LOS ANGELES | Wilshire Grand Development | 1,100 FT | 73 FLOORS | U/C - Page 150

BrandonJXN · #**2981** Posted **Oct 30, 2015, 2:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoLith

For how enormous LA is it has a pretty sparse downtown. You would think it would have as enormous and dense of a skyline as Chicago. This tower will be a great addition but it really needs a hell of a lot more towers downtown to fill it in.

Why does DTLA need more towers? I never understood this.

blackcat23 · #**2982** Posted **Oct 30, 2015, 2:56 PM**

http://urbanize.la/post/wilshire-grand-revisited

Another tour of the Wilshire Grand.

LA Kurt · #**2983** Posted **Oct 30, 2015, 8:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Kill 'em

La county is larger than that. The city of la is about 469 alone

oops, I meant City of LA. I knew it was around 500 SM

cesar90 · #**2984** Posted **Oct 31, 2015, 2:09 AM**

Well counting more surface of the city would look more like this

[IMG]

[/IMG]

Anyways, We're here for the WG!

[IMG]

[/IMG]

[IMG]

[/IMG]

source: ImageShack

BuildingsR' Us · #**2985** Posted **Oct 31, 2015, 6:25 AM**

I think now will be an interesting time to make predictions/estimates on when YOU believe the concrete core will top out. My prediction is before Christmas in December. Glass skin will be more than 1/3rd complete.

cesar90 · #**2986** Posted **Oct 31, 2015, 7:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuildingsR' Us

I think now will be an interesting time to make predictions/estimates on when YOU believe the concrete core will top out. My prediction is before Christmas in December. Glass skin will be more than 1/3rd complete.

is it me or are they going ahead of schedule? If so my predictions would be even sooner than "Christmas in December"

just to be random and maybe it's gum and sticks I'd say December 12th-ish

rlw777 · #**2987** Posted **Oct 31, 2015, 8:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrandonJXN

Why does DTLA need more towers? I never understood this.

Basically more density (aka more towers) means a much more efficient city, and a healthier environment.

Low density
families live in separate homes with their own separate utility systems, lawn care, driveways, cars etc. These families drive to the store and to work 100% of the time. They water and mow their lawns and rarely ever use any sort of public transit.

High density
families live in shared buildings that use significantly less land per capita, share utility systems, dont have lawns, might not even own a car.These families mostly walk or use public transit for work or goods. They don't water or mow lawns.

Higher density means less sewer pipes, power lines, roads, sidewalks, less gas stations, etc. per capita.

QUEENSNYMAN · #**2988** Posted **Oct 31, 2015, 9:12 PM**

Love this I can not wait to see the view from the top from this tower's upper most floor, LA will showcase great!

King Kill 'em · #**2989** Posted **Nov 1, 2015, 12:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777

Basically more density (aka more towers) means a much more efficient city, and a healthier environment.

Higher density means less sewer pipes, power lines, roads, sidewalks, less gas stations, etc. per capita.

Fully agree but higher density wouldn't necessarily equal less of some of those things. There would be fewer miles of sewer pipes but the ones there were would be bigger. same with sidewalks, roads, and probably power lines. Less gas stations definately. In downtown the only gas stations are the one in chinatown and the one on olympic near the hanover projects. Gas is like $5 a gallon there right cause theres so few others around. Its great

rlw777 · #**2990** Posted **Nov 2, 2015, 2:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Kill 'em

Fully agree but higher density wouldn't necessarily equal less of some of those things. There would be fewer miles of sewer pipes but the ones there were would be bigger. same with sidewalks, roads, and probably power lines. Less gas stations definately. In downtown the only gas stations are the one in chinatown and the one on olympic near the hanover projects. Gas is like $5 a gallon there right cause theres so few others around. Its great

I'm not so sure about your objection here. On a per capita basis I believe all of those systems are more efficient at higher density. To use your example of sewage pipes imagine a subdivision with 100 families and a building with 100 families both are going to need the same sized main sewage line at some point to meet capacity but in a subdivision you have a much larger network of pipes connecting homes to that line than in a building. Lets say you have 10 of those subdivisions and 10 of those buildings and you see the same thing. Both systems need to handle the same capacity and thus will need the same sized pipes but one is much more compact and as a result more efficient.

photoLith · #**2991** Posted **Nov 2, 2015, 3:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbyv

Yes great cities have lots of skyscrapers downtown like the great city of Houston

Houston doesnt have a metro population of 13 million people like LA, Houston has 6 million and both both downtown skylines are about equal in size.... and I wasnt even trying to start a city vs city rivalry, I could care less, seeing as I dont even live in Houston and moved away because Houston kind of sucks. Anyways, I look forward to both Houston and LA getting denser more vibrant downtowns.

King Kill 'em · #**2992** Posted **Nov 2, 2015, 3:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777

On a per capita basis I believe all of those systems are more efficient at higher density.

Well yeah of course they are. The rest of what you said basically just summarized what I was trying to say about sewer pipes.

King Kill 'em · #**2993** Posted **Nov 2, 2015, 3:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoLith

Anyways, I look forward to both Houston and LA getting denser more vibrant downtowns.

I'm looking forward to all of Texas getting more urban. Then maybe the sane people living there will finally number enough to overthrow the redneck overlords that control the state.