HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #11081  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:18 PM
citywatch citywatch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by StethJeff View Post
Sure, we may not end up getting the Olympics in the end
stethjeff, it's not 'may'. try 'will not'.

it will be almost a purposeful, calculated slap in the face if the olympics officials don't select paris, & since many of them are based in europe, no how, no way will they allow that to happen. that's why I say the IOC bypassing paris is about as likely as the day when you'll see....pigs flying.

the US should have skipped bidding for 2024 & instead tried getting 2028. But since they didn't, I think the LA committee is going to be wasting its money that would have been better spent competing for the games that follow the games that follow tokyo 2020.


Quote:
While 2024 might feel a lifetime away, plans are already being drawn up for how Paris could host the Olympics in nine years' time. Authorities in Paris may still have a bitter taste in their mouths after unexpectedly losing out to London for the right to host the 2012 Olympics.

Now, they're seemingly ready to give it another go - with a poll this week showing that 73 percent of French public said they would like to see the Games return to Paris 100 years after it last held the event.

Financing the Games could be a major hurdle, especially given the state of the French economy. Authorities in Paris will be uneasy at the thought of London splashing out €9.1 billion on the cost of the 2012 Olympics, even if the event widely considered a huge success.

A feasibility study carried out this week found that there is such an abundance of potential locations that only an Olympic swimming pool and an athletes' village to cater for 10,000 people, would need to be built.

Quote:
The new Broad museum, though efficiently designed, really only comes alive on the periphery


Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles Times

Christopher Hawthorne
Los Angeles Times


Broad has had contentious relationships with architects over the years — in the 1980s, he hired Gehry to design a house in Brentwood only to fire him and recruit another firm to finish the job — and for this project set an aggressive construction timetable that was serially extended. In a related development, Broad has filed suit against the German company, Seele Inc., brought on to build the museum's unusual latticed skin, saying fabrication errors added roughly $20 million to construction costs and delayed the opening by more than a year.

It wouldn't be fair to say that the museum, which has moments of real charm, buckles under the burden of those expectations and conflicts. But in a number of places, including its surprisingly punchless facade, it shows the considerable strain of holding up that weight.

The elements of the Broad that have been most closely scrutinized or most often reworked, in fact, are the most uneven. It is only in the relative shadows — in the peripheral or easily overlooked spaces, or in the rooms added or enlarged late in the design process — that the architecture of the museum really comes to life.

A large dimple along the front of the museum, which the architects call an "oculus," marks the location of a second-floor lecture hall overlooking Grand. The rest of the facade is oddly inert and largely opaque, with little of the lightness or translucency suggested by the word "veil." (The architects had strict instructions from Broad and Joanne Heyler, the director of the museum, to keep any direct sunlight from reaching the galleries, leaving the openings in the skin relatively pinched.) This is no small imperfection in a building whose exterior draws so much of its architectural power from pattern and material texture as opposed to form.

As you approach the museum on foot, you begin to notice just how dramatically and effectively the facade is lifted at the front corners, exposing walls of glass behind the skin and seeming to pull the Grand Avenue sidewalk into the museum. There is an appealing loggia along the front, formed by the gap between the glass and the portion of the veil that comes all the way down, in a flying V, to the pavement.

The entry from the parking garage is not handled with nearly as much grace. Elevators bring visitors not directly into the lobby but to the plaza along the southern edge of the building. When the elevator doors open they'll be standing with their backs to the museum, facing not DS+R's architecture but a bland new apartment tower, the Emerson, on the far side of the plaza.

Once you wander in any direction away from the center of the top floor, into one of the smaller gallery spaces created by substantial but movable partitions 16 feet high, the power and presence of the ceiling fades. At least for the opening exhibition, the balance between wall space for paintings and room for the architecture to breathe — and the skylights to assert themselves — is tipped very much in the direction of the art.

From the bottom of the stairs it's a short walk to the surprisingly spacious, appealingly direct ground-floor galleries or — past a bookshop tucked into two corners of the lobby — back out to the plaza. Designed by DS+R and the landscape architect Walter Hood, the outdoor space features a collection of 100-year-old Barouni olive trees framing a sizable lawn, a surprising choice in the middle of a drought.

