SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Found City Photos (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   noirish Los Angeles (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=170279)

CityBoyDoug Jan 10, 2017 7:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaudry (Post 7672968)
Yes, the RB Young Burbank!

As to when she did what and where, confuses me too. I think the Wiki is probably correct, as it gives her birth year as 1928. I was going by what I read in the Ebert interview I linked to, which reads

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/526/32...00f7b773_o.png

and in that account, it doesn't say what year she got to Los Angeles, just that she was 17 in 1952. If born in 1928, she was 24. Perhaps she was "selectively remembering" a little to her interviewer to shave a few years off her age?

So I imagine she worked at Simon's for a spell, but for six years till 1951? (Which is when she became active, according to wiki, and she took on her moniker after a week, according to the Ebert piece?) I'm still confused.

Lillian Hunt? Oh my gosh, she operated a School for Strippers. We must not forget Lillian.!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...pscibc7qk6.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...pszencqolz.jpg
mediacashe

tovangar2 Jan 10, 2017 8:07 AM

I knew I'd heard of the Crown before Beaudry:

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 7187964)
Not quite what you were after, but here are a couple of night shots of the corner of 8th and Olive. They are grabs from a 1946 color film I've linked to before (you can watch it here). The first shows the Olive Street side. The neon on the right belongs to the Crown Grill Jewel Room at 754 S Olive. Shortly before this, the camera car drives past Clifton's Pacific Seas Cafeteria.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...1.jpg~original

I think there's also a crown on the right of this shot of the 8th Street side. The 1956 CD lists 427 W 8th as Lou Silver's Crown Grill Restaurant. The blade sign on the corner appears to say "FEDER'S", which I can't find in the City Directories. The camera car continues on past the Bristol Hotel and Golden Gopher.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...2.jpg~original

Both from archive.org

And thx for trying to straighten of the Tempest Storm story. I'm happy to let her keep her secrets.



Great post CBD

Beaudry Jan 10, 2017 8:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliNative (Post 7671495)
Looking at these old Bunker Hill pics, starting to realize why they leveled the hill in the early 1960s. This was no Nob Hill. The forest of boxy towers that replaced the slum could have been done better, for sure. Some of the Victorian neighborhoods should have been left in place. A city works best when it is a mixture of old & new. This is why L.A. is fortunate to have so many pre-1930 buildings to the east of Hill--on Broadway, Spring & Main. Mix in a few modern towers, and you have a real city with history. A streetscape finally seems to be returning to Bunker Hill as residential towers, Disney hall, museums, etc. proliferate. They carted off some of the old Vics to "Heritage Square" north of DTLA--is that still there? They also should have done a better job of providing housing to the displaced poor. I guess most of them drifted into skid row to the east.

I'd say yes, it would never be confused with Nob Hill. But the Hill was not nearly as bad as many other parts of town—see Nadel's images of the areas around Aliso, 7th & Mateo, Fickett Hollow, all the places where there was heavy industrial-meets-residential mixed use. BH had its better parts (up on Bunker Hill Ave was much nicer than this area around Figueroa, and the part of BH about the west end of the Third St Tunnel was pretty dodgy, and north of First, but then, north of First was taken by the Civic Center/Music Center, and didn't get wiped because it was downtrodden).

Point being, the City went after BH in the 30s because of the national housing acts, and in the immediate postwar years they wanted to cash in on all that Federal money, and the local legalities to declare the Hill a "slum" involved all sorts of well-meaning jargon about "the common good" and being "progressive" and the Hill was a nice, cohesive plot of land—most saliently, it had not only lots of pensioners, but many other voiceless folk (communists, homosexuals, and the like) directly adjacent City Hall—and was as such declared slum-clearance Redevelopment Area #1 in 1949.

The real question is, what if the City had simply looked to code enforcement? If a mix of old and new is desirable, then I agree a quantity could have been excised, and the better parts retained. My two cents anyway.

But in answer to your few final sentences, yes, Heritage Square is still there! But the sole two houses to be saved from Bunker Hill are not...they were carted off there in March of 1969 and, because the City didn't bother to fence or otherwise protect them, they became party houses and were burned to the ground by vandals in October of that year.

