next to Wilshire along the old Ambassador Hotel site.

Nice photos Muji, and welcome.

There's something about this park that doesn't quite work. I think perhaps its the fact that its lower than the sidewalk, and has that wall on the far side. Its like a big hole. It doesn't look like a pleasant place to sit and relax. I would like to hear the landscape architect's explanation as to why they designed the park this way.

LAmarODom420
Sep 15, 2010, 10:48 PM
Nice photos Muji, and welcome.

There's something about this park that doesn't quite work. I think perhaps its the fact that its lower than the sidewalk, and has that wall on the far side. Its like a big hole. It doesn't look like a pleasant place to sit and relax. I would like to hear the landscape architect's explanation as to why they designed the park this way.

It's like a mini-Pershing Square - all concrete and uninviting:(

DistrictDirt
Sep 15, 2010, 11:38 PM
It's like a mini-Pershing Square - all concrete and uninviting:(

Totally. What's up with those big concrete blocks? It makes it look cold and unfinished.

dktshb
Sep 16, 2010, 4:09 AM
Welcome to LA Muji and thanks for the pics of the RKIP. It doesn't much look like a functional park in the traditional sense but the trees and greenery are not too bad. It will be a nice place for students to hang out and chill I suppose.

Chef Boyardee
Sep 16, 2010, 2:04 PM
Hey all. Two projects i found, one is under construction, the other one has been completed. Don't know if they've been discussed here or if they're even worth discussing.
Anyway, under construction is a new Cedars-Sinai building that's supposed to be completed in 2013

http://www.discoveringforlife.org/view.image?Id=1006

And the Kenmore tower in Koreatown has apparently been completed

http://media.cdn-redfin.com/photo/40/bigphoto/287/10-470287_6_0.jpg

BrighamYen
Sep 16, 2010, 6:40 PM
Regarding the Koreatown park:

I think it's a nice addition to that part of Wilshire, but I agree it isn't the larger "park" we had all hoped for.

However, there is a much better opportunity just right down the street to make a great park out of the front lawn of the Wilshire Park Place at Wilshire and Oxford.

I know it's private (probably owned by dead beat landlord Jamison Properties), so we don't have a lot of hope for it, but who knows, maybe down the line, this piece of green grass lawn could be RETHOUGHT and converted to a nice park (albeit private and better maintained) and be in a much better location (closer to more action at Wilshire/Western).


http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/897/70259289.jpg (http://img80.imageshack.us/i/70259289.jpg/)
Image from google maps

pesto
Sep 17, 2010, 5:51 PM
Aren't there enough "Parks" in Ktown? (sorry, I promise never to do that again.)

Generally I'm always in favor of parks, but that particular stretch already has considerable open space facing Wilshire, in the form of set-backs and plazas. I don't think converting open space such as that in front of Wilshire Park Place does much. This area already has a nice balance between the density of DT (more plazas and vest-pocket parks needed) and the sparsity of CC (more highrise and lowrise buildings needed).

I am guessing that some insulation of the RFK park area from Wilshire was intended. If the bulk of the people in the park are going to be high school students, the potential for minor "kids being kids" issues or showing off cars on Wilshire may be a concern.

pesto
Sep 17, 2010, 5:59 PM
Chef B: thanks for the postings. It's good to remember that there is stuff getting done and that density is coming along, building by building. The Cedars/Beverly Center area has all the markings of a walkable urban center, mini-DT, from Robertson to past La Cienega. Bring on the Purple and Pink.

Nightlife is also increasing in Ktown, even along Wilshire, which used to be pretty dead at night. I have heard of issues being raised by tenants around Wilshire and Normandy due to club noise.

BrighamYen
Sep 17, 2010, 7:55 PM
Chef B: thanks for the postings. It's good to remember that there is stuff getting done and that density is coming along, building by building. The Cedars/Beverly Center area has all the markings of a walkable urban center, mini-DT, from Robertson to past La Cienega. Bring on the Purple and Pink.

Nightlife is also increasing in Ktown, even along Wilshire, which used to be pretty dead at night. I have heard of issues being raised by tenants around Wilshire and Normandy due to club noise.


In an area like Koreatown which is in transition from a hell hole after the riots to a viable and affordable location for new middle-class residents, the last thing people should be worried about is more night life, which brings a sense of safety (depending on the crowd of course) due to just having people on the streets and sidewalks underneath dark, ficus-covered streets at night.

Also, Koreatown happens to be in the MIDDLE of literally one of the biggest cities on the continent. A little noise is expected and I think it's been waaaay too quiet for waaaay too long.

Bring on more night life in a very dead-on-the-streets Koreatown (as long as the crowds do not result in violence and gunshots).

