HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #921  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2010, 7:50 AM
AndrewK AndrewK is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 320
can someone tell me why they need 662 parking spaces for 300 units? i guess im just used to sf developments, where that same number of units would get around 150-200 spots.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #922  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2010, 6:23 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
I would guess a couple of reasons for the parking:

1. locals would hate it even worse if you proposed many units and few parking places; street parking and other lots would become even more crowded. This brings people but also creates parking spaces to ease congestion.

2. this is not DT SF; this is closer to the San Mateo or Santa Monica model, which are thriving thanks in part to very large, fully utilized parking structures.

3. there is no rail transit even planned for within a mile of this area. I would have a very different attitude if the "Beverly" or "3rd St." subway were in the works, but there isn't even a proposal. Why would I buy a condo in an area with bad traffic, no parking and no subway plans?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #923  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2010, 8:11 PM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
I would guess a couple of reasons for the parking:

1. locals would hate it even worse if you proposed many units and few parking places; street parking and other lots would become even more crowded. This brings people but also creates parking spaces to ease congestion.

2. this is not DT SF; this is closer to the San Mateo or Santa Monica model, which are thriving thanks in part to very large, fully utilized parking structures.

3. there is no rail transit even planned for within a mile of this area. I would have a very different attitude if the "Beverly" or "3rd St." subway were in the works, but there isn't even a proposal. Why would I buy a condo in an area with bad traffic, no parking and no subway plans?
^^^ that's why i don't believe any statement about la's urbanism whenever a big dense "urban looking" project goes up. it's still a sub-urban development when there is no fundamental walkability and everybody served by that development is forced to drive. that is la's as yet, unaddressed problem despite all these "positive developments" which pretty much amount to nothing as far as urbanism is concerned.

our two subway lines and our rapidbus, as sad as that sounds, continues to remain the only thing that really counts toward anything so far, despite all the new lrt lines which have gone up over the years. world class my ass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #924  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2010, 2:13 AM
AndrewK AndrewK is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
I would guess a couple of reasons for the parking:

1. locals would hate it even worse if you proposed many units and few parking places; street parking and other lots would become even more crowded. This brings people but also creates parking spaces to ease congestion.

2. this is not DT SF; this is closer to the San Mateo or Santa Monica model, which are thriving thanks in part to very large, fully utilized parking structures.

3. there is no rail transit even planned for within a mile of this area. I would have a very different attitude if the "Beverly" or "3rd St." subway were in the works, but there isn't even a proposal. Why would I buy a condo in an area with bad traffic, no parking and no subway plans?
i guess i should say that i would understand even 450 spaces for 300 units, but i cant possibly see how they would expect every unit to average more than two cars (assuming the parking is for residents only of course).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #925  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2010, 5:37 PM
dktshb's Avatar
dktshb dktshb is offline
Environmental Sabotage
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
^^^ that's why i don't believe any statement about la's urbanism whenever a big dense "urban looking" project goes up. it's still a sub-urban development when there is no fundamental walkability and everybody served by that development is forced to drive. that is la's as yet, unaddressed problem despite all these "positive developments" which pretty much amount to nothing as far as urbanism is concerned.

our two subway lines and our rapidbus, as sad as that sounds, continues to remain the only thing that really counts toward anything so far, despite all the new lrt lines which have gone up over the years. world class my ass.

Walkability and auto-centric can coexist. I would rather this city had transit so this parking would be irrelevant but this development is on 3rd and Ogden for Christ's sake. If you can't walk 100 yards to the grocery store or across the street to the grove and farmers market you're an idiot. Plus isn't there going to be a subway stop on Wilshire and Fairfax? Heaven forbid you have to walk .74 miles to the subway stop when it opens. Too many lazy dumbazz people in this city apparently.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #926  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2010, 6:31 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
The funny thing is that everybody's comments make a lot of sense depending on your vision for the area.

1. This is a highly senior-dense area; Fairfax/Wilshire is a long walk; I would guess that there will be shuttles eventually. 600 parking places is a lot but I am guessing it's to cater to the community.

2. This area is largely suburban at this time evolving to mid-density urban. It is unlikely to ever be urban like the cores of NY, Chicago, etc. The Westside area is huge and density of a Manhattan sort would imply 10M plus people and hundreds of high-rise office buildings, neither of which is going to happen. There are going to be sfh's and cars in this area for 100 years or longer.

