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 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88

LAsam
Jan 17, 2014, 11:14 PM
That's great, thanks blackcat! Is 1901 Ave of the Star being demolished for this? It appears so from that rendering. Looks like it fills the crater and the 1901 space.

edluva
Jan 18, 2014, 10:40 AM
i'll take this one

blackcat23
Jan 19, 2014, 5:13 PM
http://buildinglosangeles.blogspot.com/2014/01/emerson-college-quietly-opens-sunset.html#more

From yesterday. Emerson College quietly opened last week; 130 students already living there, and the ground floor restaurant space already appears to be doing well.

Sunset Gordon is topped out across the street. Design wasn't award winning to begin with, and reality isn't looking so great either.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7_GjZVimlr0/UtsXR9uYByI/AAAAAAAAB6o/nzGrvrOLqDM/s800/DSC02387.JPG

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xDWVL2Huntk/UtsqbqmZd7I/AAAAAAAAB64/-dVzW5cypfU/s800/DSC02381.JPG

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TGyzb8wiG5w/UtsqhIt_OtI/AAAAAAAAB7A/Qw3B16U62lQ/s800/DSC02382.JPG

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U7VTqsMIDho/Uts7yW0gcQI/AAAAAAAAB74/cQtlJLWwovQ/s800/DSC02377.JPG

Muji
Jan 19, 2014, 9:20 PM
Whoa, the Emerson College opening really snuck up on me. Those were nice pictures. I'll have to check it out for myself sometime this week.

edluva
Jan 19, 2014, 11:51 PM
starchitecture bites

WonderlandPark
Jan 20, 2014, 4:39 AM
^^ guess you were hoping TCA did the Emerson project :shrug:

WonderlandPark
Jan 20, 2014, 6:28 PM
View into Downtown Hollywood from a couple of days ago:

http://i39.tinypic.com/2dcg0zn.jpg

LA21st
Jan 21, 2014, 3:13 AM
Anyone know what's under construction at Western and 5th? Looks to take up a whole block.

I noticed some other construction sites north of Wilshire and south of 3rd, west of Western too. There's already a good amount of solid infill here.

Muji
Jan 21, 2014, 3:48 AM
From what I know, the northeast corner of 5th and Western is going to be a 3 story supermarket and shopping center. They were supposed to start construction back in late 2011 but they only got going sometime recently. Curbed wrote about it ages ago: http://la.curbed.com/archives/2011/06/g_shopping_center.php

edluva
Jan 21, 2014, 9:56 AM
^^ guess you were hoping TCA did the Emerson project :shrug:

as if those were the only possibilities

colemonkee
Jan 21, 2014, 4:22 PM
I drove by Emerson College this weekend and it's a very impressive building, at least when viewed straight on. The side view when approaching it on either side on Sunset is pretty blah, to be honest. But it's pretty amazing and head-turning when at the corner of Sunset & Gordon. The complexity of the design draws you in visually, and makes you want to explore the various walkways within.

Sunset & Gordon, on the other hand, looks far worse in person than the pictures show. It's really just a cheap implementation of lazy architecture, and already looks dated, despite the fact that it's still not finished. Simply adding some colored panels (which I believe were in the renders initially) would really do wonders with this.

inSaeculaSaeculorum
Jan 21, 2014, 4:33 PM
^^ guess you were hoping TCA did the Emerson project :shrug:

Take me down to TCA city where the stucco is green and the boxes are shitty, Oh won't you please take me hoooome :rock:

ChelseaFC
Jan 21, 2014, 6:39 PM
LA Times front page today has a story on Pasadena looking to reduce lanes and construct parklets along a stretch of Colorado Blvd

http://www.latimes.com/includes/sectionfronts/A1.pdf

Muji
Jan 21, 2014, 7:06 PM
I was just about to post that actually. Of course, no such article would be complete without a quote from an average Joe who says it's a bad idea and that Colorado should be widened instead. Interestingly, the proposed narrowing is all to the east of the busiest parts of Old Town, but it makes sense too for Pasadena to 'spread the wealth' of walkability.

brudy
Jan 21, 2014, 7:27 PM
Take me down to TCA city where the stucco is green and the boxes are shitty, Oh won't you please take me hoooome :rock:

That is awesome. :tup:

ChelseaFC
Jan 21, 2014, 8:07 PM
I was just about to post that actually. Of course, no such article would be complete without a quote from an average Joe who says it's a bad idea and that Colorado should be widened instead. Interestingly, the proposed narrowing is all to the east of the busiest parts of Old Town, but it makes sense too for Pasadena to 'spread the wealth' of walkability.

To be fair, the areas of Colorado Blvd around DeLacey and Fair Oaks already feel pretty walkable. It's when you get passed Raymond walking towards Paseo that the streetscape begins to feel dominated by cars and pedestrians are largely overwhelmed.

The full article is now up: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-colorado-blvd-diet-20140121,0,6698432.story

Munchitup
Jan 21, 2014, 8:18 PM
I was just about to post that actually. Of course, no such article would be complete without a quote from an average Joe who says it's a bad idea and that Colorado should be widened instead. Interestingly, the proposed narrowing is all to the east of the busiest parts of Old Town, but it makes sense too for Pasadena to 'spread the wealth' of walkability.

I live about 3 blocks south of this area, and would love this. In regards to the average Joe's complaint - she complains about lack of parking but this plan would actually increase street parking. It would also make it possible to cross Colorado mid-block.

Munchitup
Jan 21, 2014, 8:22 PM
To be fair, the areas of Colorado Blvd around DeLacey and Fair Oaks already feel pretty walkable. It's when you get passed Raymond walking towards Paseo that the streetscape begins to feel dominated by cars and pedestrians are largely overwhelmed.