In many ways the museum marks a step forward for DS+R, a firm long known for conceptual and theoretical projects that has designed soon-to-open buildings for Stanford University and U.C. Berkeley as well as an expansion to the Museum of Modern Art in New York. The Broad is a more confident and resolved piece of architecture than the firm's 2006 Institute for Contemporary Art in Boston, a top-heavy waterfront building overstuffed with clever (and some too-clever) design ideas.

It is also a far more rational and constrained building than it initially appears. Because of a strict height limit — and because Broad wanted a large, column-free exhibition space on the top floor and parking below, with room for the archive in the middle — a stacked box was essentially the only design option. The result is a streamlined ratio of exhibition to ancillary space, something increasingly rare in an age of museum bloat. The Broad has 50,000 square feet of gallery space -- 35,000 on the third floor and 15,000 more on the first — in a building totaling 120,000 square feet. Renzo Piano's new Whitney Museum in New York has the same amount of interior exhibition space in a building covering 220,000 square feet.

Still, it's not in the center but around the edges of that basic sequence that the museum proves most compelling and full of personality — in the cylindrical glass elevator at the back of the lobby, for instance, or the small gallery next to it, framed in near-Baroque vertical folds and for now holding a fantastic mirrored installation by the Japanese artist Yayoi Kusama. These moments and a handful of others show a verve that is elsewhere compromised, tamped down or reined in — and suggest that DS+R, for all its imaginative talent, is still figuring out how to shepherd its boldest design ideas through a challenging construction process, so they emerge fully and powerfully intact.



Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles Times
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11082  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:38 PM
timpdx's Avatar
timpdx timpdx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 170
From the article: "strict height limit" Huh?? on Bunker Hill?

Anyways, Metropolis from last evening:

tower 3 core is defined and rising (noted quickly looking out my window on the onramp to the 110)

__________________
Travel, Scenic & Architecture Photos at: http://www.pixelmap.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11083  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:20 PM
NativeOrange NativeOrange is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: The Orange Curtain
Posts: 22
I can't believe how quickly Greenland has been going on metropolis. When do you think we should start seeing fireproofing and panels go up for tower 2? (Or is the taller one tower 1?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11084  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:20 PM
timpdx's Avatar
timpdx timpdx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 170
The hotel (right tower) is going quite a bit slower than tower 2 (the taller one)
__________________
Travel, Scenic & Architecture Photos at: http://www.pixelmap.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11085  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:33 PM
bighomey3000 bighomey3000 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by citywatch View Post
your and other forumers' photo updates help give this thread a nice tangible direction, very much a glimpse of the here & now. The thread, after all, is about new devlpt in dtla that's either underway or realistic enough to be under construction in the near future.

in comparison, talking about what may or may not happen in terms of devlpt at an event yrs & yrs into the future.....in light of LA competing with Olympic bids from paris, rome and probably Toronto too....is about as realistic as....


Paris is the frontrunner, no doubt. Those other cities?

"Rome is on the verge of collapse," Giancarlo Cremonesi, the president of the Rome Chamber of Commerce, told Reuters. "It is unacceptable that a major city which calls itself developed can find itself in such a state of decay." This state of collapse includes a flirtation with bankruptcy, garbage piling up in the streets, a partially closed airport months after a fire, Mafia infiltration of city government, continuous strikes in the public transit sector, and inability to expand public transit. A 2013 European Commission survey placed Rome last out of 28 EU capitals in the rankings for the efficiency of city services, and last in public transit. On a bigger picture, Italy has had some of the worst economic growth of any country in the entire world since 2000. Does this seem like a promising contender to you?

Toronto is about the least inspiring choice I can imagine and has terrible public transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11086  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:52 PM
DTLAdenizen's Avatar
DTLAdenizen DTLAdenizen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DTLA
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by timpdx View Post
The hotel (right tower) is going quite a bit slower than tower 2 (the taller one)
Much slower.

Here are some from just now:

Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr

Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr

Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr



All of 20' or so separating the project from the freeway:
Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr

Read:
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan...ce/sci-lungs26

And the retail-less 8th+Francisco garage:
Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11087  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:55 PM
SCG8364 SCG8364 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by timpdx View Post
From the article: "strict height limit" Huh?? on Bunker Hill?

Anyways, Metropolis from last evening:

tower 3 core is defined and rising (noted quickly looking out my window on the onramp to the 110)

I wonder if the Salvation Army will someday relocate allowing for future development on that site across from Metropolis.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11088  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:00 PM
Mojeda101's Avatar
Mojeda101 Mojeda101 is online now
Doctor Burncream
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pyongyang, North Korea
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTLAdenizen View Post
Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr
It is good to see the core's of the second phase towers shaping up. I just have to wonder why the condo tower is shooting up considering it's almost twice as tall as the hotel.
__________________
2WTC is ugly, end of story.