I think where the area is going is something like 5-8 story in many places and maybe double the density of the area overall in 20-40 years. Cars are not going away; parking AND transit are going to be in demand. Light-rail connecting Hollywood to Beverly Center via 3rd/Fairfax would be nice, but I don't see this on the "must do" list.

There is room for rational development with medium-rise, retail, hidden parking and a real street scene, but not with the density of much of NY, etc. This is still urban, like much of SF, Georgetown, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #927  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2010, 3:55 AM
dktshb's Avatar
dktshb dktshb is offline
Environmental Sabotage
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,531
The Results Are In: Hollywood and Highland is Your Least-Favorite L.A. Mall

No surprise here:

http://franklinavenue.blogspot.com/2...-highland.html

Quote:
Our regrets to Hollywood and Highland, which pulled ahead to easily win our survey for worst shopping mall in Los Angeles.

The Beverly Center came closest -- and for me, it's a toss up. The Beverly Center is a hulking mess of an ugly building with no character, but at least it has some actual shopping options.

Hollywood and Highland was terribly designed, with no thought given to where stores are laid out. Some unfortunate shops are found in dead ends, and the corridor next to the Kodak Theatre entrance is particularly sad and un-pedestrian friendly. But at least it's airy, and has views of the hills.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #928  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2010, 8:33 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,583
^ Yeah, and the least despised mall is the most suburban one of all. Not the best poll to draw any meaningful conclusions from as it pertains to urban development. H&H isn't that bad. I go there to people watch. There are VERY few malls that do it for me anyway (I love shopping vintage).
__________________
Check out my blog DTLA Rising
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #929  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2010, 6:18 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Beverly Center is actually good for shopping but is my choice for the biggest single problem in the area. It's like a death star hulking in the middle of town. It actually used to be even worse before restaurants and some retail was added at ground level.

Asuming they are not going to radically redo it, how about some glass or openness to moderate the oppressiveness? Some open dining plazas at the upper levels? A digital news and picture ring around the place?

H&H is terrible for shopping. I don't really have a solution but some rethinking could improve the shopping and maybe some focus on entertainment/tourist services would help (e.g., small branches of the film, radio, etc., museums and art galleries; a visitor's bureau office; "earthquake experience", etc. Tacky but, hey, this is Hollywood.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #930  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2010, 7:51 PM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,583
^ Beverly Center: there is a dining terrace on the top for the food court.

H&H: CIM bought it from Trizec Hahn and spent millions improving it. It was much worse before (i.e., no escalators in the front, no water fountain, etc.), and there is a LA Visitors Bureau in the front of the complex.
__________________
Check out my blog DTLA Rising
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #931  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2010, 9:12 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
But the top floor dining deck is not visible from the outside. I want something that will open up the shell and give some visible connection to the outside world.

The Vistor's Bureau is a start. Now get some more advertising for visitor attractions into the premises. Of course, Cirque coming to the Kodak may help this and change the economics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #932  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 5:47 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Stay in Yo Lane
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,531
So, the W Hollywood Hotel opened today. Yeah.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods

"The power of imagination makes us infinite." -- John Muir
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #933  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 6:02 AM
DowntownCharlieBrown's Avatar
DowntownCharlieBrown DowntownCharlieBrown is offline
Good Grief
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Downtown, Orange County, L.A.
Posts: 543
The W Hollywood Hotel and Residences

Team Hollywood
W Hollywood opens with contributions by slew of LA firms

http://www.archpaper.com/e-board_rev...PagePosition=1



The W Hollywood Hotel and Residences is finally scheduled to open tomorrow, dropping its hefty highrise anchor on the eastern flank of a revitalized Hollywood Boulevard. The $350 million development, by Gatehouse Capital and HEI Hotels & Resorts, brings 305 hotel rooms and 143 luxury residences to the neighborhood.

In a collaboration that Kevin Daly of Daly Genik Architects dubbed a “Venn diagram,” due to the way their contributions overlapped, a sizeable group of firms worked on the project, including LA architects like HKS Architects, Rios Clementi Hale Studios, Daly Genik, and Sussman/ Prejza; Portland, Oregon–based designstudio; and a trio of artists—Erwin Redl, Pae White, and Christian Moeller.