Californialove24
Sep 18, 2010, 9:58 AM
The Future of this City!! Can't wait to check these out!:banana:

pesto
Sep 18, 2010, 4:29 PM
LAB: agreed. These clubbers are mostly clean-cut Asian kids and the bars are a mix of hipsters and artsy types. Not a trouble kind of crowd.

As you suggest, Ktown is quite active for night-life but it doesn't show on the streets so much. But it could given the large open plazas that mark many of the high-rises along Wilshire from Vermont all the way to BH.

StethJeff
Sep 20, 2010, 4:19 AM
Nice photos Muji, and welcome.

There's something about this park that doesn't quite work. I think perhaps its the fact that its lower than the sidewalk, and has that wall on the far side. Its like a big hole. It doesn't look like a pleasant place to sit and relax. I would like to hear the landscape architect's explanation as to why they designed the park this way.

I just strolled the area this afternoon. A few observations:

1) Only that specific part of the park is below the level of the sidewalk. The entrances to the park along the edges, where people would naturally approach the park if they were walking along Wilshire from the east or west, are at sidewalk level.

2) Not enough trees and greenery. There's some but it could definitely use more.

3) Way too much concrete. Its everywhere, a lot of it is exposed and uninteresting, very blocky. Also, because of 2) above, it gets hot with the constant overhead summer sunlight.

4) Small.

5) Big image of RFK, a swirly metal thing, some oversized quotes by the likes of Maya Angelou and Cesar Chavez and . . . that's it? Very forgettable memorial. Considering they all but wiped out the Cocoanut Grove and Ambassador, kind of a piss poor job to remember one of the more significant events in America's political history. It's a shame.

DIESELPOLO
Sep 20, 2010, 3:50 PM
Hey everyone. I recently moved to LA (Koreatown) a couple of weeks ago after a few years in Philadelphia, so it looks like I'll be joining this and the Downtown development threads.

Muji! Congratulations on the move! LA looks great and I hope you get out of your relocation what you hope for. I just moved to Portland, OR last week myself, so I too went from East to West. Should this have been a PM?

Go 30/10! If LA can do it....

JDRCRASH
Sep 21, 2010, 4:02 AM
Go 30/10! If LA can do it....

I really don't like to get involved in politics, but LA MUST to do it...in the next few weeks...

Muji
Sep 21, 2010, 4:59 AM
Thanks for the welcome everyone. The Robert Kennedy park does actually include a grassier and greener section which is pretty difficult to photograph (sorry for the lack of photos). I personally rather enjoy the park, which provides plentiful seating options, something that really can't be said for a lot of other green spaces. However I've never seen more than 3 people inside at any given time so perhaps it is uninviting to others.

Good luck with your move to Portland, Dieselpolo!

BrandonJXN
Sep 26, 2010, 5:11 PM
Did anyone else besides me go to Glow Santa Monica last night? That event needs to happen every year. An OBSCENE amount of people enjoying all of the very cool and interactive exhibits. Some of them included a 150 foot long DNA double helix, a glowing bridge that ended near the ocean, a karaoke bar that shone your face on a giant globe 100 feet in the air, and (my personal favorite) a exhibit where a camera recorded your hand, and projected in on the ground from another camera 100 feet in the air. It was fun pointing and 'grabbing' all of the people. I would have to estimate that around 200,000 people showed up. Probably a lot more. But as the event grows, there needs to be a bit more to do.

LAofAnaheim
Sep 26, 2010, 6:08 PM
Did anyone else besides me go to Glow Santa Monica last night? That event needs to happen every year. An OBSCENE amount of people enjoying all of the very cool and interactive exhibits. Some of them included a 150 foot long DNA double helix, a glowing bridge that ended near the ocean, a karaoke bar that shone your face on a giant globe 100 feet in the air, and (my personal favorite) a exhibit where a camera recorded your hand, and projected in on the ground from another camera 100 feet in the air. It was fun pointing and 'grabbing' all of the people. I would have to estimate that around 200,000 people showed up. Probably a lot more. But as the event grows, there needs to be a bit more to do.

I was there last night. And, I have to applaud Metro last night for running the Rapid 720 ALL NIGHT LONG to let people take transit to the event. I took the Rapid 720 at 3 am from Ocean Avenue back to downtown LA. Awesome!

You have to give it to Metro...when there is a big event, they do plan ahead and increase service (i.e. U2 concert, Lakers championship parade, bicycle tour, and now Glow).

JDRCRASH
Sep 27, 2010, 2:03 AM
I was down in SM last night, too. But I was at the promenade, tho. But I remember hearing something about that particular event while I was in the area.