All of my Los Angeles updates can be found on my Flickr
Any extras can be found on my Instagram
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11089  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:35 PM
RuFFy's Avatar
RuFFy RuFFy is offline
FlyyyFALiiFe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Miami
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by citywatch View Post
stethjeff, it's not 'may'. try 'will not'.

it will be almost a purposeful, calculated slap in the face if the olympics officials don't select paris, & since many of them are based in europe, no how, no way will they allow that to happen. that's why I say the IOC bypassing paris is about as likely as the day when you'll see....pigs flying.

the US should have skipped bidding for 2024 & instead tried getting 2028. But since they didn't, I think the LA committee is going to be wasting its money that would have been better spent competing for the games that follow the games that follow tokyo 2020.
There is no question that Paris is a strong contender. But there is also no question that NBCUniversal, which as we know owns NBCUniversal Studios, is the Olympic Movements largest corporate contributor and through its airwaves all other corporate sponsors will broadcast their brands to the Olympic Movements largest Market... The U.S. NBCUniversal Studios is also the location of the proposed LA24 Media Center right in the middle of an NBC 1 billion plus expansion. LA's bid offers everyone involved an opportunity to make a load of money. That includes the IOC, the USOC, the SCCOG, NBC, and all sponsors. That is pretty incredible. And while Paris is no doubt incredible on its own, I don't think it can offer the magnitude that an off the shelf LA Olympics can.

As far as discussing a bid that might not be won it may be worth noting that Boston 2024 initiated talks of serious mass transit improvements as well as the redevelopment of Widett Circle for that City. The failed New York 2012 bid also went on to be the catalyst for the often referenced Atlantic Yards. Two baseball fields more commonly known as the new Yankee Stadium and Citi Field were also the result of a failed Olympic Bid.

Perhaps the biggest difference with LA's bid is that substantial portions of it are already on the discussion table. Even a failed LA bid would serve as a catalyst for the many things already discussed on this forum.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11090  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:39 PM
citywatch citywatch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighomey3000 View Post
Paris is the frontrunner, no doubt. Those other cities?

"Rome is on the verge of collapse," Giancarlo Cremonesi, the president of the Rome Chamber of Commerce, told Reuters.

Toronto is about the least inspiring choice I can imagine and has terrible public transit.
your snippet on rome is helpful since I didn't realize that city is in such bad shape. I originally though it would one of the more serious challengers to other cities bidding for the 2024 games.

Toronto is a major challenger, however, since canada hasn't hosted the summer games in over 40 yrs, & if it's competing as one of the reps of north america, it will have the upper hand....since the last games in this part of the world occurred only 20 yrs ago, in atlanta. but toronton has yet to formally announce whether it will put in a bid in the next few wks, so it may be a non factor.

As for a city being uninspiring, the same could be said about boston. But americans, no less, on the US olympic committee originally favored it over LA. So it's a mistake to assume that a city placing a bid, & all it elements as host of the games....have to be exciting in order for that city to win. iow, there's a lot of politics involved in the process.

btw, don't get me wrong. It would be a coup if LA got another olypmics. But out of fairness....due to the fact paris hasn't hosted the games in over 100 yrs & has competed & lost recently, that city really deserves to win the 2024 games more than any other.

besides, from a purely symbolic standpoint, I think the olympics have lost some of its original prestige, in that it has gone from this...


Video Link


to this...

Video Link



But ymmv.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11091  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:47 PM
black_crow's Avatar
black_crow black_crow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojeda101 View Post
It is good to see the core's of the second phase towers shaping up. I just have to wonder why the condo tower is shooting up considering it's almost twice as tall as the hotel.
That is the reason. It is twice as tall, so it will grow faster.

Greenland doesn't want to finish one tower earlier, they don't want the people to look at a construction area. That is why phase 2 started early, I remember an interview about that topic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11092  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:52 PM
King Kill 'em's Avatar
King Kill 'em King Kill 'em is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTLAdenizen View Post
Much slower.