The full article is now up: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-colorado-blvd-diet-20140121,0,6698432.story

This is further east along Colorado then the Paseo though, really it is closer to Lake Street than Old Town. I wouldn't say pedestrians are overwhelmed at that stretch of Colorado Blvd but it is certainly not as walkable or busy as Old Town.

ChelseaFC
Jan 21, 2014, 8:59 PM
This is further east along Colorado then the Paseo though, really it is closer to Lake Street than Old Town. I wouldn't say pedestrians are overwhelmed at that stretch of Colorado Blvd but it is certainly not as walkable or busy as Old Town.

I'm aware. I'm just saying from experience that once you get past Raymond, the street definitely loses its pedestrian vibe. Probably due to the office buildings.

StethJeff
Jan 22, 2014, 4:45 AM
I'm aware. I'm just saying from experience that once you get past Raymond, the street definitely loses its pedestrian vibe. Probably due to the office buildings.

That. Those office buildings are unlit, set back, and have nothing going on in them. They create a 1 block gap in what would otherwise be an uninterrupted and interesting Colorado Street. As it stands now, OTP feels like its super far from Paseo.

blackcat23
Jan 22, 2014, 4:34 PM
http://buildinglosangeles.blogspot.com/2014/01/condo-project-would-literally-sit-on.html

31 unit condo project on the Beverly Hills/LA border

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ETGL9H10n4s/UttvPDamaiI/AAAAAAAAB84/v-P9fTRjs-s/s800/oakhurst1.PNG

brudy
Jan 22, 2014, 7:39 PM
This is further east along Colorado then the Paseo though, really it is closer to Lake Street than Old Town. I wouldn't say pedestrians are overwhelmed at that stretch of Colorado Blvd but it is certainly not as walkable or busy as Old Town.

But it's crazy how busy that area is at night lately. The Urth Caffe has added a real destination and there's always a fair amount of people at the Laemmle, Vromans. It's a great section. If they could connect it up with Lake with more retail/food and residential, it would be a great section of town. I'd like to see them run the bike lanes through Old Town too, fwiw.

Munchitup
Jan 22, 2014, 8:22 PM
That. Those office buildings are unlit, set back, and have nothing going on in them. They create a 1 block gap in what would otherwise be an uninterrupted and interesting Colorado Street. As it stands now, OTP feels like its super far from Paseo.

Oh okay I see what you are talking about, that block does seem like a bit of a pedestrian barricade that would stop casual visitors from continuing down Colorado. IMO Colorado does get more pedestrian-friendly again on the other side of the Paseo in the "Playhouse District".

Also, someone mentioned on Curbed that this would have been better served on Arroyo Parkway.

'And Pasadena should spread some of the pedestrian love south of here to the other gold line stops. Arroyo Parkway is a disgusting traffic sewer that could definitely benefit from a road diet... shave off a couple auto lanes for parking and bicycles and you'd still have two lanes each way for all the cars commuting through the area."

I think I agree.

Munchitup
Jan 22, 2014, 8:27 PM
That. Those office buildings are unlit, set back, and have nothing going on in them. They create a 1 block gap in what would otherwise be an uninterrupted and interesting Colorado Street. As it stands now, OTP feels like its super far from Paseo.

Oh okay I see what you are talking about. IMO Colorado does get more pedestrian-friendly again on the other side of the Paseo in the "Playhouse District".

Also, someone mentioned on Curbed that this would have been better served on Arroyo Parkway.

'And Pasadena should spread some of the pedestrian love south of here to the other gold line stops. Arroyo Parkway is a disgusting traffic sewer that could definitely benefit from a road diet... shave off a couple auto lanes for parking and bicycles and you'd still have two lanes each way for all the cars commuting through the area."

I think I agree.

Oh and speaking of Pasadena, the mid-rise office building next to the Playhouse broke ground a month or so ago:

http://www.pasadenaplayhouseplaza.com/

losangelesnative
Jan 24, 2014, 12:42 AM
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/01/nohos_dated_laurel_plaza_shopping_center_going_mixeduse.php
laurel plaza shopping center in NOHO going mixed use

edluva
Jan 24, 2014, 3:34 AM
pasadena needs a streetcar circulator to connect lake st, old town, and the rest of colorado. as such, old town is just a roofless shopping mall, and del mar/memorial park stations are functionally nonexistent in proportion to traffic down these corridors.

"pedestrian friendliness" is a meaningless term when the place functions as a shopping mall (eg 93% of patrons parked in a garage before transforming magically into "pedestrians" upon exiting said garage

Angelenos need to see "pedestrian friendliness" or "pedestrian oriented" as a holistic term, not a box to be checked on the technicality that the driver starts walking away from his car. this is what shallower-minded angelenos don't get when others critique the "progress" LA has made towards whatever urbanist end.

ChelseaFC
Jan 24, 2014, 7:15 AM
pasadena needs a streetcar circulator to connect lake st, old town, and the rest of colorado. as such, old town is just a roofless shopping mall, and del mar/memorial park stations are functionally nonexistent in proportion to traffic down these corridors.

"pedestrian friendliness" is a meaningless term when the place functions as a shopping mall (eg 93% of patrons parked in a garage before transforming magically into "pedestrians" upon exiting said garage

Angelenos need to see "pedestrian friendliness" or "pedestrian oriented" as a holistic term, not a box to be checked on the technicality that the driver starts walking away from his car. this is what shallower-minded angelenos don't get when others critique the "progress" LA has made towards whatever urbanist end.

