LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 6.0

[Easy]

Originally Posted by BillinGlendaleCA

The original comment decried the lack of green space in LA,using Central park as an example. My point is urban green space need not be a manicured park, green space can be a natural setting. We have a large urban green space here in LA, it's called Griffth Park. As far as access, Metro/LADOT do have routes that service Griffth Park.

The large majority of parks in LA are manicured and I don’t think that we’re getting many more Griffith Parks or parks in a natural setting. Since the discussion is about having more parks, Central Park seems a much more appropriate comparison.

Griffith Park only has two bus lines afaik. One is hourly and the other only goes to the Observatory. I don’t consider that easily accessible by many people.

We certainly disagree on (manicured) park access but yours is obviously the prevalent opinion. Otherwise we’d have more.

[BillinGlendaleCA]

Originally Posted by Easy

The large majority of parks in LA are manicured and I don’t think that we’re getting many more Griffith Parks or parks in a natural setting. Since the discussion is about having more parks, Central Park seems a much more appropriate comparison.

Griffith Park only has two bus lines afaik. One is hourly and the other only goes to the Observatory. I don’t consider that easily accessible by many people.

We certainly disagree on (manicured) park access but yours is obviously the prevalent opinion. Otherwise we’d have more.

I'm all in favor of more access to Griffith Park by public transportation, however since it is a wilderness area, there are limited options: the Observatory(I use the DASH bus during normal times) and the line that goes by Travel Town, The Zoo, the Autry, and the Merry-Go-Round area/Old Zoo. Unless you opened up Mt. Hollywood Drive and Vista Del Val for transit, I'm not sure how else you'd increase access. You can't look at the amount of parks in the urban part of LA without looking at the history, specifically the 1940's to the 1970's, the trend was folk leaving the downtown area and razing buildings to create parking. We've seen reversals in that trend in the past 30 years. We have seen some new parks in the downtown area, but since the area is already built up, it's difficult to put in any parks of any size. The only place that it has been possible to do so is the converted railroad yard that is now LA Historical Park. I've seen proposals to convert the piggyback yard to parkland. There are also several parcels along the river that have been converted to smaller parks. But in downtown itself, the best you're going to do is efforts like San Julian Park, or Spring Street Mini Park or the addition to Grand Park on the side of the old State Building. I should also note that there are other parks in the eastern Santa Monica Mountains, Runyon Canyon, Franklin Canyon and others.

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by BillinGlendaleCA

I was replying to the lack of "green space", not a manicured green space. BTW, Col Griffith didn't murder his wife; he did shoot her in the head, but she survived.

LA is not New York, nor should it strive to be New York.

Well contrary to what many believe, New York isn’t the first thing that pops into some of urbanists’ heads when they think of what they hope LA will be like in the future. For me, Tokyo, London or even Toronto come to mind. Dense nodal and linear CBD’s with relatively low density in between. In fact as I’ve gotten older I’ve come to nearly want LA to not be New York as much as I don’t want it to be Las Vegas. Too much of anything can be bad.

Folks came to LA to escape the cramped conditions of New York and other eastern cities. That said, more parkland should be part of any redevelopment plans.

While this may have been overwhelmingly true decades ago, the reality is that until very very recently, Downtown and surrounding inner-city neighborhoods have undergone unprecedented revitalization. All the while places like Santa Clarita, Eastvale, Irvine, etc. continue to grow horizontally.

So in actuality it appears we now have two dynamics at play: Those that want a quiet, tranquil life in a suburban setting and those that want a bustling, vibrant, life in a urban setting. And both don’t show any signs of letting up in the long run (post-pandemic).

Originally Posted by BillinGlendaleCA

My point is urban green space need not be a manicured park, green space can be a natural setting.

Absolutely true, which is why I pointed out the plusses of Griffith Park. It’s a great place to go hiking.

The problem is, LASHP notwithstanding, we don’t really have ANY large-scale “manicured” green space parks in Downtown proper. At least anymore, anyway, after the “redevelopment” (aka:bastardization) Pershing Square went through after WWII. Ditto for Grand Park. Spring St Park is nice, but again, it’s just too small.