Here are some from just now:


Metropolis by Hunter, on Flickr
Is that glass I see on tower 2?
__________________
Death to the suburbs!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11093  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:58 PM
Yackemflaber69's Avatar
Yackemflaber69 Yackemflaber69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 522
I think so
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11094  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:45 PM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,931
Citywatch, the issue isn't whether or not we'll win the bid. Almost anyone would agree that it's Paris' to lose. That isn't the point. The point is what are our decision makers willing to do for personal legacy and self-aggrandizement? Why does Garcetti seem to be pushing so hard on something that other city council members and experts say is not realistic? Could we benefit from the Olympics? Potentially yes. Is it worth doing if we're stuck with an enormous bill and half-assed river planning and development? Probably not. And to add irony to this mess, from the LAT:

"Westside Councilman Mike Bonin sounded a similarly cautious note, pointing out that the city refused to provide a financial backstop when it hosted the successful 1984 Summer Games.

"The City did not assume that responsibility in 1984. Why would it assume that responsibility now?" Bonin wrote in a letter to Council President Herb Wesson on Friday. "Since L.A. is the only U.S. city currently willing to bid on the 2024 games, have we used this strong negotiating position to ask the USOC to cover any costs or provide any financial guarantees?"

City-imposed cost controls on Olympic bids have a history in L.A., and not just from 1984. In 2007, council members — led by Garcetti, who was then council president — gave former Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa their blessing to pursue the 2016 Summer Games. But they included a big caveat: L.A. would under no circumstances be liable for Olympic deficits of more than $250 million."

Umm, wtf.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11095  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:28 PM
NativeOrange NativeOrange is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: The Orange Curtain
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Kill 'em View Post
Is that glass I see on tower 2?
Nice catch! It definitely is. My excitement cannot be withheld!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11096  
Old Posted Today, 12:14 AM
King Kill 'em's Avatar
King Kill 'em King Kill 'em is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 151
Does anyone know when will phase one be complete? Slightly before the Wilshire Grand in early 2017? Is that a good estimate?
__________________
Death to the suburbs!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11097  
Old Posted Today, 12:38 AM
NativeOrange NativeOrange is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: The Orange Curtain
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Kill 'em View Post
Does anyone know when will phase one be complete? Slightly before the Wilshire Grand in early 2017? Is that a good estimate?
At the rate they're going, I wouldn't be surprised if they had wrapped it up in 4th quarter of 2016. I may be mildly optimistic, however.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11098  
Old Posted Today, 2:54 AM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 2,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighomey3000 View Post
Paris is the frontrunner, no doubt.
I don't even see Paris as the frontrunner. A top city to bid against, sure, but not necessarily the frontrunner.

Athens was seen as some to be the frontrunner for 1996 precisely because of the centennial thing, but it lost to Atlanta (!).

If you look at it in terms of continental rotation, the last time North America hosted a Summer Olympics was 1996. Barring say, Istanbul or an African city putting in a bid (places that have never hosted an Olympics before), I would think North America would be a pretty likely place for Summer 2024.
__________________
Patriotism is an inflated assertion of imaginary superiority.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11099  
Old Posted Today, 4:23 AM
retina retina is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: DTLA
Posts: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
I don't even see Paris as the frontrunner. A top city to bid against, sure, but not necessarily the frontrunner.

Athens was seen as some to be the frontrunner for 1996 precisely because of the centennial thing, but it lost to Atlanta (!).

If you look at it in terms of continental rotation, the last time North America hosted a Summer Olympics was 1996. Barring say, Istanbul or an African city putting in a bid (places that have never hosted an Olympics before), I would think North America would be a pretty likely place for Summer 2024.
A good read breaking down the finances of a LA24 bid. It's really a two-horse race. Should Europe get another summer Olympics 12 years after London? I think LA really is a great option. Alan Abrahamson is a well-respected Sports journalist based in LA.

http://www.3wiresports.com/2015/08/3...r-a-good-deal/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11100  
Old Posted Today, 4:37 AM
Jaycruz Jaycruz is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 73
Downtown, Broadway specifically, made a good impression on the VMAs Tonite. The Orpheum Theater, Broadway Trade center ( unfortunately covered in her scaffolding) and the Eastern Columbia Building made appearances. What better way to showcase the revitalization of downtown than to put it center stage of an award show. Get people to talk about it and spread the word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by King Kill 'em View Post
Is that glass I see on tower 2?
Great eye ! I missed that the first look through. Awesome. Metropolis is coming along quickly, had no idea Tower 3 and 4 were that far along.
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 4:46 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.