I don't really understand what you're saying. If arriving without a personal vehicle is your definition of "pedestrian friendly", a streetcar won't solve that. SFH's in the SGV aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The vast majority of those who patronize S. Lake and Colorado Blvd arrive via car. However more and more are using the Gold Line, and that's a good thing.

edluva
Jan 24, 2014, 10:36 AM
I don't really understand what you're saying. If arriving without a personal vehicle is your definition of "pedestrian friendly", a streetcar won't solve that. SFH's in the SGV aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The vast majority of those who patronize S. Lake and Colorado Blvd arrive via car. However more and more are using the Gold Line, and that's a good thing.

no, it won't solve the problem but it will push the requirement of driving multiple places to do shopping back another step and create a more unified "pedestrian experience".

but youre right that LA will not be any more pedestrian friendly simply for having a couple of ersatz "old towne" roofless shopping malls amidst an ocean of auto-oriented sprawl

a fundamental change needs to occur to change this ocean of behavior, not a couple of concession steps which do nothing to solve the problem at the source. "more and more" is a concession statement, not actual substance. likewise for statements such as "more and more angelenos are living car-free", or "more and more anaheimers are commuting on metrolink", or "more and more angelenos are conducting bike-oriented lifestyles". hollow generalities which don't stand up to the actual numbers. i don't care much for feel-good statements with little substance, but it seems many here place all their faith on these tiny slivers of untruth

I'd rather understand the really large and pressing problems. something angelenos seem to have a difficult time doing, seeing as they're too busy constructing tiny bubbles to insulate themselves from the surrounding reality.

ChelseaFC
Jan 24, 2014, 3:57 PM
no, it won't solve the problem but it will push the requirement of driving multiple places to do shopping back another step and create a more unified "pedestrian experience".

but youre right that LA will not be any more pedestrian friendly simply for having a couple of ersatz "old towne" roofless shopping malls amidst an ocean of auto-oriented sprawl

a fundamental change needs to occur to change this ocean of behavior, not a couple of concession steps which do nothing to solve the problem at the source. "more and more" is a concession statement, not actual substance. likewise for statements such as "more and more angelenos are living car-free", or "more and more anaheimers are commuting on metrolink", or "more and more angelenos are conducting bike-oriented lifestyles". hollow generalities which don't stand up to the actual numbers. i don't care much for feel-good statements with little substance, but it seems many here place all their faith on these tiny slivers of untruth

I'd rather understand the really large and pressing problems. something angelenos seem to have a difficult time doing, seeing as they're too busy constructing tiny bubbles to insulate themselves from the surrounding reality.

Let's be careful not to too narrowly define the success or failure of a city/metro. Some people tend to have too specific of requirements. If it doesn't fit their idea of what a city should be, it's no good. Can LA do things to improve the pedestrian experience? Absolutely! We are seeing local areas constantly putting their main thoroughfares on a road diet. But expecting large scale culture shift is pretty unrealistic. One of the reasons people move to LA from the vertical cities is the ability to have privacy in the comfort of your own home in a quiet residential neighborhood, but still be close to all of the offerings a typical global city offers. That may not be for everyone, and LA as a whole will just never be the urban walk-everywhere city some may like it to be. It's not inherently in the city's DNA to be that. However, what Pasadena is doing is wonderful, and needed. Hopefully more localities do this.

brudy
Jan 24, 2014, 5:11 PM
no, it won't solve the problem but it will push the requirement of driving multiple places to do shopping back another step and create a more unified "pedestrian experience".

but youre right that LA will not be any more pedestrian friendly simply for having a couple of ersatz "old towne" roofless shopping malls amidst an ocean of auto-oriented sprawl

a fundamental change needs to occur to change this ocean of behavior, not a couple of concession steps which do nothing to solve the problem at the source. "more and more" is a concession statement, not actual substance. likewise for statements such as "more and more angelenos are living car-free", or "more and more anaheimers are commuting on metrolink", or "more and more angelenos are conducting bike-oriented lifestyles". hollow generalities which don't stand up to the actual numbers. i don't care much for feel-good statements with little substance, but it seems many here place all their faith on these tiny slivers of untruth

I'd rather understand the really large and pressing problems. something angelenos seem to have a difficult time doing, seeing as they're too busy constructing tiny bubbles to insulate themselves from the surrounding reality.

You don't like hollow generalities, yet you're making them. While I usually agree with your assessments (and like your writing style), I think a holistic view of the situation is required. The ingrained attitudes of southern california aren't going to change overnight, but there's evidence that those attitudes are shifting. For example, Expo ridership has already hit the predicted 2020 levels. You also can't deny the practical impact of initiatives like all the new bike lanes and the various road diets. Could the city do more, and do it faster? Of course.

But I think you also need to separate government vs the public. The city government is rife with old thinking and a lack of innovation (example, the reticence for a direct rail connection to LAX). This may require a decade or two to change as younger people with more urbanist attitudes get into politics and old crusties retire. Meanwhile younger people are demanding a more walkable, livable, urban environment.

The city sits right now in the middle of two eras. Developers are still creating those false worlds, those bubbles of fakeness which seem to be endemic around here. But contemporaneously the region is moving towards a more urban modality. At times these two views conflict (for example the situation of the atwater bridge) and that will probably happen for years until the inexorable rise of urbanism takes a deeper hold. LA is just beginning down this path, many years behind other american cities and decades, if not a century, behind European cities.

202_Cyclist
Jan 24, 2014, 5:18 PM
edluva:
but youre right that LA will not be any more pedestrian friendly simply for having a couple of ersatz "old towne" roofless shopping malls amidst an ocean of auto-oriented sprawl

Perhaps but Long Beach and Glendale are not "erstaz "old towne" roofless shopping malls. There are many truly walkable neighborhoods in Southern California. The challenge is for these to continue to develop and to better connect them by transit.

Munchitup
Jan 24, 2014, 5:28 PM
But I think you also need to separate government vs the public. The city government is rife with old thinking and a lack of innovation (example, the reticence for a direct rail connection to LAX). This may require a decade or two to change as younger people with more urbanist attitudes get into politics and old crusties retire. Meanwhile younger people are demanding a more walkable, livable, urban environment.