BrighamYen
Sep 27, 2010, 7:58 PM
Even better when the Expo Line (or Aqua or Gold Line after the DTC or whatever it's going to be called) reaches 4th/Colorado!

yeah215
Oct 7, 2010, 3:07 AM
This isn't a high-rise, but is still important. Many residents of Warner Center want the area to urbanize. There is a bit of fight as the Mayor and Councilman Zine are supporting a huge Costco with a gas station on the superblock that was supposed to be developed in a mix-used urban center.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2010-10/56515600.jpg

Woodland Hills residents unhappy about development plan for Warner Center area

For years they were told a 31-acre parcel would be remade as a high-quality live-work project. Instead, Councilman Dennis Zine now says a Costco store and gas station are 'a done deal.' That has prompted some recall talk.

By Bob Pool, Los Angeles Times

October 4, 2010
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!

Los Angeles City Councilman Dennis Zine was in a defensive mood when he walked into the crowded Woodland Hills middle school auditorium.

Half a dozen police officers stood at the ready outside the door. Inside, a standing-room-only crowd of 300 waited.

They were there to discuss development plans for the last major vacant area in Warner Center — the San Fernando Valley's version of high-rise Century City.

Residents were promised years ago that a high-quality combination residential and commercial project called the Village was being planned for 31 acres of an L-shaped parcel along Victory and Topanga Canyon boulevards.

Now, they were being told that a big-box warehouse store would anchor the site, not something resembling Fairfax's the Grove or Glendale's Americana at Brand shopping and residential plaza.

"It's a done deal," Zine had earlier told a group of neighborhood council leaders when he explained that a Costco store and gas station were coming to Warner Center.

That had been met with demands from some for Zine's recall. They complained that a bulky warehouse project would torpedo Warner Center's goal of being a model of where people both live and work.

Now Zine was standing before the Sept. 15 meeting of the Woodland Hills-Warner Center Neighborhood Council to do some damage control. Along with homeowners, the auditorium was packed with union members invited by the project's developer.

Residents were angry that more than half a dozen public forums about the Village had been staged yet the final version of the project plan had been switched without notice.

"It's a done deal — I stand by that comment," Zine told the crowd. "That meant I support them coming to this community. I'm trying to bring in jobs … tax revenue. I'm not telling Costco to go away."

It wasn't his idea to scrap the 360 units of residential housing that had been earmarked for the site, he said. He wasn't the one who decided to shrink the size of the hotel, office, shops and restaurant space planned for the Village, either.

That decision was made by Westfield Shopping Centers, which will develop the 31-acre parcel and which operates shopping malls north and south of the site, he said.

"It offends me when people criticize me" for trying to improve the community, said Zine. As for his recall: "I think it's absurd when you have a councilman trying to bring in jobs," he said.

But Zine blanched when a rendering of the proposed 147,000-square-foot Costco store was shown to the crowd. The picture showed the store's back wall extending about a block next to the Victory Boulevard sidewalk.

"That's not a done deal," Zine said, promising that residents would have a chance to review design plans before construction is approved.

Angry residents offered a list of 20 questions for Zine, Westfield and Costco, including why a more suitable "urban store" design wasn't being considered by the Issaquah, Wash., wholesaler and what the true financial gain to the city would be.

John Alderson, a development executive with Westfield, and Jackie Frank, a Costco executive, defended the planned $50-million store, which would occupy land leased from the shopping center company.

It remains unclear whether Costco intends to close an aging warehouse store it operates about 2 1/2 miles away in Canoga Park and transfer its 200 employees to the Warner Center store. Frank indicated that the new store will employ about 300 people.

In an interview later, Larry Green, senior vice president of development for Westfield, defended Costco as being "totally consistent to what we've done at Topanga with Neiman Marcus and Nordstrom." He said the scaled-down project proposal is also consistent with the earlier plans for the Village.

"We'd be nuts in today's market to build 500,000 square feet of residential. We still think we have a good amount of office space," Green said. Buildings that are adjacent to existing streets will allow for green space, pedestrian sidewalks and bikeways in the interior of the development, he said.

Westfield believes that the planned 16-pump Costco gas station's underground tanks can be engineered to accommodate the high water table in Warner Center. The station's placement at the corner of Victory Boulevard and Owensmouth Avenue will be "something that's nice and appropriate," he said. The project will allow for the removal of several vacant commercial structures in the area.

The high water table will preclude underground parking. Green said a parking structure will be built atop retail shops, and its look could be softened by covering it with an architectural facade.

Jeff Brotman, co-founder of Costco and its director of planning, did not respond to inquiries from The Times by phone and in writing as to whether his company had investigated other Warner Center locations. The former Catalina Yachts factory on Victory Boulevard is vacant, and residents say a large Litton facility on Canoga Avenue has been rumored to be on a closure list.