As to the displacement, yes, the City did a shameful job. When the Bunker plan finally made it over its legal hurdles, Councilman Roybal particularly opposed it on the grounds of its inadequate relocation provisions and failure to provide senior housing. 9,000 people, a vast majority the urban elderly poor, shuttled off with the promise that they'll have first place in the sexy new high-rise community; but they removed people in the early-60s, and the Angelus Plaza senior living complex didn't open till the early-80s. Imagine you're 75, displaced, given a pittance, and told to come back in twenty years. Good luck!

So let me end with some Bunker Hill pix that counter the conventional narrative of it being a blighted area casting long shadows across darkened alleys (and so on). The accounts I've heard were it was calm, and quiet, and people liked living there just fine. Because of low car ownership, and there being stores on every corner (with residential above), it kind of typifies the sort of "New Urbanist" neighborhoods we attempt to engineer today...

The 300 block of S Bunker Hill Ave
https://c4.staticflickr.com/5/4068/4...8e7b3b5b_o.jpg

201 S Bunker Hill was always known for being kept in tip-top shape
https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7405/9...c220964d_o.jpg

300 block of S Olive
https://c4.staticflickr.com/5/4058/4...fd08d6f7_o.jpg

244 & 238 S Bunker Hill
https://c6.staticflickr.com/5/4071/4...4c1121a2_o.jpgall above, lapl

Third and Grand—proving that not all the apartments were big wooden firetrap-lookin' things, sometimes you had crenellated parapets and witch-hat towers
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3287/...68a1507e_o.gifcushman

CaliNative Jan 10, 2017 9:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaudry (Post 7672989)
I'd say yes, it would never be confused with Nob Hill. But the Hill was not nearly as bad as many other parts of town—see Nadel's images of the areas around Aliso, 7th & Mateo, Fickett Hollow, all the places where there was heavy industrial-meets-residential mixed use. BH had its better parts (up on Bunker Hill Ave was much nicer than this area around Figueroa, and the part of BH about the west end of the Third St Tunnel was pretty dodgy, and north of First, but then, north of First was taken by the Civic Center/Music Center, and didn't get wiped because it was downtrodden).

Point being, the City went after BH in the 30s because of the national housing acts, and in the immediate postwar years they wanted to cash in on all that Federal money, and the local legalities to declare the Hill a "slum" involved all sorts of well-meaning jargon about "the common good" and being "progressive" and the Hill was a nice, cohesive plot of land—most saliently, it had not only lots of pensioners, but many other voiceless folk (communists, homosexuals, and the like) directly adjacent City Hall—and was as such declared slum-clearance Redevelopment Area #1 in 1949.

The real question is, what if the City had simply looked to code enforcement? If a mix of old and new is desirable, then I agree a quantity could have been excised, and the better parts retained. My two cents anyway.

But in answer to your few final sentences, yes, Heritage Square is still there! But the sole two houses to be saved from Bunker Hill are not...they were carted off there in March of 1969 and, because the City didn't bother to fence or otherwise protect them, they became party houses and were burned to the ground by vandals in October of that year.

As to the displacement, yes, the City did a shameful job. When the Bunker plan finally made it over its legal hurdles, Councilman Roybal particularly opposed it on the grounds of its inadequate relocation provisions and failure to provide senior housing. 9,000 people, a vast majority the urban elderly poor, shuttled off with the promise that they'll have first place in the sexy new high-rise community; but they removed people in the early-60s, and the Angelus Plaza senior living complex didn't open till the early-80s. Imagine you're 75, displaced, given a pittance, and told to come back in twenty years. Good luck!

So let me end with some Bunker Hill pix that counter the conventional narrative of it being a blighted area casting long shadows across darkened alleys (and so on). The accounts I've heard were it was calm, and quiet, and people liked living there just fine. Because of low car ownership, and there being stores on every corner (with residential above), it kind of typifies the sort of "New Urbanist" neighborhoods we attempt to engineer today...

