HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4841  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:11 PM
bzcat bzcat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobcat View Post
Wow, what a beast! Wonder how accurate the rendering is considering the TCW building is 517ft. That would make it ~900ft?
I sure hope the rending is accurate scale

I remember years ago when JW Marriott went up and I thought to myself - boy that building is tall... Now it is one of the shortest new-ish building in South Park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4842  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:31 PM
Blesha13 Blesha13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA 90026
Posts: 25
Reminds me of a futuristic Aon building
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4843  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:29 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 3,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
I like it a lot. The podium is unfortunate, but not an abomination like it is with Circa. The number of parking spaces is somewhat reasonable given the specs.
I like it a lot too, but I'm kinda wishing they'd rethink the color. Blue-gray glass boxes seem to be all the rage for South Park; it'd be nice to have more architectural variety in that part of downtown.
__________________
Patriotism is an inflated assertion of imaginary superiority.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4844  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:35 PM
King Kill 'em's Avatar
King Kill 'em King Kill 'em is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
I like it a lot too, but I'm kinda wishing they'd rethink the color. Blue-gray glass boxes seem to be all the rage for South Park; it'd be nice to have more architectural variety in that part of downtown.
Too bad no postmodern office towers were built further south than TCW in the 80s and 90s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4845  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:33 PM
Illithid Dude's Avatar
Illithid Dude Illithid Dude is offline
Paramoderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Santa Monica / New York City
Posts: 2,534
What I don't like about this tower is how it relates to the Hotel Figueroa. The tower simply exists next to it, not making any effort to relate to the large blank wall. As such, the streetwall seems uneven, and to be honest, the huge blank wall is kind of unseemly. The tower could easily acknowledge the Hotel Figueroa somehow, especially by raising that part of the podium, or extending the main mass of the tower, to connect and ackowledge the historic 150 foot hight limit that the Hotel Figueroa conformed to.

In New York, where I live for most of the year, new buildings make an effort to fit in with their neighbords, creating a cohesive and pleasent neighborhood. Buildings are built to the height of their existing neighbors, or have setbacks so that they appear so. They also often use the same, or complimentary, materials as their neighbords, which creates a beatiful street. I'm not a hater, I think Los Angeles and this tower is great and exciting, but I do think more effort needs to be made in this regard. Los Angeles, after all, is a young city in terms of urbanity and densification, and still has areas in which it must mature.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4846  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:44 PM
ChargerCarl's Avatar
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Los Angeles/San Francisco
Posts: 1,807
Our lot sizes are simply too large. In most other cities the tower portion would stand on its own and take up most, if not all, of the lot.

I'm not sure what drives this difference. Perhaps regulatory.
__________________
This Machine Kills NIMBYs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4847  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:54 PM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChargerCarl View Post
Our lot sizes are simply too large. In most other cities the tower portion would stand on its own and take up most, if not all, of the lot.

I'm not sure what drives this difference. Perhaps regulatory.
It's not the size of our lots that dictate this, rather our current building code and zoning which has developers need to assemble lots to construct what they want.

Building codes... 3 major rules I see
1. parking minimums create need for either an adjacent structure, podium beneath tower, or most expensive... a cost prohibitive completely underground garage based on minimums set
2. Design guidelines for air rights and setbacks which are meant to maximize sunlight to the ground but creates each developer buying up excess lot space around a project to create the needed air rights to go taller according to code.
3. The mass and shape of our tower cores in LA dictated by our Fire code that has us build very wide boxy buildings in LA in comparison to other cities.