This. There is some data that shows new residents are owning cars at a much lower rate than previous Angeleno households. There is progress that is being made, albeit it can feel very slow and halting from our close-up perspective. Maybe I am part of the problem (and I am in fact one of the 89%) by being impressed with the major growth being in "low-car-households" and not "car-free-households" but when you compare to other cities around the country (like semi-contemporaries Seattle and Portland) Los Angeles does extremely well.

http://www.betterinstitutions.com/2013/07/almost-all-of-los-angeles-growth-is-in.html

http://bikeportland.org/2013/07/30/low-car-households-account-for-60-of-portland-growth-since-2005-91282

LA: 89% New Households are Low Car
PTD: 60.3% New Households are Low Car
SEA: 37.5% New Households are Low Car
BOS: 69.5% New Households are Low Car

edluva clearly spends/has spent way to much time with mid-to-late century generation Southern Californians. :D But a streetcar down Colorado and Lake does sound great.

DtlaCuriousity
Jan 25, 2014, 12:12 AM
Not sure if this was mentioned already, but has anyone seen the renderings posted for 3500 Wilshire Blvd? Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line stop. I can't see how something like that could have been approved. Sorry, no links or pictures but maybe someone can find something online.

Muji
Jan 25, 2014, 4:05 AM
I passed by the Vermont today and took a picture. I didn't quite zoom in on the podium, but they've put up a little more glass on the Vermont Ave side in the past week, as well as some more screens on the upper floors. They have begun rebuilding the sidewalk along Vermont Avenue and I was very relieved to see that they will not be widening the roadway, as I was afraid they would. We will instead be getting an extra-wide sidewalk :).

http://urbandiachrony.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/dsc_1610-e1390622675541.jpg

caligrad
Jan 25, 2014, 5:10 AM
^^^^ WOW.... I actually like the towers.... maybe the glass helps them out since they really are 2 giant boxes..... I am probably the last one to complain about the ridiculous podium though.... and yes I must complain about it now because driving on the side of it today doing down Vermont..... its HUGE.... but that being said... since it is right next to the subway station and purple line is continuing west.... and hopefully a future Vermont line that will run through.... is parking in this building also allocated for "park and ride" for commuters or is it purely for the building and businesses at the ground level ? because I would have a little less hate if it was for park and ride seems like an excessive amount of parking just for the building itself.

Mojeda101
Jan 25, 2014, 8:47 AM
I passed by the Vermont today and took a picture. I didn't quite zoom in on the podium, but they've put up a little more glass on the Vermont Ave side in the past week, as well as some more screens on the upper floors. They have begun rebuilding the sidewalk along Vermont Avenue and I was very relieved to see that they will not be widening the roadway, as I was afraid they would. We will instead be getting an extra-wide sidewalk :).

http://urbandiachrony.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/dsc_1610-e1390622675541.jpg

I actually got a chance to go inside. We took advantage and went all the way to the Helipad on the roof. With that said, bam.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/12058750925_f0804e0bcc_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/)
DSC_6171 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/) by mojeda101 (http://www.flickr.com/people/21978107@N08/), on Flickr

DistrictDirt
Jan 25, 2014, 11:09 AM
I actually got a chance to go inside. We took advantage and went all the way to the Helipad on the roof. With that said, bam.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/12058750925_f0804e0bcc_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/)
DSC_6171 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/) by mojeda101 (http://www.flickr.com/people/21978107@N08/), on Flickr

New favorite photo I've seen on SSP in ages. Well done. :worship:

DtlaCuriousity
Jan 25, 2014, 4:42 PM
Not sure if this was mentioned already, but has anyone seen the renderings posted for 3500 Wilshire Blvd? Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line stop. I can't see how something like that could have been approved. Sorry, no links or pictures but maybe someone can find something online.

Great picture, Mojeda.

So it's not an actual new development. They're trying to renovate the existing building and it's probably not set in stone. Here's a link -

http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/18120847/3500-Wilshire-Blvd-Los-Angeles-CA/

The current state of the building is horrendous so you would think any renovation would be welcomed, but this just looks very disappointing. If the renovations could somehow salvage the Normandie side of the current building, then it's a slight improvement. I'm happy there is some interest in improving this corner however.

Wally West
Jan 25, 2014, 8:10 PM
Great picture, Mojeda.

So it's not an actual new development. They're trying to renovate the existing building and it's probably not set in stone. Here's a link -

http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/18120847/3500-Wilshire-Blvd-Los-Angeles-CA/

The current state of the building is horrendous so you would think any renovation would be welcomed, but this just looks very disappointing. If the renovations could somehow salvage the Normandie side of the current building, then it's a slight improvement. I'm happy there is some interest in improving this corner however.

Oh god. I guess from just strictly a financial POV, it's understandable why the owners would rather renovate. But it's frustrating to see a two story building right next to a subway entrance and the newly renovated hotel that's across the street.

And while we're on the topic of that building, I found it incredibly amusing that building was featured in the latest Grand Theft Auto game.

Gram3000
Jan 25, 2014, 8:54 PM
Amazing pic, wow!! Some may say that DTLA skyline punches below its weight, but undeniably it does pack quite a punch! L.A. is definitely IMO "THE KING OF THE NIGHT!!"

StethJeff
Jan 25, 2014, 11:04 PM
I actually got a chance to go inside. We took advantage and went all the way to the Helipad on the roof. With that said, bam.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/12058750925_f0804e0bcc_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/)
DSC_6171 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/) by mojeda101 (http://www.flickr.com/people/21978107@N08/), on Flickr

Definitely worth re-quoting for the next page. Well done, Mo.:cheers:

Wilcal
Jan 26, 2014, 2:39 AM
Mojeda,
you little rascal, how on earth did you get to the top of the Vermont?