The 300 block of S Bunker Hill Ave
https://c4.staticflickr.com/5/4068/4...8e7b3b5b_o.jpg

201 S Bunker Hill was always known for being kept in tip-top shape
https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7405/9...c220964d_o.jpg

300 block of S Olive
https://c4.staticflickr.com/5/4058/4...fd08d6f7_o.jpg

244 & 238 S Bunker Hill
https://c6.staticflickr.com/5/4071/4...4c1121a2_o.jpgall above, lapl

Third and Grand—proving that not all the apartments were big wooden firetrap-lookin' things, sometimes you had crenellated parapets and witch-hat towers
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3287/...68a1507e_o.gifcushman

Some of those pics--Bunker Hill could almost pass for Nob Hill. I had no idea. A pity more of these neighborhoods weren't preserved. L.A.'s Alamo Square. Now we have West Adams and old Pasadena and maybe a few others. Pretty much the last vestiges of widespread Victorians. This is what happens when (possibly) corrupt politicians smell big money and start bulldozing things. The irony is that some of those Vics would sell for millions today.

Urban "Renewal" should follow the Hippocratic Oath--"First, do no harm". Imagine Bunker Hill with a mix of these old houses and apartment buildings, refurbished, with some tall buildings and hotels mixed in some blocks where appropriate. Leveling the Hill was like tearing down the sacred tree in "Avatar". Gone forever. I'm all for well designed skyscrapers on empty lots and to replace truly decrepit buildings, and of course in the core financial district there must be skyscrapers. But the Bunker Hill neighborhoods in these old pics look totally functional and even attractive, and thousands lived there. They should have been preserved where possible.

DTLA would have been better and more interesting if they tread more lightly with the "redevelopment" of Bunker Hill. Thankfully L.A. still has the hundreds of historic structures between Hill and Main Streets. Now many are being refurbished, and appreciated. The rebuilding of Bunker Hill should of course include tall buildings, but emphasis must be on restoring the pedestrian streetscape that once existed. Buildings on podiums won't do.

MichaelRyerson Jan 10, 2017 5:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Pal (Post 7670186)
Apparently Robert Moseley's new name was given to him by Henry--Guy (the "guy" girls would like to meet) and Madison (from a passing Dolly Madison cake truck). He apparently tried to give Tab Hunter the name Troy Donahue, but he eventually found someone else for that name:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3251/...ccb91255_m.jpg

I believe other clients were John Gavin and James Darren. Mike Connors, mentioned above, was first given the name Touch Connors. He's credited as that in a Joan Crawford film titled Sudden Fear. Three client names I'm not familiar with are Yale Summers, Rad Fulton and Race Gentry.




True!

GW, the GM photos in your post are linked to A Certain Cinema...that was a trove of Hollywood photo shots in a dozen
or more categories, a film site founded by Sérgio Leemann, and two years ago, maybe even longer, there was some hosting
problem or something and the entire site unfortunately has disappeared, to my chagrin.

It was linked to a Facebook page where the entry says "We have a new website," but do not.



I never saw this series, but I saw some old commercials with him as the character selling Sugar Pops or some other cereal. (It wasn't muselix.)

I believe Mike Connors was nicknamed 'Touch' by his high school basketball teammates and was still known as 'Touch' after the war when he played at UCLA under coach John Wooden.

Lomara Jan 10, 2017 7:04 PM

Wow! I always say, if it's worth doing, it's worth OVERDOING.


Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 7672811)
Last night I mentioned not to go overboard with the boobs, and I took some grief for it today.


So as an apology, here's tonight's 'mystery' location.

Even the overhead lighting fixture looks like a BOOB.


HossC Jan 10, 2017 8:40 PM

Here's another of my rare excursions into Julius Shulman pictures of private houses. This one is "Job 0148: Kimpson House (Long Beach, Calif.), 1940".