Also up in the air was the future of Costco's Canoga Park store on Roscoe Boulevard.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa may have had the answer when he traveled to Warner Center on Wednesday to meet with the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization.

Villaraigosa told a group of about 50 that his understanding is that Costco will keep the Roscoe Boulevard store open as a "business Costco" outlet.

"They're going to get me riled" if they close it and simply transfer Canoga Park's operations to Warner Center, the mayor said. "I would not be for them closing that other one down. They'd have to do something with it. This was always an addition game, not a subtraction one."

Villaraigosa listened as residents bemoaned the loss of the original Village concept. "It was highly appealing, an absolutely fantastic proposal," one woman said. A man complained that Costco is only willing to let locals "pick the color" of the new building and weigh in on its landscaping.

"That would irk me, too," acknowledged the mayor.

Resident Peter Fletcher summed up homeowners' concerns.

"This is the last great superblock left in Woodland Hills," Fletcher told Villaraigosa. "This should be our town center — an area we could stroll through and meet our neighbors and have a true center to this town.

"We're not against Costco. We just want them to respect our community, to see the value of our community."

bob.pool@latimes.com

JDRCRASH
Oct 7, 2010, 4:42 AM
I'd definitely rather have another Grove or A&B than yet another Costco.

DJM19
Oct 12, 2010, 12:38 AM
Instead of a costco or something like the grove, how about a development that activates the sidewalk? You can even divide the property into a smaller grid.

Kingofthehill
Oct 12, 2010, 5:35 AM
Really? Villawhatever has done more for Los Angeles' transportation since probably Tom Bradley. Shit...if it wasn't for him falling off of his bike and breaking his elbow, there probably wouldn't be a CicLAvia which by all accounts was a huge success.
I did some volunteer work for CicLAvia, and can tell you that the event was planned out well before the Mayor's accident (which, oddly enough, happened while I was in Colombia for a ciclovía in Bogotá).

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4903911100_3cb17eb726_b.jpg

colemonkee
Oct 16, 2010, 12:32 AM
Many, MANY posts deleted for off-topic comments. This is not a forum to discuss politics, people. This is a forum to discuss projects and developments in the Greater Los Angeles area outside of downtown. And it is not a democracy. The next person to continue the political debate of Villiaraigosa's efficacy (or lack thereof) will take a not-so-optional leave of absence from the forum.

colemonkee
Oct 16, 2010, 12:44 AM
To get things back on topic, here's some good news on the Crenshaw Line, which coincidentally ties in to the 30/10 Initiative. From the LA Times (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/10/villaraigosa-gains-546-million-federal-loan-to-speed-construction-of-crenshaw-light-rail.html):

http://shametrainla.typepad.com/.a/6a00e393399ea788340120a54c7a62970b-pi

Federal loan to speed work on Crenshaw light-rail line

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s effort to accelerate construction of local transit projects advanced Friday when the federal government announced that it would loan $546 million for a planned light-rail project that would run from the Crenshaw district to a station near Los Angeles International Airport.

The assistance is the first federal commitment to the mayor’s so-called 30/10 initiative, which calls for speeding up the completion dates of 12 transit projects planned by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, including the Westside subway extension.

"This is a substantial down payment," said Villaraigosa, who was in Washington, D.C., recently to lobby for federal assistance. "The money will help create about 5,000 jobs, free up funds for other projects and allow us to move ahead at an accelerated rate."

The loan will cover more than a third of the planning and construction costs of the Crenshaw light-rail project, which is now estimated to cost $1.4 billion.

The proposed line would run about 8 1/2 miles from Exposition and Crenshaw boulevards to the Green Line station at Aviation Boulevard near LAX.

-- Dan Weikel

Source: Los Angeles Times LA Now Blog (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/10/villaraigosa-gains-546-million-federal-loan-to-speed-construction-of-crenshaw-light-rail.html)

BrighamYen
Oct 16, 2010, 8:37 AM
Now that the Purple Line is leaving out a potential "Pink Line" connection at Wilshire and La Cienega, the Crenshaw Line may be the answer to West Hollywood's transit connection.

So basically instead of connecting up to the Wilshire/Western or Wilshire La Brea Line, it would continue up San Vicente all the way up to the Beverly Center/Cedar Sinai, San Vicente/Santa Monica, Santa Monica/La Cienega, Santa Monica/Fairfax, Santa Monica/La Brea, then up to Hollywood/Highland.