Another thing to consider about places like Elysian, Griffith, Santa Monica Mountains etc. is that because they’re in such a natural, rugged and untamed setting, the risk of fires (and ensuing mudslides) there are higher than in manicured parks. So in actuality I would think you’d want as much access as possible in emergencies.

[DownTown Giant]

The skyscraper-park page....
exciting ?

[Niftybox]

Originally Posted by DownTown Giant

The skyscraper-park page....
exciting ?

It's all connected, urban parks influence urban development, even non-urban parks on the outskirts affect city parks, and that seems to be a major reason why LA has no major downtown parks to speak of, which also influences sprawl, parks help densify regions, especially if the park is nearby downtown. Thanks for all of the above discussions replying to my topic, surely more than I bargained for. And no, I don't want a Central Park in L.A., I don't believe it's even close to possible barring an asteroid impact or skid row being demolished. I just wonder if the massive freeways are a possibility, like freeway caps, those won't affect building development like parks normally do, imagine long stretches of grass and trees with winding paths atop the freeway adjacent to downtown, pretty interesting but probably quite far off.

[bhunsberger]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Kenneth Hahn should definitely be expanded, if only somehow those oil derricks nearby could disappear.

Agreed. The park would be enormous! So much potential. Such a tragedy.

[BillinGlendaleCA]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Well contrary to what many believe, New York isn’t the first thing that pops into some of urbanists’ heads when they think of what they hope LA will be like in the future. For me, Tokyo, London or even Toronto come to mind. Dense nodal and linear CBD’s with relatively low density in between. In fact as I’ve gotten older I’ve come to nearly want LA to not be New York as much as I don’t want it to be Las Vegas. Too much of anything can be bad.



While this may have been overwhelmingly true decades ago, the reality is that until very very recently, Downtown and surrounding inner-city neighborhoods have undergone unprecedented revitalization. All the while places like Santa Clarita, Eastvale, Irvine, etc. continue to grow horizontally.

So in actuality it appears we now have two dynamics at play: Those that want a quiet, tranquil life in a suburban setting and those that want a bustling, vibrant, life in a urban setting. And both don’t show any signs of letting up in the long run (post-pandemic).



Absolutely true, which is why I pointed out the plusses of Griffith Park. It’s a great place to go hiking.

The problem is, LASHP notwithstanding, we don’t really have ANY large-scale “manicured” green space parks in Downtown proper. At least anymore, anyway, after the “redevelopment” (aka:bastardization) Pershing Square went through after WWII. Ditto for Grand Park. Spring St Park is nice, but again, it’s just too small.

Another thing to consider about places like Elysian, Griffith, Santa Monica Mountains etc. is that because they’re in such a natural, rugged and untamed setting, the risk of fires (and ensuing mudslides) there are higher than in manicured parks. So in actuality I would think you’d want as much access as possible in emergencies.

The problem is that we didn't set aside , with Pershing Square and an exception, any parks back in the 1870's when the land was undeveloped. Once it's developed and in private hands, it's difficult to turn it into parkland. I hope the plans to return Pershing Square(orginally called Central Park) back into a green space comes to fruition.

[LAisthePlace]

Originally Posted by bhunsberger

Agreed. The park would be enormous! So much potential. Such a tragedy.

I too hope that they keep expanding the park as the
oil wells go out of commission (always would be a fan of them adding dense housing surrounding it to see it is more accessible to more people.

I'd say it is already massive at 400 acres (half the size of Central Park).

For my money it is the best kept park secret in Los Angeles, but it is mostly that way because it is surrounded by single family homes and oil derricks.

[scania]

Originally Posted by LAisthePlace

I too hope that they keep expanding the park as the
oil wells go out of commission (always would be a fan of them adding dense housing surrounding it to see it is more accessible to more people.

I'd say it is already massive at 400 acres (half the size of Central Park).