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...1.jpg~original

Here's the back of the house. I've omitted a close-up of the patio area.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...2.jpg~original

A look down the hallway, past the stairs, to the living room.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...3.jpg~original

There are no pictures of the kitchen or upstairs rooms. The only other image I omitted was of view of this table from inside the house.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...4.jpg~original

All from Getty Research Institute

The Kimpson (or Kimpson-Nixon) House is fairly well documented. The text below is from socalmodern.com. There are some recent interior pictures at the link.
This innovative and historic home was designed by renowned architect Raphael Soriano and is regarded as one of his purest achievements in International Style residential architecture. Built in 1940 and located in what is now the prestigious neighborhood of Alamitos Heights, the home is unique in its dramatic geometric form, which was designed to fill the interior with natural light through a horizontal band of windows that run the length of the structure. Soriano directly oversaw the building of the home, which he designed for indoor-outdoor living in the Southern California climate.
The house stands at 380 Orlena Avenue, and now has much closer neighbors. It was put on the market for the first time in 2012.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...5.jpg~original
GSV

You can also read about the house at laconservancy.org.

CityBoyDoug Jan 10, 2017 9:09 PM

House of Torture.....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 7673587)
Here's another of my rare excursions into Julius Shulman pictures of private houses. This one is "Job 0148: Kimpson House (Long Beach, Calif.), 1940".


The house stands at 380 Orlena Avenue, and now has much closer neighbors. It was put on the market for the first time in 2012.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...5.jpg~original
GSV

You can also read about the house at laconservancy.org.

This house is for So. California? I don't agree at all. There is no protection from the bright sun and often pouring rain of So. Cal. The architect of this house appears to want the residents of this house to suffer....a lot.

Raphael S. Soriano designed some very nice modern homes but this is not one of them.

odinthor Jan 10, 2017 9:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 7673587)
Here's another of my rare excursions into Julius Shulman pictures of private houses. This one is "Job 0148: Kimpson House (Long Beach, Calif.), 1940".

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...1.jpg~original

Here's the back of the house. I've omitted a close-up of the patio area.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...2.jpg~original

A look down the hallway, past the stairs, to the living room.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...3.jpg~original

There are no pictures of the kitchen or upstairs rooms. The only other image I omitted was of view of this table from inside the house.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...4.jpg~original

All from Getty Research Institute

The Kimpson (or Kimpson-Nixon) House is fairly well documented. The text below is from socalmodern.com. There are some recent interior pictures at the link.
This innovative and historic home was designed by renowned architect Raphael Soriano and is regarded as one of his purest achievements in International Style residential architecture. Built in 1940 and located in what is now the prestigious neighborhood of Alamitos Heights, the home is unique in its dramatic geometric form, which was designed to fill the interior with natural light through a horizontal band of windows that run the length of the structure. Soriano directly oversaw the building of the home, which he designed for indoor-outdoor living in the Southern California climate.
The house stands at 380 Orlena Avenue, and now has much closer neighbors. It was put on the market for the first time in 2012.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...5.jpg~original
GSV

You can also read about the house at laconservancy.org.



Can't say I like the aesthetics of this one at all. It looks like a blockhouse. I'd feel institutionalized living there.

ethereal_reality Jan 10, 2017 9:50 PM

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640...922/I66hps.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by tovangar2 (Post 7672935)

It's in the shape of an artichoke :-)

:previous:Yes it is t2. lol.

I meant artichoke. I eat steamed artichokes often. Artichokes look nothing like avocados. ;)
__


Avocado Stand at 790 North Vine Street, 1927.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/128...924/2DbpPi.jpg
Vagabond Magazine, 1927 / old file




An earlier ad in the Vagabond had Avocados misspelled.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800...923/4J5BUa.jpg

Were avocados considered an exotic delicacy back in the 1920s?
__

tovangar2 Jan 10, 2017 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 7673587)
Here's another of my rare excursions into Julius Shulman pictures of private houses. This one is "Job 0148: Kimpson House (Long Beach, Calif.), 1940".

I remember your post on Soriano's Polito House.

Raphael Soriano (1904-1988) also did Julius Shulman's own Hollywod Hills house in 1950. No doubt Shulman photographed it.