This would essentially cover most of what is "LA" and you will not absolutely NEED a car to exist in CENTRAL LA anymore!

edluva
Oct 16, 2010, 9:30 AM
^with the concentration of business, tourism, retail, and entertainment in that part of town it would be a big shame to see it getting mere lrt. the amount of traffic to and from weho sunset strip, santa monica blvd, melrose, beverly center, cedars sinai collectively justify one-seat hrt connections to the rest of the subway's current and planned destinations.

the only question is whether running trains from union station to this part of town would negatively impact headways at wilshire/vermont since we would now have three lines branching out of it. an alternative would be to create a transfer point at hollywood/highland

BrandonJXN
Oct 16, 2010, 4:18 PM
I'd love to see the Crenshaw Line connect with the 'Pink Line' (God I hate that) at Santa Monica and La Brea.

Btw...LA should start thinking about giving these lines names as opposed to colors. We used up all the cool colors and now are starting to head into the ugly colors.

dktshb
Oct 16, 2010, 4:36 PM
Good news about the Crenshaw line but it should extend up La Brea, go underground at some point, and connect to the H&H red line station at Highland and Hollywood as well as connect to LAX to the south.

BrandonJXN
Oct 16, 2010, 5:30 PM
Good news about the Crenshaw line but it should extend up La Brea, go underground at some point, and connect to the H&H red line station at Highland and Hollywood as well as connect to LAX to the south.

That was pretty much what I had in mind. The line should travel underneath Hancock Park. Though I don't think the residents would like the idea of tunneling under their houses and mini vans.

pesto
Oct 18, 2010, 7:17 PM
so as to avoid politics, I won't mention the "p" word that went oink, oink before it became meat and you hear about just before elections.

Crenshaw is why people vote against transit. Drive the route and put together a list of the all buildings over 2 stories; if you leave out the shopping center, you get about zero. Even better drive at rush-hour; you will immediately notice that traffic moves easily in each direction. In short: low density; low industry; no natural connection to the westside; doesn't actually go to LAX (people mover? when and funded how?).

And I agree that LRT north of Washington is a bad idea and north of Wilshire worse. Notice any LRT in central London, Paris, Manhattan? There used to be but they tore it up to improve transit and beautify the city.

Sodha
Oct 18, 2010, 7:53 PM
The Crenshaw Line should go north on Fairfax and not La Brea. From Expo/Crenshaw, the line should continue north on Crenshaw then turn west on San Vicente (which has a large enough median to support an at-grade median) and then go underneath Fairfax to hit Little Ethiopia, Museum Row, the Grove, CBS/Farmers Market, and West Hollywood. Thereafter, it should go east on Santa Monica boulevard and either meet up with the Red Line at Hollywood/Highland or Sunset/Vermont. A Sunset Vermont connection will allow the train to continue further east to Silver Lake and snake back into downtown LA.

JDRCRASH
Oct 19, 2010, 12:49 AM
Sodha, Beverly Hills NIMBYs are fighting the Purple Line with their auto-centric lives. What makes you think they are possibly going to allow at-grade LRT down San Vincente?

colemonkee
Oct 19, 2010, 4:05 AM
^ San Vicente and Fairfax is not within the Beverly Hills City limits. It's probably a mile or more from the border of LA/Bev Hills. They would really have no say in the matter.

Sodha
Oct 19, 2010, 6:14 PM
Good news about the Crenshaw line but it should extend up La Brea, go underground at some point, and connect to the H&H red line station at Highland and Hollywood as well as connect to LAX to the south.


Eventhough La Brea is a nice straight shot up north to Hollywood/Highland (with a 1 block east diversion to Hollywood/Highland at Hollywood blvd), the thing is there is no real destination on La Brea outside of Pinks (which is not really a trip generator) or Santa Monica/La Brea. This line needs to go on Fairfax. There, we will hit Museum Row (LACMA, BCAM and Peterson's), The Grove, CBS Studios, Farmers Market, and serve the center of West Hollywood. La Brea is a cheap diversion to where the line should really serve...and that's Fairfax. If anything, I would put La Cienega second to Fairfax; but definitely not La Brea.

pesto
Oct 20, 2010, 10:11 PM
Sodha: your revised route is a definite improvement, although still a little odd. Do you see some demographic connection between WeHo and Inglewood or Slauson that I'm missing? Has the WeHo community been screaming for a connection to Manchester or Vernon, or would they prefer BH, SM, Holywood?

And putting 20 (or is it 30?) miles of LRT winding from south of LAX through the westside to DT and beyond is hard to defend on any theory I can think of.

BrandonJXN
Oct 20, 2010, 11:32 PM
Then why have public transportation at all if they don't connect neighborhoods despite income levels?

LAofAnaheim
Oct 21, 2010, 6:53 AM
Sodha: your revised route is a definite improvement, although still a little odd. Do you see some demographic connection between WeHo and Inglewood or Slauson that I'm missing? Has the WeHo community been screaming for a connection to Manchester or Vernon, or would they prefer BH, SM, Holywood?

And putting 20 (or is it 30?) miles of LRT winding from south of LAX through the westside to DT and beyond is hard to defend on any theory I can think of.

