LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 6.0

[bhunsberger]

9/22/17 - Kenneth Hahn State Recreation Area

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by blackcat23

Grand Avenue Project

Tall, short, shorter, taller, shorter, even shorter, wider, now tallish again (hopefully THIS is the last change).

They have changed this thing soooooo many times. But its funny to see the design really hasn't changed much over the years.

Urbanize says that parcel W is the last phase of the Grand Avenue project. At the rate things are going.... Ill be 50? 60 ? when that starts construction, if ever?

I hope Related isn't attached to that parcel as well.

[bhunsberger]

Originally Posted by caligrad

Tall, short, shorter, taller, shorter, even shorter, wider, now tallish again (hopefully THIS is the last change).

They have changed this thing soooooo many times. But its funny to see the design really hasn't changed much over the years.

Urbanize says that parcel W is the last phase of the Grand Avenue project. At the rate things are going.... Ill be 50? 60 ? when that starts construction, if ever?

I hope Related isn't attached to that parcel as well.

I kind of wish they were a bit more proportionate. The top of the taller one looks like an afterthought. Doesn't quite feel right.

[Quixote]

Of all the different iterations (I've lost count how many) of the Grand Avenue project over the last 10 years, this one might be the best. The reduction in parking spaces is just icing on the cake. Though I am concerned about the blank walls and huge parking ramps along 2nd and Olive Streets.

At this point, I just say build the damn thing.

[Illithid Dude]

In these new models, the towers lack the limestone brickwork the original rendering had. Is this just because these models aren't exactly replications of the details in the facade, or has the limestone brickwork been value engineered out?

[caligrad]

^^^ That's a great question.

Am I the only one a bit annoyed with the base ? The towers are ok. But take away the towers and just look at the base. It looks like a non distinct 80s/90s era building you find all over the west side and the valley.

I know its just rendering but if that's their goal. It needs to be, dare I say, watered down a bit? the towers already have a lot going on with the jenga style. The base doesn't need to follow the same designs, especially with cheap looking/dated materials.

*Edit*

On second thought. The more I look at it. The more the whole DA** plan looks dated.

[ozone]

At this point I'm just happy the Grand Avenue Project is finally moving forward! This project has always seem to me to be a game changer for that area which consists of a lot of impressive, but not exactly pedestrian friendly, monolithic civic institutions.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by ozone

At this point I'm just happy the Grand Avenue Project is finally moving forward! This project has always seem to me to be a game changer for that area which consists of a lot of impressive, but not exactly pedestrian friendly, monolithic civic institutions.

What do you mean? It's been finally moving forward for at least 10 years.

[Steve8263]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

In these new models, the towers lack the limestone brickwork the original rendering had. Is this just because these models aren't exactly replications of the details in the facade, or has the limestone brickwork been value engineered out?

I was wondering the same thing. The devil will definitely be in the details on this latest (of way too many) iterations. I assume you are referring to the following design and I agree it's imperative they keep this level of finish quality-





For comparison sake, here's the same angle-

[Illithid Dude]

I am referring to the above. But like I said, the lack of limestone in the model could easily be due to the rudimentary nature of the construction, and not some form of cost cutting by Related.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by Easy

What do you mean? It's been finally moving forward for at least 10 years.

related cos proposal all by itself dates back that far....the site in general has been no better than an unattractive parking lot for over 50 yrs.

I recall a false start....with an announcement that the parking lot was being closed down & demolished....back in 2009, or something like that.

we're now towards the end of 2017.

long overdue that part of bunker hill finally be more than just a big gap.

I'll celebrate when at least the tinker toy parking garage is actually closed to users & torn down.

sorry, county workers and ppl in the civic ctr like those on jury duty, but it's high time you park your cars elsewhere.

the permit to get rid of the parking lot appears to have been filed less than 2 months ago....