Wilcal
Jan 26, 2014, 2:43 AM
Oh, and as far as the Vermont is concerned, the podium is starting to look a lot better. I wish the owners of the Watermarke in downtown were as conscientious about such detail. All it would take would be some multi-shaded green glass panels (or even metal) to beautify that monstrosity

blackcat23
Jan 27, 2014, 2:39 PM
http://buildinglosangeles.blogspot.com/2014/01/gensler-designed-senior-housing-for.html

This is a Gensler designed retirement community that will be built in Playa Vista. Not half bad.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Vx0msqyXVXI/UuR_By7RrMI/AAAAAAAAB-w/YhOXQB0WDik/s800/fountainviewgonda2.jpg

202_Cyclist
Jan 27, 2014, 4:14 PM
How far will the Crenshaw line be away from Playa Vista? Between this proposal, Federal Reality's investment (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/nov/06/business/la-fi-el-segundo-shopping-center-20131107) and the other construciton in Playa Vista, it seems like there is a lot of development around LAX.

JDRCRASH
Jan 27, 2014, 5:26 PM
How far will the Crenshaw line be away from Playa Vista? Between this proposal, Federal Reality's investment (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/nov/06/business/la-fi-el-segundo-shopping-center-20131107) and the other construciton in Playa Vista, it seems like there is a lot of development around LAX.

Oh, Playa Vista is Northwest of LAX, almost 3 miles away from the Crenshaw Line, not really in the vicinity at all.

However all is not lost on rail to Playa Vista. Eventually it would make sense to extend the Green Line to LAX Lot C, then veer north onto Lincoln Blvd to Santa Monica (as proposed by Tom LaBonge, i believe), with a station at Jefferson Blvd to serve the Playa Vista area.

202_Cyclist
Jan 27, 2014, 5:43 PM
JDRCRASH:
However all is not lost on rail to Playa Vista. Eventually it would make sense to extend the Green Line to LAX Lot C, then veer north onto Lincoln Blvd to Santa Monica (as proposed by Tom LaBonge, i believe), with a station at Jefferson Blvd to serve the Playa Vista area.


Is this feasible? If so, this is another reason why the LAX station on the Crenshaw line should be Lot C and not directly at the terminal.

WCArch
Jan 27, 2014, 8:29 PM
cool stuff being built out in LA. Check out this awesome brand new architecture blog:
http://westcoastarch.blogspot.com/
it will cover projects in LA and all the west coast cities

Mojeda101
Jan 27, 2014, 9:04 PM
Mojeda,
you little rascal, how on earth did you get to the top of the Vermont?

How do you think?

inSaeculaSaeculorum
Jan 27, 2014, 11:14 PM
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/image.php?u=67950&dateline=1379049435:How do you think?

.

losangelesnative
Jan 27, 2014, 11:57 PM
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/01/a_complete_tour_through_the_future_academy_movie_museum.php
new renderings of the academy museum scheduled to break ground at the end of the year and open in 2017

StethJeff
Jan 28, 2014, 3:32 AM
cool stuff being built out in LA. Check out this awesome brand new architecture blog:
http://westcoastarch.blogspot.com/
it will cover projects in LA and all the west coast cities

Did you just call westcoastarch.blogspot.com "awesome," WCArch? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

There's nothing like a recommendation from an impartial individual.

Illithid Dude
Jan 28, 2014, 4:02 AM
Did you just call westcoastarch.blogspot.com "awesome," WCArch? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

There's nothing like a recommendation from an impartial individual.

I mean, I'm fine with someone pimping their own blog, and many do so on this site. I just think it's important to be clear that it is your blog. Otherwise, it seems a bit shady, you know?

mdiederi
Jan 28, 2014, 6:20 AM
How do you think?

Helicopter? :haha:

Valyrian Steel
Jan 28, 2014, 6:35 AM
Helicopter? :haha:

Come on, let's be realistic here. He's obviously Spiderman. ;)

Muji
Jan 28, 2014, 6:23 PM
I forgot to post this picture of Blvd 6200 taken on Sunday. I'm very unimpressed with the dark stucco they decided to use on the corner building, which is unacceptably boring for such a visible intersection of Hollywood Boulevard. The renderings suggest that each of the buildings will be a little different, so lets hope the others turn out better than this.

http://urbandiachrony.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/img_2292-e1390847022246.jpg

WonderlandPark
Jan 28, 2014, 6:26 PM
There is a graphic that wraps that corner, so that will help.

ChelseaFC
Jan 28, 2014, 8:17 PM
Whatever happened to the proposal to complete the Pantages theater building?

bobbyv
Jan 28, 2014, 8:29 PM
Whatever happened to the proposal to complete the Pantages theater building?

I've been very curious about that as well.

StethJeff
Jan 29, 2014, 6:27 AM
Despite how unimpressive Blvd6200 looks, this simony of those cases where the block just needed the infill. Pantages looked lonely and surrounded by far too much open space before this started going up. And obviously that lot across the street needs to be developed as well. The canyon along Hollywood is in desperate need of being extended out to the 101.

SimonLA
Jan 29, 2014, 6:43 AM
Despite how unimpressive Blvd6200 looks, this simony of those cases where the block just needed the infill. Pantages looked lonely and surrounded by far too much open space before this started going up. And obviously that lot across the street needs to be developed as well. The canyon along Hollywood is in desperate need of being extended out to the 101.

The massive lot across the street is supposed to be Blvd6200's second phase. I hope it's not delayed because of the earthquake hysteria, but can't seem to get a straight answer.

inSaeculaSaeculorum
Jan 29, 2014, 6:45 AM
There is a graphic that wraps that corner, so that will help.

i am both laughing and crying at the idea that we need gaudy graphics in LA to cover up bad architecture. this city is sad and hopeless.

