HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2001  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2016, 10:17 PM
dachacon dachacon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 148
I know its alittle old, but here's an overhead picture of the Mac Urban project I toke from my buildings roof on Wednesday 7/13...
IMG_1505 by David Chacon, on Flickr

Last edited by dachacon; Jul 17, 2016 at 11:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2002  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2016, 10:40 PM
Wally West Wally West is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 228
Thanks for the contribution!

But is it possible to resize the image? It's pretty large.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2003  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 3:31 PM
cesar90 cesar90 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 364
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2004  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 3:47 PM
blackcat23's Avatar
blackcat23 blackcat23 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,269
Renderings revealed for nine-story Arts District office building

Lowe Enterprises, Humphreys & Partners Architects. 90,700 sf of office, 6,100 sf retail.

__________________
Urbanize LA - Covering real estate development, architecture and urban planning in the Greater Los Angeles Area.

Please follow on Twitter @UrbanizeLA, Facebook and Instagram.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2005  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 6:54 PM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is offline
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: L.A. - Skid row adjacent
Posts: 6,977
I had to look at the location before commenting on the design. Not a big fan of the parking podium, and in any other location, I would be a very vocal dissenter, but given the location, I can begrudgingly accept this one.
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2006  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 7:02 PM
caligrad's Avatar
caligrad caligrad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 1,024
^^^ I'm with you on that one. The other day I told King Kill'em that its rare to see a 7 story sitting on a podium but jesus, a 4-5 story sitting on a 5 story podium. Somebody Help us.

That being said. IF this was put ANYWHERE else, I would be raising the pitchforks and torches. BUT. looking at an aerial view of the area. I'll accept it. Its literally a tear down building. When the Arts District gets a little more busy and the area around the River gets a little more valuable (if we ever get the River revitalization off the ground) I am willing to bet that this one gets torn down quickly for something better.

What's interesting is the fact that the podium is wrapped with signage. I wonder if the arts district will be allowed to have the same billboards/signage as fig ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2007  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 11:01 PM
MultiK MultiK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by caligrad View Post
That being said. IF this was put ANYWHERE else, I would be raising the pitchforks and torches.

We need less pitchforks, and more people willing to support additional housing across the metro area in whatever form it takes. This may be an urbanist forum, but before pedestrian activation, filling holes in the skyline, and banning stucco, the housing shortfall takes precedence. Housing is the crisis that is exacting a substantial human toll on the people of Southern California.

My two cents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2008  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 11:09 PM
Just-In-Cali's Avatar
Just-In-Cali Just-In-Cali is offline
Urbanite in Suburbia
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Angeles Metro
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiK View Post
We need less pitchforks, and more people willing to support additional housing across the metro area in whatever form it takes. This may be an urbanist forum, but before pedestrian activation, filling holes in the skyline, and banning stucco, the housing shortfall takes precedence. Housing is the crisis that is exacting a substantial human toll on the people of Southern California.

My two cents.
Oh man...on this forum with these posters...them's fightin words!
__________________
Blue State Heaven
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2009  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 1:10 AM
Wilcal Wilcal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Yucaipa--LA exurban wasteland
Posts: 641
Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiK View Post
We need less pitchforks, and more people willing to support additional housing across the metro area in whatever form it takes. This may be an urbanist forum, but before pedestrian activation, filling holes in the skyline, and banning stucco, the housing shortfall takes precedence. Housing is the crisis that is exacting a substantial human toll on the people of Southern California.

My two cents.
Multik,

you couldn't be more right. Also, do not forget to mention that the continuation of a chronic housing shortage will also create a devastating economic toll. And without a viable economy, all the urban, architectural and design interests of the forumers (however meaningful) will be moot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2010  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 1:44 AM
ConstructDTLA's Avatar
ConstructDTLA ConstructDTLA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DTLA
Posts: 1,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilcal View Post
Multik,

you couldn't be more right. Also, do not forget to mention that the continuation of a chronic housing shortage will also create a devastating economic toll. And without a viable economy, all the urban, architectural and design interests of the forumers (however meaningful) will be moot.
What do the surplus residents we're trying to house do?