Is there any demographic connection between Westlake and Hollywood/North Hollywood? How about Pasadena and East LA? And, with the future regional connector, there will be a natural connection between Compton and Pasadena. This is quite common in other cities where lines extend through the city. I've seen many areas in New York and London that really don't seem like a natural connection, but are conveniently located on a somewhat direct line.

I think the overall picture of the Crenshaw Line will be a north-south line for the westside. That's what Metro is looking at in a bigger picture. If we did the Pink Line just from Hollywood/Highland to La Cienega, you'd have 3 train lines starting in Union Station, which would be an operational nightmare. It would have made more sense to go from North Hollywood to Century City via West Hollywood, but it was declared infeasible.

Right now, if you want to go north-south on Metro rail, people have to go to the Blue Line at 7th street. Imagine, having this north-south line on La Brea, Fairfax, or La Cienega, the true westside, this has huge potential. Yes, there are people from the westside that do work in the South Bay, and vice versa, so I do see there will be a huge benefit to the area. And, if people want to go to Santa Monica from WeHo they can take the Crenshaw Line to La Brea or Fairfax stations and transfer to the Purple Line. That makes way more sense then having the Pink Line. Because, if we did build the Pink Line...what would have happened to the Crenshaw Line north of Wilshire? It would have probably dead-ended and then we'd come to the realization.........there is no north-south Westside rail line (which is sorely needed).

BrighamYen
Oct 21, 2010, 7:41 AM
@pesto - that is the silliest argument against transit development I've ever heard. That a line SHOULDN'T be built because it goes through multiple socioeconomic communities?

LAofAnaheim and ThreeHundred bring up a good points. How is that you can have the Red Line go through Westlake/MacArthur Park and still be able to pass through Hollywood and Highland?

Let's look at it this way so perhaps auto-oriented people can grasp the concept a bit better: How can you have a freeway that connects South Pasadena with Lincoln Heights? Or Pasadena with South Gate? It should be impossible!!

Kingofthehill
Oct 21, 2010, 3:12 PM
..more ridiculous comments from people who obviously don't ride LA's Metro, nor who are familiar with how the system works, even in its most simple form. should we axe nyc's b train because people in harlem don't care for brighton beach/south brooklyn? or because the c ultimately links washington heights and east new york? afterall, though socioeconomically similar (harlem's leaped ahead of its peers as of late, though), those nabes are very disparate and a "connection" between them is non-existent (be it for work, family or leisure). i tend to support you most of the time, but that one was a bit too bizarre.

pesto
Oct 21, 2010, 4:49 PM
Must be a case of hearing what you want to hear. Where do I talk about socio-economic levels?

I am talking about DEMAND. Transit should follow demand, either current or very likely expected. Notice that the most successful MTA lines (Red, Blue) parallel major freeways. Ditto for Expo and Purple, which I expect will do well. Demand. Please also note that no one is demanding a Crenshaw freeway; take a ride on Crenshaw and you'll see why. Half-empty, easily flowing streets with nothing dense that someone from outside the neighborhood would have great cause to visit.

Is there a connection between DT, West Lake, Ktown and Hollywood: yes. I would have thought it was too obvious to state, but these are the guts of LA and will soon become our greater DT. Now they are mostly poor, mostly Hispanic with Asian and young artsy populations moving in; but almost every stop has density, high-rises, medical centers or shopping centers. And the connection between DT-Hollywood-the Valley is a true commuter route. Demand.

A connection between Pasadena and ELA? No demand or at least not enough. This wouldn't have been my priority. But there are really two connections: ELA to DT and Pasadena to DT. I am surprised that the DT to Pasadena segment performs so poorly but ELA is less surprising (no density or destinations). Hope it improves but it seems to be requiring city improvements and subsidies to get anyone interested in building at the stations.

LAmarODom420
Oct 21, 2010, 4:49 PM
Any have any idea what this building, on Pico between Genesee and Spaulding is:

Here is the link to the street view (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=pico+and+spaulding,+la,+ca&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.631106,86.572266&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=W+Pico+Blvd+%26+S+Spaulding+Ave,+Los+Angeles,+California+90019&ll=34.051895,-118.362826&spn=0,0.005284&z=18&layer=c&cbll=34.050756,-118.362824&panoid=dPDtSHs8IWRgdlqoTuIPeA&cbp=12,22.29,,0,-21.04)

It's been empty for years and doesn't seem to have any identifying signs.

Kingofthehill
Oct 21, 2010, 6:55 PM
It has an oil well inside of it.

northbay
Oct 21, 2010, 7:21 PM
Must be a case of hearing what you want to hear. Where do I talk about socio-economic levels?