Wilcal
Jan 29, 2014, 5:01 PM
How do you think?

Well to be quite honest, it was a straight forward question and I wouldn't have asked if I really knew how. But I would have thought the access doors would be locked or unavailable to non-residents. Therefore, somehow sneaking up to the top and risking security arresting you. I mean it is a privately owned building and someone else s property, isn't it?

The Illusive Man
Jan 29, 2014, 7:01 PM
I'm looking forward to Blvd 6200. That'll definitely be an awesome project for the area.

inSaeculaSaeculorum
Jan 29, 2014, 7:44 PM
Large graphic billboards all around hollywood remind me of when your computer has a virus and pop-up ads keeping popping up everywhere. These billboards are a form of urban blight, I don't know why we so readily construct them.

Mojeda101
Jan 30, 2014, 12:44 AM
Well to be quite honest, it was a straight forward question and I wouldn't have asked if I really knew how. But I would have thought the access doors would be locked or unavailable to non-residents. Therefore, somehow sneaking up to the top and risking security arresting you. I mean it is a privately owned building and someone else s property, isn't it?

We had the cops called on us as we escaped. We evaded the 5-0 :)

losangelesnative
Jan 30, 2014, 3:49 AM
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/01/santa_monica_punts_again_on_huge_bergamot_transit_village.
bergamot transit village delayed a little bit more

blackcat23
Jan 30, 2014, 4:02 PM
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-property-report-20140130,0,7796561.story#axzz2rtiFr08D


Vine Street resurgence continues with $285-million mixed-use project

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/2014/01/kilroy-realty-hollywood-city-block.jpg

by Roger Vincent

With plans for a motion picture museum relocated to Wilshire Boulevard, another vast complex of apartments, offices and stores may be coming to the heart of Hollywood in the block just south of the ArcLight Cinema complex.

The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, the group that puts on the Oscars, scrapped plans for a museum there and sold the full city block near Sunset Boulevard and Vine Street to Los Angeles developer Kilroy Realty Corp. for $46 million.

The proposed project, valued at as much as $285 million, underscores the ascendancy of the Vine Street neighborhood around Hollywood and Sunset boulevards, where billions of dollars' worth of development has been completed or planned in recent years....


In Hollywood, Kilroy Realty plans to seek city approval to develop a 475,000-square-foot mixed-use campus intended to serve small businesses in the entertainment industry. The complex, which doesn't have a name yet, is to incorporate three office buildings, 220 apartments and shops and restaurants along Vine.

Three existing buildings on the site, including a former Big Lots store and a 1920s warehouse, will be rented to tenants during the city approval process, which is expected to last about 18 months, said David Simon, executive vice president of Kilroy Realty.

LA21st
Jan 30, 2014, 7:30 PM
Awesome. One of my favorite parts of LA.

202_Cyclist
Jan 30, 2014, 7:58 PM
Developer to build five office buildings in Playa Vista
New York developer Tishman Speyer plans to spend $80 million building the Playa Vista offices and expects to break ground in March.

http://www.trbimg.com/img-52e9acb4/turbine/la-pv-renderings-1-jpg-20140129/600
Tishman Speyer's Playa Vista offices are being built on speculation that there will be tenants to rent them when they are completed. (Image courtesy of the LA Times)

By Roger Vincent
January 29, 2014
LA Times

"Developer Tishman Speyer will break ground in March on five office buildings in Playa Vista, with a combined value of more than $80 million.

The properties are being built on speculation that there will be tenants to rent them when they are completed, said John Miller, director of West Coast operations for Tishman Speyer, based in New York.

Like other office buildings in the Playa Vista neighborhood south of Marina del Rey, the new structures are intended to appeal to businesses in creative fields such as entertainment and media..."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-playa-vista-offices-20140130,0,257635.story#axzz2ru5TiEtM

LAsam
Jan 30, 2014, 9:55 PM
200K of office square footage built on spec. Does Tishman know something we don't know or are they just rolling the dice?

LA21st
Jan 30, 2014, 10:29 PM
I think it will be okay with all the new tech companies and creative industries in that area.

LA Weekly had a nice article about companies setting up in Playa Vista.

LosAngelesSportsFan
Jan 30, 2014, 10:35 PM
200K of office square footage built on spec. Does Tishman know something we don't know or are they just rolling the dice?

That area is booming with tech. They will lease out before they are completed.

202_Cyclist
Jan 30, 2014, 10:43 PM
Does anyone know what the status is of the LAX Northside Plan (http://www.lawa.org/GDZ/opportunity.aspx)

The Illusive Man
Jan 31, 2014, 4:42 AM
Could LA's new NFL stadium be built in Inglewood for the Rams?

Time will tell:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/football/nfl/la-sp-nfl-la-rams-20140131,0,3805682.story#axzz2rw98jC6F

StethJeff
Jan 31, 2014, 4:48 AM
Could just be nothing - and the article makes a point to state this - but like they said, plenty have talked the talk but this dude actually bought the land. If anything, it'll at least create plenty of juicy speculation. Get ready to revive the very old and very tiring potential NFL stadium site discussions . . .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A return of L.A. Rams?

By Sam Farmer
January 30, 2014, 6:31 p.m.

The owner of the St. Louis Rams has bought a large piece of land in Inglewood that potentially could be used for an NFL stadium, multiple individuals with knowledge of the transaction have told The Times.

Within the last month, billionaire Stan Kroenke bought a 60-acre parking lot located between the Forum and Hollywood Park, according to individuals who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak on behalf of the buyer or seller . . .