We're losing jobs, and the reality is that's never going to stop. In fact it will likely speed up with wage & tax increases.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2011  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 1:54 AM
headcheckjj's Avatar
headcheckjj headcheckjj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 57
I may be late in this realization, but hey, I'm nothing if not slow. Regardless, I was hoping to have a discussion on two points:

A. It seems that so long as downtown development is regulated to have adequate parking, we will not see infills in all the small lots throughout the neighborhood (I'm looking at you SE corner of 4th and Hill, 639 Olive, 735 Hill, 220 Broadway, all the remainders along Spring, etc. etc.) These lots cannot reasonably fit parking podiums, and deep underground construction is simply too costly.

This cycle of development is bound by parking regulations and thus is bound to large empty lots that can accommodate massive podiums. Infills may have to wait for changed building codes.

B. We talk a lot about "this cycle" and "the next cycle" of development in downtown and across Los Angeles. However, this may be a once-in-a-lifetime boom. That is not to say that construction will never come again, but we are in the midst of a perfect storm of factors that has caused this development bonanza.

First, interest rates are at historic lows and may never be so low again -- possibly for decades.

Second, coming out of the Great Recession, corporations are sitting on historically high amounts of cash and are looking for a place to invest.

Third, the American economy (though sluggish itself) is a bastion of economic stability amidst international turmoil (Brexit? China's Slump? Brazil's Implosion? Russia's Implosion?). All of this amounts to a climate of real estate investment eyeing large projects. Los Angeles is a large market with enough ample space and potential.

I'm sure there are further factors I'm not considering, but the point is that future cycles may be way smaller than what we're seeing today.

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2012  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 1:54 AM
citywatch citywatch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomJames View Post
There could always be a boycott of Cedd Moses many bars. If he is blocking new development because of personal business reasons, we could block HIS development. We could also show up at the zoning hearing for his new bar and make it difficult or impossible for him to get a CUP. His businesses have thrived due to most downtowners wanting to see the city grow. We made it easy for him. We don't have to in the future.

While he has put his money where his mouth is, & has helped dt by opening important businesses in parts of it, he must be allowing his selfish side to get the better of him right now. How else to explain his not only not being relieved that a major gap in dtla at 4th & Hill st is to be filled in with a new apt tower, but his being opposed to it? Worse of all, his saying he doesn't approve of it cuz it's too big, too tall.

I was walking around there earlier this yr & the current corner of 4th & hill is not appealing at all. I would be more likely to mosey on over to cedd moses renovated bldg on broadway if I didn't have to pass by such unpleasant gaps.

But he just proves you can never be sure exactly how anyone will judge something or some issue in dt. Look at the ppl living in that apt bldg on flower st in south pk....presumably not into a burban lifestyle or the type who'd choose to live in a house with a white picket fence in samo or silver lake.....yet who opposed a proposed apt tower for a parking lot next to their bldg due to it blocking their views & sunlight.

this is why when dealing with the good or bad about dt, I try not to get too worked up about the small details. That's cuz I know that something I like, someone else may hate, & something I like, someone else may dislike.

there may be some ppl truly committed to dtla, who when looking at the before & after, may....believe it or not.....actually prefer the before. Ppl like Moses could very easily look at past images of dt from over 60 yrs ago & feel they're just as good as something from 2016, such as a proposed new apt tower at 4th & hill st.


Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2013  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 1:57 AM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConstructDTLA View Post
What do the surplus residents we're trying to house do?

We're losing jobs, and the reality is that's never going to stop. In fact it will likely speed up with wage & tax increases.
This coming from the same person that's been saying the cycle has been over since last year?? IMO, we are entering a new age where people don't have static jobs, where 3D printing will build almost all of our clothing and supplies. We need housing. The new economy, the post service economy; which LA is at the forefront of, doesn't require staid office space. We are entering what I like to call, the economy of ideas and we need housing and the exchanging of these ideas centered in cities like LA and SF, people can work from anywhere. An idea like snapchat or a new way of doing something is what is truly of value now and into the future. Visionary people like Elon musk make LA their base of residence because of things like this

Excerpt from Gov Jerry brown's letter to gov Rick Scott of Florida after he came to CA to poach jobs

Dear Governor Scott,

I’m writing to welcome you back to California – a state that in the last year has added more jobs than Florida and Texas combined. We’re home to Hollywood, Silicon Valley and more than 50 Fortune 500 companies. We attract more than half of the nation’s venture capital investment, win more than a quarter of the nation’s patents and grow much of the nation’s fruits and vegetables. Our budget is balanced. We’re paying down debt and building a solid rainy day fund.