I am talking about DEMAND. Transit should follow demand, either current or very likely expected. Notice that the most successful MTA lines (Red, Blue) parallel major freeways. Ditto for Expo and Purple, which I expect will do well. Demand. Please also note that no one is demanding a Crenshaw freeway; take a ride on Crenshaw and you'll see why. Half-empty, easily flowing streets with nothing dense that someone from outside the neighborhood would have great cause to visit.

Is there a connection between DT, West Lake, Ktown and Hollywood: yes. I would have thought it was too obvious to state, but these are the guts of LA and will soon become our greater DT. Now they are mostly poor, mostly Hispanic with Asian and young artsy populations moving in; but almost every stop has density, high-rises, medical centers or shopping centers. And the connection between DT-Hollywood-the Valley is a true commuter route. Demand.

A connection between Pasadena and ELA? No demand or at least not enough. This wouldn't have been my priority. But there are really two connections: ELA to DT and Pasadena to DT. I am surprised that the DT to Pasadena segment performs so poorly but ELA is less surprising (no density or destinations). Hope it improves but it seems to be requiring city improvements and subsidies to get anyone interested in building at the stations.

the mta has to spread out its investments over a greater area since everyone voted to tax themselves so everyone (not just downtown la) wants to benefit. its just a matter of being fair to everyone.

there may or may not be greater ridership on other corridors, but my understanding is their primary goal is to create a regional system that more or less blankets the entire area (minus the oc). the one exception is the downtown connector - but that one is a no brainer.

great news about the crenshaw line. is anyone know if there's a timetable for the lax people-mover that will connect to it?

Sodha
Oct 21, 2010, 7:29 PM
Must be a case of hearing what you want to hear. Where do I talk about socio-economic levels?


Re-read your previous comment...it surely did sound like it...

Then why have public transportation at all if they don't connect neighborhoods despite income levels?

Sodha
Oct 21, 2010, 7:32 PM
there may or may not be greater ridership on other corridors, but my understanding is their primary goal is to create a regional system that more or less blankets the entire area (minus the oc). the one exception is the downtown connector - but that one is a no brainer.


OC is not paying for Measure R.....

OC has Measure M, their "roadmap to relief", which 75% dedicated to roadways, 25% to public transit. And that 25% to public transit has basically been adding new parking garages at Metrolink stations. What a crock!

LAmarODom420
Oct 21, 2010, 7:33 PM
It has an oil well inside of it.

Thanks for solving that mystery.

northbay
Oct 21, 2010, 7:35 PM
OC is not paying for Measure R.....

OC has Measure M, their "roadmap to relief", which 75% dedicated to roadways, 25% to public transit. And that 25% to public transit has basically been adding new parking garages at Metrolink stations. What a crock!

i know, but thank you for the general clarification. c'mon, this is the oc we're talking about, would you expect anything else? i heard people ARE their cars there. ;)

BrighamYen
Oct 21, 2010, 9:27 PM
HAHA I bought this T-Shirt from Kitson recently:


http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/92/img8913f.jpg (http://img693.imageshack.us/i/img8913f.jpg/)

pesto
Oct 22, 2010, 5:57 PM
Northbay: you hit the point that no one else is willing to say. There is no justification for Crenshaw other than political. Again, if anyone would like to drive the route with me let me know and we can look for signs of density, new building projects, jammed traffic, crowded buses, etc.

Sodha: that second quote isn't mine. My response to it is that it is not the job of transit to connect or not connect neighborhoods based on income levels. It should ignore this and focus on demand.

"Demographic" means cultural, economic, educational, age, race, ethnicity, income level, work, commute, religion, industry, shopping, in short, any human trait. It is not equivalent to socio economic. My point: it is not clear to me what work, commute, educational, shopping (or ethnic) demand exists that would require the upgrading of bus service to LRT along Crenshaw.

BrandonJXN
Oct 22, 2010, 6:09 PM
Tear up the Blue Line then. There is no reason why anyone should go to South LA.

pesto
Oct 22, 2010, 6:37 PM
300: first of all, reality trumps all theories and Blue is successful. But in any event, I have no issues with Blue Line except that I prefer subways. The existence of a dramatically overcrowded 110 was proof of demand. I don't know and don't really care if the riders are mostly locals or people passing through. On the same theory, I don't need to discuss Purple Line and feel pretty good about Expo, which clearly go across a variety of neighborhoods. The traffic on the 10, Venice, Washington, Rodeo, Exposition, Pico, Olympic, Wilshire, etc., tell me everything I need to know.