Los Angeles has been without an NFL franchise since the Rams and Raiders left after the 1994 season. Although relocating a franchise would be fraught with challenges, and the L.A. market repeatedly has been used as leverage to get stadium deals done in other cities, this is the first time an NFL owner has bought a piece of land in the L.A. area capable of accommodating a stadium . . .

http://www.latimes.com/sports/football/nfl/la-sp-nfl-la-rams-20140131,0,3805682.story#axzz2rwi7rXJ2

StethJeff
Jan 31, 2014, 4:49 AM
/\ Ha! Beat me to it.

The Illusive Man
Jan 31, 2014, 5:25 AM
/\ Ha! Beat me to it.

I like your description better!

Quixote
Jan 31, 2014, 5:48 AM
I've pretty much given up on Farmers Field at this point. I just want the Rams back...

ChelseaFC
Jan 31, 2014, 6:09 AM
Could just be nothing - and the article makes a point to state this - but like they said, plenty have talked the talk but this dude actually bought the land. If anything, it'll at least create plenty of juicy speculation. Get ready to revive the very old and very tiring potential NFL stadium site discussions . . .


I would be mildly surprised if the Rams don't end up moving back. Pretty hard to believe that with the timing and location that this is all coincedental.

StethJeff
Jan 31, 2014, 7:11 AM
I would be mildly surprised if the Rams don't end up moving back. Pretty hard to believe that with the timing and location that this is all coincedental.

It really is too much at this point to not run with this story. The Ram's original home, the current state of the team in St. Louis, the huge land sale, etc. Chavez Ravine will always be my first choice but I suppose this would do.

Munchitup
Jan 31, 2014, 5:02 PM
The only disappointment with an Inglewood site is that there won't be transit all that close by (Florence / La Brea and Florence / West are the closest stops, both over a mile away). It's certainly not the end of the world by any means but one great thing about Farmer's Field was its transit-adjacency.

However if this does come to pass I am fairly confident that a decent shuttle service would be set up ala Dodger Express, and since the area isn't surrounded by choke points like Chavez Ravine, it might actually be a pretty decent service.

202_Cyclist
Jan 31, 2014, 5:21 PM
The only disappointment with an Inglewood site is that there won't be transit all that close by (Florence / La Brea and Florence / West are the closest stops, both over a mile away). It's certainly not the end of the world by any means but one great thing about Farmer's Field was its transit-adjacency.

However if this does come to pass I am fairly confident that a decent shuttle service would be set up ala Dodger Express, and since the area isn't surrounded by choke points like Chavez Ravine, it might actually be a pretty decent service.

I disagree. I am indifferent about football but having a huge stadium that sits empty 350 days per year is not the best use of a rail station. Perhaps this location is better for a football stadium.

The Illusive Man
Jan 31, 2014, 6:23 PM
I disagree. I am indifferent about football but having a huge stadium that sits empty 350 days per year is not the best use of a rail station. Perhaps this location is better for a football stadium.

Not true. I prefer Farmers Field and there is no way it would sit empty during the offseason. It would be built as part of the convention center and would be used as convention space for larger events. That's probably the primary reason the stadium would be build where the west hall currently sits in the first place.

I really hope Farmers Field still somehow becomes a reality, but if not I'll be perfectly fine with a stadium in Inglewood.

Munchitup
Jan 31, 2014, 7:08 PM
I disagree. I am indifferent about football but having a huge stadium that sits empty 350 days per year is not the best use of a rail station. Perhaps this location is better for a football stadium.

I'm not sure what rail station you are referring to. Pico Station in South Park (where Farmer's would be) is an existing station, and the Inglewood stations have been planned all along on the Crenshaw Corridor.

Perhaps you are referring to the shuttle service? That would be only game-days and just consist of re-purposed Metro buses.

I mean, I certainly agree that new rail lines should not be built to accommodate this hypothetical Inglewood stadium. So in that way I agree with you, and in Inglewood this stadium probably would sit empty for 300 or so days (probably have some concerts and special events).

202_Cyclist
Jan 31, 2014, 7:18 PM
I'm not sure what rail station you are referring to. Pico Station in South Park (where Farmer's would be) is an existing station, and the Inglewood stations have been planned all along on the Crenshaw Corridor.

Yes, the Pico station. Housing, office and hotels are probably a better use of land for this area-- buildings that will generate ridership than a stadium that will sit empty most of the year (even if conventions used Farmer's Field, that is what, another 25 - 50 days per year?).

blackcat23
Jan 31, 2014, 7:27 PM
Yes, the Pico station. Housing, office and hotels are probably a better use of land for this area-- buildings that will generate ridership than a stadium that will sit empty most of the year (even if conventions used Farmer's Field, that is what, another 25 - 50 days per year?).

Housing, office and hotel will be happening either way. I've been in favor of Farmers Field because it would expand the convention center, but there are other ways of doing that.

202_Cyclist
Jan 31, 2014, 7:41 PM
Housing, office and hotel will be happening either way. I've been in favor of Farmers Field because it would expand the convention center, but there are other ways of doing that.

I think that is another argument against a downtown football stadium. The Staples Center helped spur development around there and elsewhere downtown when it opened nearly 15 years ago. Looking at this thread, it seems like downtown has enough momentum that it doesn't need whatever catalyst the football stadium would provide.

DistrictDirt
Jan 31, 2014, 7:53 PM
I think that is another argument against a downtown football stadium. The Staples Center helped spur development around there and elsewhere downtown when it opened nearly 15 years ago. Looking at this thread, it seems like downtown has enough momentum that it doesn't need whatever catalyst the football stadium would provide.

Not to mention the fact that football stadium only holds 8 games a year, plus one-off entertainment events. I think the catalytic effects were always overstated.

202_Cyclist
Jan 31, 2014, 8:02 PM
Not to mention the fact that football stadium only holds 8 games a year, plus one-off entertainment events. I think the catalytic effects were always overstated.