Last edited by hughfb3; Jul 19, 2016 at 2:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2014  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 2:21 AM
NativeOrange's Avatar
NativeOrange NativeOrange is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Westminster/Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by headcheckjj View Post
I may be late in this realization, but hey, I'm nothing if not slow. Regardless, I was hoping to have a discussion on two points:

A. It seems that so long as downtown development is regulated to have adequate parking, we will not see infills in all the small lots throughout the neighborhood (I'm looking at you SE corner of 4th and Hill, 639 Olive, 735 Hill, 220 Broadway, all the remainders along Spring, etc. etc.) These lots cannot reasonably fit parking podiums, and deep underground construction is simply too costly.

This cycle of development is bound by parking regulations and thus is bound to large empty lots that can accommodate massive podiums. Infills may have to wait for changed building codes.

B. We talk a lot about "this cycle" and "the next cycle" of development in downtown and across Los Angeles. However, this may be a once-in-a-lifetime boom. That is not to say that construction will never come again, but we are in the midst of a perfect storm of factors that has caused this development bonanza.

First, interest rates are at historic lows and may never be so low again -- possibly for decades.

Second, coming out of the Great Recession, corporations are sitting on historically high amounts of cash and are looking for a place to invest.

Third, the American economy (though sluggish itself) is a bastion of economic stability amidst international turmoil (Brexit? China's Slump? Brazil's Implosion? Russia's Implosion?). All of this amounts to a climate of real estate investment eyeing large projects. Los Angeles is a large market with enough ample space and potential.

I'm sure there are further factors I'm not considering, but the point is that future cycles may be way smaller than what we're seeing today.

Thoughts?
I agree, but wouldn't necessarily say that it's a "once in a lifetime" boom. Maybe once every few decades for sure. The boom of the 80's/90's didn't do much for our urbanity, but it forever beefed up the skyline and added lots of office space. With that said, what we are seeing now is smaller scale projects for the most part, but a lot more of them since a residential component is now at play, which most certainly was not back then.

I don't think that residential demand downtown will ever sharply decline for an extensive period of time, but you're most likely right in that future cycles will probably not be as large. Downtown is in the midst of it's renaissance, so anything in the future will already have a precedent, so to speak.

As a side note, what I am hoping for one day (that's a very big "hope"), is that office vacancy drops, warranting a demand for more space. I can see around a dozen or so plazas or corporate courtyards that should be replaced by separate additions to the current office towers.

More than likely, going forward we will see more infill projects as the last of the large parking lots DT fill up. (As much as we like to think they are almost gone, there are still hundreds of parking lots downtown, even big ones). But you bring up a good point, and I don't see any other way for developers to feasibly build something on those skinny lots unless there is some sort of zoning change to allow 0 parking. At least not anything significant enough to be posted to the front page. Maybe LA will get it together and finally relieve the parking requirements on developments near transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2015  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 2:36 AM
headcheckjj's Avatar
headcheckjj headcheckjj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by NativeOrange View Post
As a side note, what I am hoping for one day (that's a very big "hope"), is that office vacancy drops, warranting a demand for more space. I can see around a dozen or so plazas or corporate courtyards that should be replaced by separate additions to the current office towers.
I had thought about that too, but some issues:

First, office space vs residential space seems like a chicken-and-egg problem, or an inhale-exhale one at the very least. You need more people downtown to justify more office space. Also, you need more people working downtown to draw more residents to it. Now, we are seeing residents flock to the neighborhood. This might be followed by an office space boom.

Second, Los Angeles (the second largest city, and economy, in the United States) does not have any Fortune 500 companies headquartered within our city limits (Disney, the only one in the region, is in Burbank). Furthermore, we are not a major hub for any industry besides entertainment. Los Angeles needs to attract more corporate headquarters, and Downtown needs to bring more headquarters to it. Could you imagine if CAA or Paramount or even the Gores Group relocated to DTLA?