Going off on a tangent, "South Central" is pretty much dead as a reality. It used to be code for "the scary black parts of town" and still conjures up that image for some. But in reality, it is a very mixed area and parts are basically middle class. It's as much connected to East LA County, South Bay, the LAX area, DT and the industrial areas near DT as anyone else is.

dktshb
Oct 23, 2010, 10:22 PM
Eventhough La Brea is a nice straight shot up north to Hollywood/Highland (with a 1 block east diversion to Hollywood/Highland at Hollywood blvd), the thing is there is no real destination on La Brea outside of Pinks (which is not really a trip generator) or Santa Monica/La Brea. This line needs to go on Fairfax. There, we will hit Museum Row (LACMA, BCAM and Peterson's), The Grove, CBS Studios, Farmers Market, and serve the center of West Hollywood. La Brea is a cheap diversion to where the line should really serve...and that's Fairfax. If anything, I would put La Cienega second to Fairfax; but definitely not La Brea.

Our mass transit isn't solely made for tourist destinations. LA Brea would be a critical way to connect the red and purple lines and service a north south root in much the way the red line services Vermont. There is a lot of high density residential on either side of La Brea especially north of Santa Monica Blvd and on Santa Monica Blvd and La Brea there is the West Hollywood shopping complex. West Hollywood is going to start 2 rather large mixed use developments on La Brea too at Fountain and Santa Monica Blvd. I guarantee the line will be well served and at capacity immediately.

LAofAnaheim
Oct 24, 2010, 1:09 AM
Our mass transit isn't solely made for tourist destinations. LA Brea would be a critical way to connect the red and purple lines and service a north south root in much the way the red line services Vermont. There is a lot of high density residential on either side of La Brea especially north of Santa Monica Blvd and on Santa Monica Blvd and La Brea there is the West Hollywood shopping complex. West Hollywood is going to start 2 rather large mixed use developments on La Brea too at Fountain and Santa Monica Blvd. I guarantee the line will be well served and at capacity immediately.

Fairfax is not just a destination for tourism....but also for locals. There are more points of interest on Fairfax than La Brea..that's a fact. Let's not jeopardize destinations just because La Brea is a "straight shot". The Grove, Farmers Market, CBS Studios, West Hollywood (Santa Monica/La Brea is just the tip of West Hollywood) and West Hollywood's main center is Santa Monica/La Cienega. Metro knows this too and issued a feasability study in March '09 that noted La Brea was superior to Western, however if the train were to go further west and north to Hollywood (i.e. via Fairfax or La Cienega), ridership would significantly increase. Read the feasibilty study: http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/crenshaw/images/Feasibility%20Study%20Wilshire-La%20Brea%20LRT%20Extension%20-%20Report.pdf

By the way...no matter what route is chosen (i.e. La Cienega, Fairfax, or La Brea), the segment between Santa Monica blvd to Hollywood will most likely be La Brea. It won't be Fairfax or La Cienega, so don't worry about that.

Vermont was ONLY chosen because the Red Line couldn't proceed west of Western avenue. And since Vermont was the 2nd heaviest bus corridor, it was picked by default in order to get the Red Line to Hollywood/Highland. The stations between Vermont/Beverly to Hollywood/Vine were not part of the original plans. The Ross dress for less in Mid-Wilshire screwed up plans to continue the subway west. Inititally, the city wanted the subway to go north on Fairfax to connect with Hollywood/Highland. But because drilling past Western was out of the option; Vermont was chosen. By the way, notice how busy (i.e. not sarcasm) those stations are between Wilshire/Vermont to Hollywood/Western. That's why we shouldn't go up La Brea...it has to be either Fairfax or La Cienega; there's more destinations for locals and tourists.

LAofAnaheim
Oct 25, 2010, 4:06 AM
By the way..here is the original routing of the Red Line (http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4066/4425797827_4fb24d773d_b.jpg). And, like I said, Vermont was only chosen because the Red Line could not travel further west than Western Avenue in the Wilshire district, so Metro was stuck with Vermont. Again, look at how busy those stations are....pretty quiet for subway stations. We need to focus on a major corridor, which is either Fairfax or La Cienega. Sodha/LAofAnaheim did not say anything that Fairfax is being built "for tourists"....it's just why spend all the money as possibly West Hollywood's only light rail subway and NOT even get into West Hollywood which is Santa Monica boulevard between Fairfax and Robertson. La Brea would be a "cop-out" for WeHo, and could receive tremendous backlash from the community that voted 86% yes for Measure R.

pesto
Oct 26, 2010, 5:12 PM
Either La Brea or Fairfax could use transit since, as mentioned, Fairfax has institutions and La Brea is gaining in density. But the real winner is the Pink Line, basically along SM-San Vicente-La Cienega. It not only connects density to density (Hollywood to BH and west) but goes through density and connects Red to Purple.

It also goes underground. Surface LRT on La Brea or Fairfax just means worse traffic there. Very short sighted for the central part of LA.