The USBank building when constructed is an example of all of this being exercised.
This building only exists as the tallest in LA at its location with two large building next to it because it was able to buy the air rights from the Central library which enabled it to be remodeled. It also satisfied its parking minimum by building a parking garage beneath the library's expansion, negating the need for an adjected parking garage or a podium underneath. It also has setbacks along the tower as it rises fulfilling that demand. The USBank is my favorite building in LA based on its exterior design, but this is its major flaw. We see that it has a unique non-square box shape in the midst of our current large core requirement, and the lease able space is awkward; making it one of the most difficult buildings to lease in LA

It's very difficult to build a very tall tower in LA that is surrounded by other tall buildings as our current code allows, hence massive podiums like Onni's 50 story and Level reaching to adjacent lots to fulfill air rights and parking minimums in one swoop. I think this new proposal does the absolute best it can based on our guidelines and I love the design and look of it... especially that roof

Last edited by hughfb3; Today at 12:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4848  
Old Posted Today, 12:15 AM
ChargerCarl's Avatar
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Los Angeles/San Francisco
Posts: 1,807
I knew the effects of #1 and #3 but wasn't sure how much #2 played a role. Makes sense though.
__________________
This Machine Kills NIMBYs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4849  
Old Posted Today, 12:55 AM
Bwin517 Bwin517 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by hughfb3 View Post
It's not the size of our lots that dictate this, rather our current building code and zoning which has developers need to assemble lots to construct what they want.

Building codes... 3 major rules I see
1. parking minimums create need for either an adjacent structure, podium beneath tower, or most expensive... a cost prohibitive completely underground garage based on minimums set
2. Design guidelines for air rights and setbacks which are meant to maximize sunlight to the ground but creates each developer buying up excess lot space around a project to create the needed air rights to go taller according to code.
3. The mass and shape of our tower cores in LA dictated by our Fire code that has us build very wide boxy buildings in LA in comparison to other cities.

The USBank building when constructed is an example of all of this being exercised.
This building only exists as the tallest in LA at its location with two large building next to it because it was able to buy the air rights from the Central library which enabled it to be remodeled. It also satisfied its parking minimum by building a parking garage beneath the library's expansion, negating the need for an adjected parking garage or a podium underneath. It also has setbacks along the tower as it rises fulfilling that demand. The USBank is my favorite building in LA based on its exterior design, but this is its major flaw. We see that it has a unique non-square box shape in the midst of our current large core requirement, and the lease able space is awkward; making it one of the most difficult buildings to lease in LA

It's very difficult to build a very tall tower in LA that is surrounded by other tall buildings as our current code allows, hence massive podiums like Onni's 50 story and Level reaching to adjacent lots to fulfill air rights and parking minimums in one swoop. I think this new proposal does the absolute best it can based on our guidelines and I love the design and look of it... especially that roof
Thanks for the thorough and insightful explanation. Do you know if the city of LA is trying to change any of the above rules? Seems like LA's city planning is so antiquated. SMH
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4850  
Old Posted Today, 1:06 AM
circuitfiend circuitfiend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 80
Nice, shiny new rendering for the first page. Kinda like ICC in Hong Kong, but shorter, of course.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4851  
Old Posted Today, 1:50 AM
black_crow's Avatar
black_crow black_crow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 439
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackcat23 View Post
I think that's a classic and gorgeous tower.

Height should be correct.. we are talking about 66 stories.
Incredible times for the city of angels.
__________________

Respect for ourselves guides our morals, respect for others guides our manners.
Nothings bothers me more than arrogant people. (I can handle them but it makes me angry whenever other people have to suffer)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4852  
Old Posted Today, 2:03 AM
ChargerCarl's Avatar
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Los Angeles/San Francisco
Posts: 1,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bwin517 View Post
Thanks for the thorough and insightful explanation. Do you know if the city of LA is trying to change any of the above rules? Seems like LA's city planning is so antiquated. SMH
I know the city is currently working on it but it seems like its taking forever.

I remember reading about recode:LA (or whatever its called) like 3 years ago.
__________________
This Machine Kills NIMBYs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4853  
Old Posted Today, 9:40 AM
Mojeda101's Avatar
Mojeda101 Mojeda101 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: DTLA
Posts: 1,321
Gorgeous looking tower. TCW is completely dwarf'd by it. Considering the number of floors I'd say it's in the 900's.

Seeing Figueroa with all those completed projects is incredible. Can Hanzens hurry up and start? Anyways, adding to the front page.
__________________
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 11:17 AM.

     

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