Perhaps eight regular season games, maybe two pre-season games, 1-2 playoff games, and a couple of concerts. I wouldn't think there would be more than 10 conventions that are so large they would need additional space at Farmer's Field-- LA auto show-type conventions.

I am not against downtown stadiums but they have to: 1) have limited public financial contribution, 2) be well-integrated with the surrounding community w/out a lot of surface parking (to its credit, it looked like Farmer's Field succeeded with this), and 3) be used with sufficient regularity (such as hockey/basketball arenas are).

StethJeff
Jan 31, 2014, 8:30 PM
Whereas it was originally just a well-known rumor, the Rams organization have at least admitted that Kroenke bought the land. No info on what's being done there, of course.

I agree and disagree with what 202_Cyclist is saying. Farmers Field is a great location because it'll expand the size of the CC, be used during NFL and CC programs, sits in the heart of LA's burgeoning rail system, and will sit against a freeway so it isn't exactly creating a pedestrian dead zone in DTLA. In many ways, it's actually a perfect place.

BUT, he makes a good point that Staples helped create a lot of momentum downtown that at this point is self-sustaining and really doesn't require an NFL stadium in any way. DTLA already "arrived" and an NFL stadium isn't going to change that. This is part of the reason why Chavez has always been my first choice. There's plenty of land to build on, plenty of parking for tailgates, it's still a very central location, it's a place that many LA sports fans already consider hallowed ground, etc. On top of all of that, the Dodgers have already invested millions into their facility and are very ambitious about proceeding with further development in order to make the Dodger stadium area a destination outside of the MLB season. An NFL stadium would obviously keep that area busy during several months out of the year when it otherwise sits empty.

With that critical mass of both stadiums, it would absolutely necessitate greater investment in one of LA's most needy corridors. Rail along Sunset/Chavez/SaMo is a no-brainer and with two of the city's focal points for 40K+ people gatherings, it would make all the more sense to finally build rail here (as opposed to Azusa).

Quixote
Jan 31, 2014, 9:04 PM
^ Getting out of Chavez Ravine after a sold-out Dodgers game (53,275) is already a legendary bottleneck. Now imagine an additional 20,000 fans, more if there's a Super Bowl held there. Yeah, no thanks.

Plus, McM(asshole) benefits from anything new built on the land. How quickly we've forgotten...

bobcat
Jan 31, 2014, 10:12 PM
Of course this could all be a ploy to scare the STL taxpayers into funding a new stadium.

StethJeff
Jan 31, 2014, 10:26 PM
^ Getting out of Chavez Ravine after a sold-out Dodgers game (53,275) is already a legendary bottleneck. Now imagine an additional 20,000 fans, more if there's a Super Bowl held there. Yeah, no thanks.

Plus, McM(asshole) benefits from anything new built on the land. How quickly we've forgotten...

All the more reason to push for rail. While I agree that traffic is an issue there more than anywhere else, it'll be a problem in DTLA proper and that close to LAX as well. I'm done listening to the "traffic" argument when it comes to pretty much anything in the Southland. Should the Chavez Ravine parking lot remain a completely undeveloped asphalt turf for eternity because the bottle necks there were never planned well? Plenty of other cities rely on transit to get people to their sports stadiums. LA should put on its big boy pants and join the club.

202_Cyclist
Jan 31, 2014, 10:30 PM
Of course this could all be a ploy to scare the STL taxpayers into funding a new stadium.

Probably, this is how professional sports usually works.

lovemycity21
Jan 31, 2014, 10:53 PM
All the more reason to push for rail. While I agree that traffic is an issue there more than anywhere else, it'll be a problem in DTLA proper and that close to LAX as well. I'm done listening to the "traffic" argument when it comes to pretty much anything in the Southland. Should the Chavez Ravine parking lot remain a completely undeveloped asphalt turf for eternity because the bottle necks there were never planned well? Plenty of other cities rely on transit to get people to their sports stadiums. LA should put on its big boy pants and join the club.

We are part of the club. Staples Center, Galen Center, The Coliseum.

jamesinclair
Feb 1, 2014, 5:09 AM
I actually got a chance to go inside. We took advantage and went all the way to the Helipad on the roof. With that said, bam.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/12058750925_f0804e0bcc_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/)
DSC_6171 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/12058750925/) by mojeda101 (http://www.flickr.com/people/21978107@N08/), on Flickr


Just saw this pic....


Amazing, I thought it was a poster for a super hero movie.

ChelseaFC
Feb 3, 2014, 10:25 PM
Santa Monica City Council Gets Ready for Round Two on Hines Development

February 3, 2014 -- After hearing hours of public testimony last week on the proposed Bergamot Transit Village, the Santa Monica City Council will vote Tuesday on the controversial project.

And though the Council voted unanimously last week to close public testimony after the hours-long session on January 28, opponents of the proposed 767,000 square-foot project are trying to turn out people for the Council vote.

http://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/News-2014/February-2014/02_03_2014_Santa_Monica_City_Council_Gets_Ready_for_Round_Two_on_Hines_Development.html

Leo the Dog
Feb 4, 2014, 5:45 PM
Of course this could all be a ploy to scare the STL taxpayers into funding a new stadium.

Bingo! The threat of LA stealing a team has worked out for the NFL. The NFL doesn't need LA to have a team to be successful. Small market teams have had successful financing for new stadiums coast to coast.

SoCalKid
Feb 6, 2014, 10:03 PM
This is very random, but does anyone know if the city of Santa Monica has ever looked into building a street car? Given the relatively high density (that is only growing), it seems like a street car would make sense. It could connect to the expo line, run along ocean, then turn up Santa Monica or Wilshire to serve those further inland. It would also further encourage visitors to use public transit instead of bringing their cars.