The hotel bucks previous style cues established by the W, well known for its clubby, violet-lit interiors. This W is sun-drenched and glamorous, featuring a dramatic circular lobby staircase with Swarovski crystals trailing down its center, by designstudio, developer Marty Collins, and a team of lighting designers.

“The amount of light here is definitely something that had to get carried through the project,” said Daly, who sourced warm, natural materials for the residential portion of the project, such as wave-like slats of computer-cut Douglas fir that cover lobby walls. On the rooftop residential pool, Daly Genik’s cabanas are walls of squared aluminum “scales.”

Elsewhere in the complex, HKS Architects and Rios Clementi Hale added exterior sheer glass walls to evoke the “silver screen,” including a glass-box nightclub 12 stories up that cantilevers 52 feet over Hollywood Boulevard.

Perhaps the most stunning contributions are public art pieces. Christian Moeller’s hunk of milled aluminum uses light and shadows to reveal a series of waving hands. Pae White’s mobile of painted metal circles will cascade down into a 12-story alcove, while Erwin Redl’s strings of LED lights drape into the auto plaza, lighting up like a disco ball.

At the epicenter of this boutique chic is an unusual amenity: A Metro Red Line subway station embedded within the courtyard. Rios Clementi Hale’s Frank Clementi said his team looked to the courtyards found in places like Grauman’s Chinese Theater for inspiration. Palms and bamboo create dramatic partitions in the space and contribute to the “filmic” quality of the plaza. “In order to be contextual in Hollywood, we had to be exotic,” he said.

Another nod to Hollywood history: A red carpet, made from a ground glass-impregnated aggregate, leads from the sidewalk through the lobby and into the auto courtyard. Other plaza finishes include black granite and a dusting of feldspar, which reference Hollywood Boulevard’s glittery terrazzo. “Folks should expect us to tastefully reinvent old Hollywood,” said Gatehouse Capital’s Collins. “And I think we did that."
Alissa Walker






All pictures from The Architect's Newspaper
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #934  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 7:46 AM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,583
I likey I am definitely going to check that out soon!
__________________
Check out my blog DTLA Rising
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #935  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 3:53 PM
Steve2726's Avatar
Steve2726 Steve2726 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 482
Christopher Hawthorne weighs in as well-

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...,1182068.story







Reply With Quote
     
     
  #936  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 4:34 PM
LAsam LAsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Playa del Rey, CA
Posts: 1,674
Nice quote here from Hawthorne regarding the W:

"It symbolizes almost perfectly a city that is groping toward a denser, more vertical and more public future while still reluctant to abandon its love affair with the car and the glossier, more exclusive corners of celebrity culture."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #937  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 5:29 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
I found Hawthorne a bit arch and catty (like maybe he really wants to be a NY critic talking to a NY audience).

Just from the pictures, I am very impressed.

It looks like the usual W dark minimalism is mixed in with a lot of light and some glitz. Sort of NY cool meets Miami heat, which in some ways describes LA. A very LA/SoCal element is the disregard for ostentation or decoration for its own sake which is often present in upscale hotels. It seems that you would be comfortable walking in in street clothes, where many hotels make you feel like you should be wearing a suit or black hipster gear.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #938  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 5:40 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
btw, note to Austin Beutner, new head of making LA a good place to do business:

"On the top floor of the hotel tower is a bachelor suite featuring a small raised area that includes a stripper pole -- or rather did include a stripper pole until city building inspectors, according to Olson Rigdon, asked the W to remove it because the area wasn't wheelchair accessible. (Any elevated space inside a hotel room with a dedicated use has to accommodate wheelchairs; removing the pole, apparently, was enough to remove the use.)"

I can only assume that this would have put strippers in wheelchairs at a disadvantage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #939  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2010, 2:28 AM
dktshb's Avatar
dktshb dktshb is offline
Environmental Sabotage
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,531
I just drove by the W and the whole courtyard was bustling with people and there were people on the balconies too. There is a big restaurant with a large outdoor elevated patio that was packed too. Unfortunately I did not have my camera but the place was really vibrant. Now if only the parking lot across the street could be developed...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #940  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2010, 7:49 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,921
^ I think what helps is that it is built ontop the subway station. I hope more of that happens.

Edit: Wow, I haven't seen you post for a while, DCB.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
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 7:15 AM.

     

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