Third, the American economy is becoming more automated, less traditionally office-centric, and more "work from anywhere" oriented landscape. Richard Florida's "The Creative Class" does more justice in describing this than I ever could, but how this will effect major office space construction....we'll find out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NativeOrange View Post
But you bring up a good point, and I don't see any other way for developers to feasibly build something on those skinny lots unless there is some sort of zoning change to allow 0 parking. At least not anything significant enough to be posted to the front page. Maybe LA will get it together and finally relieve the parking requirements on developments near transit.
Not only does LA need to relieve parking requirements, but downtown would benefit tremendously from the street car, and Los Angeles as a whole would benefit from more subway/light-rail lines and TOD projects.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2016  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 2:40 AM
SoCalKid SoCalKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConstructDTLA View Post
What do the surplus residents we're trying to house do?

We're losing jobs, and the reality is that's never going to stop. In fact it will likely speed up with wage & tax increases.
Your statement is factually false. From the bureau of labor statistics, Los Angeles County.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2017  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 2:57 AM
kaneui kaneui is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilcal View Post
Multik,

you couldn't be more right. Also, do not forget to mention that the continuation of a chronic housing shortage will also create a devastating economic toll. And without a viable economy, all the urban, architectural and design interests of the forumers (however meaningful) will be moot.

I would also add that it seems the housing crisis is more importantly one of affordability. However exciting it is to watch all the new housing projects going up around DTLA, there is a finite supply of renters able and willing to pay $4+/s.f. Although there are many variables around the economy, construction completion dates and new projects breaking ground, I would expect to see a significant increase in vacancy rates and downward pressure on rental rates for the foreseeable future.
__________________
*Development projects in metro Tucson and Flagstaff, Arizona
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2018  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 3:00 AM
NativeOrange's Avatar
NativeOrange NativeOrange is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Westminster/Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by headcheckjj View Post
I had thought about that too, but some issues:

First, office space vs residential space seems like a chicken-and-egg problem, or an inhale-exhale one at the very least. You need more people downtown to justify more office space. Also, you need more people working downtown to draw more residents to it. Now, we are seeing residents flock to the neighborhood. This might be followed by an office space boom.

Second, Los Angeles (the second largest city, and economy, in the United States) does not have any Fortune 500 companies headquartered within our city limits (Disney, the only one in the region, is in Burbank). Furthermore, we are not a major hub for any industry besides entertainment. Los Angeles needs to attract more corporate headquarters, and Downtown needs to bring more headquarters to it. Could you imagine if CAA or Paramount or even the Gores Group relocated to DTLA?

Third, the American economy is becoming more automated, less traditionally office-centric, and more "work from anywhere" oriented landscape. Richard Florida's "The Creative Class" does more justice in describing this than I ever could, but how this will effect major office space construction....we'll find out.



Not only does LA need to relieve parking requirements, but downtown would benefit tremendously from the street car, and Los Angeles as a whole would benefit from more subway/light-rail lines and TOD projects.
I'm pretty sure AECOM and Reliance Steel and Aluminum are Fortune 500 companies, and they are both HQ'd downtown. CBRE outside downtown is also a F500 company.

But with the changing waves of office space and an increasing amount of telecommuters, we will see.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2019  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 3:06 AM
headcheckjj's Avatar
headcheckjj headcheckjj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by NativeOrange View Post
I'm pretty sure AECOM and Reliance Steel and Aluminum are Fortune 500 companies, and they are both HQ'd downtown. CBRE outside downtown is also a F500 company.
You're absolutely right about those companies. Didn't even realize that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2020  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2016, 3:57 AM
ConstructDTLA's Avatar
ConstructDTLA ConstructDTLA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DTLA
Posts: 1,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalKid View Post
Your statement is factually false. From the bureau of labor statistics, Los Angeles County.
Lol don't be ridiculous. The graph warms the heart but is incredibly misleading, just like the national unemployment rate. You need to utilize 2nd level thinking to understand the bigger picture.

For anyone interested, a simple Google search will show we are losing more real (not waiters & baristas) jobs than we're gaining.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:29 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.