Another of Soriano's is the Lukens house in Jefferson Park, which came within a whisker of being demolished. The savior used Shulman's photos to guide the restoration:

Before

After

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/4O...NJ0=w1366-h768
ncmodernist


Only 12 of Raphael Soriano's buildings survive, but some of those are mangled.


.........................................................................

I love artichokes e_r, but am fabulously allergic to avocados.

CityBoyDoug Jan 10, 2017 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tovangar2 (Post 7673724)
I remember your post on Soriano's Polito House.

Raphael Soriano (1904-1988) also did Julius Shulman's own Hollywod Hills house in 1950. No doubt Shulman photographed it.

Another of Soriano's is the Lukens house in Jefferson Park, which came within a whisker of being demolished. The savior used Shulman's photos to guide the restoration:

Before

After

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/4O...NJ0=w1366-h768
ncmodernist


Only 12 of Raphael Soriano's buildings survive, but some of those are mangled.


.........................................................................

I love artichokes e_r, but am fabulously allergic to avocados.

The trapped owners of many Soriano homes have had to take drastic measures to make them livable.

Other owners have simply called for bulldozers.

ethereal_reality Jan 10, 2017 11:35 PM

When Beaudry mentioned displaced Bunker Hill pensioners it reminded me of this photograph I re-discovered in one of my older files.

Although I don't have a date for the photo, these three gentlemen could very well have been three of the displaced.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/924/UOWcXb.jpg
old file

Does anyone know where exactly these steps were located?




I've enlarged this detail to see if I could read the other sign.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640...921/EHkhvi.jpg
detail

Nope.....still can't read it.

Do you think it's the NUMBER for the apartment building...

or is it the name of the cross street (if so, that would make this a T intersection)



_

HossC Jan 11, 2017 12:26 AM

:previous:

I don't know what the sign says, but I believe they're sitting almost under Angel's Flight.

tovangar2 Jan 11, 2017 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 7673896)
:previous:

I don't know what the sign says, but I believe they're sitting almost under Angel's Flight.


Those supports on the right sure look like Angels Flight

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/nA...366-h768-rw-no
pinterest

tovangar2 Jan 11, 2017 12:45 AM

Museum of Narrative Art
 
You're sure on a tear today CBD. What do you think of this?

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/nP...366-h768-rw-no
LAT

"Los Angeles will be home to George Lucas' $1-billion museum"

The Arcade Palm will be untouched (I hope)

ethereal_reality Jan 11, 2017 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC
I don't know what the sign says, but I believe they're sitting almost under Angel's Flight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tovangar2
Those supports on the right sure look like Angels Flight

:previous: Yep, I believe you're both right. I'm kind of embarrassed I didn't figure that one out.


Let's take a closer look at the three men before we say good-bye to them.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/102...923/hXgdAG.jpg
detail

I can't imagine it being very pleasant to sit so close to Angels Flight.

Don't you think it was probably very noisy in that spot....rickedy-rackedy...clunk clunk..screech...(you catch my drift)


Did you'all notice the person sitting in the same spot in tovangar2's photograph.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/102...922/v6wFYv.jpg

Despite the noise, it must have been a popular spot.
__

GaylordWilshire Jan 11, 2017 1:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 7673927)
:previous: Yep, I believe you're both right. I'm kind of embarrassed I didn't figure that one out.


Let's take a closer look at the three men before we say good-bye to them.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/102...923/hXgdAG.jpg
detail

I can't imagine it being very pleasant to sit so close to Angels Flight.

Don't you think it was probably very noisy in that spot....rickedy-rackedy...clunk clunk..screech...(you catch my drift)


Did you'all notice the person sitting in the same spot in tovangar2's photograph.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/102...922/v6wFYv.jpg

Despite the noise, it must have been a popular spot.
__



In an image we've seen here before...handsome Mike in his 'Vette passing under the Flight

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7256/7...0a24ffb5_b.jpg

tovangar2 Jan 11, 2017 1:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 7673927)


With road-grading , that bottom step has been left high and dry. Must have been difficult for older people, but it makes a nice seat.

ethereal_reality Jan 11, 2017 1:33 AM

:previous: I hadn't noticed that. Good eye t2.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.