100 S GRAND AVE

100 S GRAND AVE 90012

Application/Permit # PC/Job # Type Status Work Description

07019-10000-02078 B07LA08531 Bldg-Demolition Permit Expired 3/22/2010 DEMO EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE. FENCE REQUIRED. NO SEWER CAP PERMIT. HANDWRECK DOZER/LOADER WRECKING.
17019-10000-03332 B17LA14037 Bldg-Demolition Application

Submittal 8/7/2017 ***DPI AND POSTING*** DEMO EXISTING 2 STORY PARKING STRUCTURE.
07010-10001-04624 B07LA11537 Bldg-New Reviewed by Supervisor

3/28/2008 THIS APPLICANTION IS FOR ZONING PLAN CHECK ONLY FOR MIXED USE HIGH RISE BUILDING (B07LA11535 - 07010-10000-04624).
07010-10000-04624 B07LA11535 Bldg-New Application Submittal

11/7/2007 MIXED USE HIGH RISE BUILDING.
17010-10003-01468 B17LA14473 Bldg-New Application Submittal

8/11/2017 10% PDPP for Green plan check of New mixed use project consisting of 2 highrise towers over parking (20-story hotel and 39-story residential).
17010-10005-01468 B17LA14482 Bldg-New Application Submittal

8/11/2017 EARLY START FOUNDATION ONLY UP TO GRADE LEVEL SLAB for New mixed use project consisting of 2 highrise towers over parking (20-story hotel and 39-story residential).
17010-10004-01468 B17LA14474 Bldg-New Application Submittal

8/11/2017 15% PDPP for remaining Structural plan check of New mixed use project consisting of 2 highrise towers over parking (20-story hotel and 39-story residential).
17010-10002-01468 B17LA14468 Bldg-New Application Submittal

8/11/2017 10% PDPP for Disabled Access plan check of New mixed use project consisting of 2 highrise towers over parking (20-story hotel and 39-story residential).
17010-10000-01468 B17LA06098 Bldg-New Verifications in Progress

6/29/2017 New mixed use project consisting of 2 highrise towers over parking (20-story hotel and 39-story residential). 35% PDPP submittal for Zoning and Structural Peer Review.
17010-10001-01468 B17LA14464 Bldg-New Application Submittal

8/11/2017 30% PDPP for Fire Life Safety plan check of New mixed use project consisting of 2 highrise towers over parking (20-story hotel and 39-story residential).
17030-10000-05550 B17LA14487 Grading Application Submittal

8/11/2017 EARLY START EXCAVATION AND GRADING for new highrise building.
17020-10000-02319 B17LA14483 Nonbldg-New Application Submittal 8/11/2017 EARLY START SHORING for new highrise building.
08042-10001-04516 X08LA05130 Plumbing Permit Expired

6/22/2010 SUPPLEMENTAL TO PERMIT 08042-10000-04516 FOR 4 ADDITIONAL SEWER CAPS.
08042-10000-04516 X08LA04132 Plumbing Permit Expired

6/10/2010 SEWER CAP.

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by Steve8263

I was wondering the same thing. The devil will definitely be in the details on this latest (of way too many) iterations. I assume you are referring to the following design and I agree it's imperative they keep this level of finish quality-





For comparison sake, here's the same angle-

If they could switch the bases, the project would be great. I prefer the base of the last proposal waaaaaay better. Its still kinda jenga-ish, but its not as dated as the current.

[BrandonJXN]

At this point, just build the damn thing. There's been wayyyyyyy too many redesigns and revisions.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

The new "rendering" doesnt really look like a detailed rendering. Are we sure the original plan for the base has changed? It would suck if it did because that was a huge plus for the project.

[bhunsberger]

Originally Posted by caligrad

If they could switch the bases, the project would be great. I prefer the base of the last proposal waaaaaay better. Its still kinda jenga-ish, but its not as dated as the current.

Looks as if they are trying to save some money. Just terrible.

[WonderlandPark2]

Couple of beauty shots of DTLA from the east side:



and this view won't change much once Metropolis is done.....until Related gets going. Exciting to see more renderings, hope they dont VE the thing.


© all photos copyright timothy swope

[ocman]

Originally Posted by BrandonJXN

At this point, just build the damn thing. There's been wayyyyyyy too many redesigns and revisions.

Gehry just needed to occupy himself with something to do for 13 years.

[blackcat23]

Proposed LAFC neighbor loses 21 story tower

[caligrad]

^^^ Expected. But kinda odd. The old proposal also had like a 8-10 story parking garage. Now it seems all of the parking will be subterranean. But. That alone should bump up the cost a bit so... I'm guessing at the end of the day... It wasn't a cost issue ? they couldn't be saving that much with all of that underground parking.

Its funny how most of the 7 story buildings have subteranean parking but most of the towers going up either have Podiums are parking garages. We've always been told that subteranean parking adds a lot to the final cost.

[ThebiteofSuarez]

The curtain wall and glass is going up on the south tower of Oceanwide Plaza at both the east and west balconies.