For my money it is the best kept park secret in Los Angeles, but it is mostly that way because it is surrounded by single family homes and oil derricks.

Conversations transitioning back to skyscrapers, street level retail...now that’s SEXY!!!

[RuFFy]

This thread has always been a good indicator of whats to come. Just to throw it in there demolishing the buildings around Grand Park should remain or be a priority for the city to increase access to the park from 1st Street to Temple Street. That, IMO, is the cities fastest way to a LA type billionaire (err: Millionaire) row. To me that’s the Court house, law library, hall of administration and potentially even the hall of records and the criminal justice center that have to go.

[ThebiteofSuarez]

Here is a progress pic of the Grand yesterday afternoon.

[Niftybox]

The Grand is looking far better than the renders, pleasantly surprised by it.

[scania]

Originally Posted by Niftybox

The Grand is looking far better than the renders, pleasantly surprised by it.

It’s definitely making a statement.

[edale]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

This thread has always been a good indicator of whats to come. Just to throw it in there demolishing the buildings around Grand Park should remain or be a priority for the city to increase access to the park from 1st Street to Temple Street. That, IMO, is the cities fastest way to a LA type billionaire (err: Millionaire) row. To me that’s the Court house, law library, hall of administration and potentially even the hall of records and the criminal justice center that have to go.

LA's commercial 'billionaire row' is in Beverly Hills.

[LAisthePlace]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

This thread has always been a good indicator of whats to come. Just to throw it in there demolishing the buildings around Grand Park should remain or be a priority for the city to increase access to the park from 1st Street to Temple Street. That, IMO, is the cities fastest way to a LA type billionaire (err: Millionaire) row. To me that’s the Court house, law library, hall of administration and potentially even the hall of records and the criminal justice center that have to go.

The Civic Center Master Plan does a ton to introduce more apartments and park space to the area surrounding Grand Park.

https://urbanize.city/la/post/look-civic-center-future

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Well contrary to what many believe, New York isn’t the first thing that pops into some of urbanists’ heads when they think of what they hope LA will be like in the future. For me, Tokyo, London or even Toronto come to mind. Dense nodal and linear CBD’s with relatively low density in between. In fact as I’ve gotten older I’ve come to nearly want LA to not be New York as much as I don’t want it to be Las Vegas. Too much of anything can be bad.

Yrs ago when dtla was in fairly bad shape, and other areas around it, including Hollywood and the wilshire corridor were hurting too, I recall thinking traditionally centralized, higher density cities throughout the country & world were the way to go. but I think I was really dissatisfied with the way that LA...urban or burban...wasn't in great condition.

If dt had at least been somewhat clean & in basic good shape....think: a burban city like Pasadena or Samo....I would have been fine with it. Even if it would have had a much less traditional big city scale about it.

Towns like santa barbara certainly don't have a wow! city power about them, but they're nice in their own way.

dtla yrs ago wasn't ready for prime time...but that was just as much because it was doing poorly as both a big city & a smaller type town....or the worst of both worlds. But within the past 5 yrs, it has turned a corner. Other cities in the US have come back too.

Now with Covid-19, a lot of places, all over the world, are moving back to square one.

I want to see light at the end of the tunnel.


• Video Link

[colemonkee]

Speaking of park views, the fully-entitled "Bella Vista Tower" development has been up fro sale since September of last year. Here's hoping someone snaps this up and actually builds it. Those views would be amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8m7mwUXJIHM

[pwright1]

[pwright1]

[colemonkee]

Wow, the shorter tower is nearly fully clad. They are flying on this thing. Here's my one gripe about The Grand: the taller tower has beige pre-cast concrete and the shorter tower uses matte silver metal panels to frame the windows where it isn't full glass window wall facade treatment. Those two color schemes don't really go well together. I like the idea of differentiating the towers - and they do a good job of that with the fenstration patterns - but the color mix is the architectural equivalent of wearing black shoes with a brown belt. Seen alone, each tower is great, but together it just looks a little haphazard.