another palmer in downtown?
This blog has moved to Twitter! Check out my twitter feed for the latest restaurant, retail, and cultural news in the neighborhood.
You’ve seen them around Downtown, mostly in City West and Chinatown. They’ve got names that read like Old World Italian nobility: Orsini, Piero, Visconti, Medici…
…Da Vinci?
According to documents filed with the City Planning Department, controversial developer GH Palmer Associates is seeking to construct another apartment building, this time inside the Downtown freeway ring at 909 W Temple Street. A public hearing is scheduled for Friday, January 23, at 10:00am.
At six stories, the 670-unit, market-rate apartment building will contain 10,000 square feet of commercial space and 1,264 parking spaces, including 163 guest spots. Three separate parcels at the intersection of Temple Street and Fremont Avenue (north and south of Temple) are currently home to surface parking lots.
But will this be another Italian Renaissance-style fortress?
Too many parking spaces hinder pedestrian activity in urban areas. Such pedestrian-oriented development is being encouraged at the city level with Planning Director Gail Goldberg’s Do Real Planning document, which opens with a strong line: “Demand a walkable city.”
Frankly, many in the Downtown community, including this author, would also like to see some architectural diversity in these new structures.
GH Palmer Associates has made a name for itself through the development of suburban-style residential projects in Santa Clarita. This time, let’s be sure the project is tailored to the realities of urban living.
59 comments
Noooooooo…
ehh, i would rather have a project than a parking lot, even if it is a palmer development.
It kinda looks like the Americana in Glendale.
I would assume the parking spaces will all be underground, so I don’t see why it’s a problem.
Yikes! I don’t mean to insult the people who live in them, but these GH Palmer apartment buildings are some of the ugliest, most dumbed down pieces of architecture built in L.A. in recent years. Does the company have a masterplan to ring downtown with these suburban-styled hulks? Why can’t Palmer pay their designers to come up with buildings that have a molecule more imagination and flair?
Follow all the inside info on their “commercial spaces”. ALL unfilled. Some people know why.
Christian
^ ^^
why christian? tell us!
I was thinking..all these buildings cannot be completely filled (fully occupied and sold out) to have a need to build more of this.
So yes C.M. let us know what truly is happening and what the reason is for all this development and expansion.
They are NICE////
GOSH
Retail under residential, aka mixed use, will never work unless you have MAJOR density within one or so blocks. None of Palmer’s projects have that amenity - their only amenity worth noting is the asshat!!!
It will likewise not work in virtually any other part of the city, and that is why many developers well known in the multi-family housing business will not even consider that pro-forma as a way of doing business.
It is my understanding that Palmer is REQUIRED to have ground floor retail, that is how he got permission to build these buildings. The fact that he does not lift a finger to rent them just shows how little regard he has for the community. It will take quite a while for the areas around his buildings to develop, but when they do, the retail will be needed. In the meantime I don’t understand why he does not just rent them at reasonable prices to local businesses.
Palmer in the City West buildings is required to do ground floor retail which they opposed so the retail sits there empty but built. The proposed building is another faux ‘tuscan’ fortress, yes lets have something built over a parking lot, but not an ugly building that will only get uglier over its 70 year life span.
Palmer is notorious from buying properties he knows require payment of affordable housing fees and then filing lawsuits to not pay them, to building downtown despite having a disdain for pedestrian activity, to making 3 or the 4 sides of the Cesar Chavez/Figueroa look exactly alike -not exactly good urban design
Palmer should be required to remodel the facades on all these ugly, existing “Tuscan” style fortresses & bring them in harmony with their surrounding buildings before permitted to build another. Palmer has a right to develop but we residents should have a right to esthetically pleasant edifices.
Bert & Chris have the answer and it’s wide spread. Retail just sits empty. What do you think the tax advantage is? Or should I say reported revenue “loss”?
Christian
Noooo!
yuck. What is this, Vegas?
I once met the architects Palmer uses for these things and I asked them straight-out why they are so ugly. The architects said Palmer loves the look and dictated almost all of the design. The architects are basically just there to do the drawings so the building does not fall over.
The worst part is that Palmer isn’t the only one who loves the design — his buildings are full (besides the retail) and he gets pretty high rents so it just reinforces Palmer’s attitude that the City planners don’t know what they are doing.
Especially when so many of you lust after a Trader Joes to open closer your converted bank building front door: packaged, bland, and quasi-culturally informed (same thing as the Palmer residences).
!!!!!
Bringing more people to downtown is good for everyone. We need to hit certain demographic/population targets before certain businesses will touch downtown and these Palmer units bring us closer to those targets.
Besides the Historic Core is full of converted loft buildings. Most of them are empty. The fact of the matter is the facade of these buildings still give the impression of class and a newer building. This is something the Historic core also needs to focus on.
Isn’t this the same “Palmer” who illegally razed the last Queen Anne-style home on Bunker Hill a few years back? Maybe his penalty should have been to construct Queen Anne-style residences instead of these cookie cutter, Disney-esque, Italian apartment buildings.
I am not stating that these buildings are the way to go but in this economy and in the current stage of development that Downtown is in, these “cookie cutter, Disney-esque, Italian apartment buildings” are better than what is there now.
The county of Los Angeles is not worse off by having a center to their county. The fact that we have pockets of interests such as (hollywood, santa monica, culver city, etc….) makes us a great city and county but it can’t hurt to have economic stimulus.
As much as I think LA Live is centered inward and does not engage the surrounding blocks, I am ecstatic that we have it.
Anonymous #22….Agreed. Something is better than nothing. But that does not change the collective regret most of us share that we can’t do better. I don’t think anyone’s calling for the demolition of Palmer’s buildings. Flip side, we’re not happy to settle for mediocre, either.
No. 23: Please keep your prejudiced thoughts to yourself.
barf..
they are NICE….
you guys are just jelous.. because u guys want to live there….
Always follow the money. If they can make xtra $$ through losses, that’s what they will do.
Christian
This is awful, it was bad enough when they tore down the BBQ king to make all of fig / sunset look terrible, but as predicted all of the retail space has and will go un-touched. Now they have added a color changing fountain and hideous glass horse walkway covering.
The retail part is the most upsetting as it would be somewhat forgivable if it actually added to the neighborhood in any meaningful way whatsoever.
Is there anyway to stop this or is it pretty much a 100% happening because its money for the city?
hmmmm - think my comment got accidentally deleted.
^ No, your comment was deleted by me on purpose because it was trolling.
trolling?
you mean critical discourse?
sorry you feel the need to insulate your blog so much.
Critical discourse is one thing; race baiting is another. I actually moderate my blog very little since most comments don’t get out of hand.
=== This is awful, it was bad enough when they tore down the BBQ king to make all of fig / sunset look terrible ===
What?! That shabby old building didn’t make the intersection look terrible (and, incidentally, one of the two streets is not Sunset Blvd, but Cesar Chavez)? Someone needs to have their eyes examined!
As for the new apartment buildings, they do have a very kitschy quality about them. But in the context of the rundown areas that surround them, or the decrepitude they’ve replaced, beggars can’t be choosers.
That’s even truer when the community still is so underpopulated and/or income restricted — central Los Angeles still is made up of predominantly poorer Angelenos — that a restaurant like the one mentioned in the post above has to close due to lack of enough business.
Speaking of which, there was a nail salon located on the ground floor of an apartment building owned by the same person who is building these Vegasy structures. But it closed awhile back, likely due to a lack of enough walk-in traffic.
Not exactly surprising.
A lack of enough public parking around these new apartment buildings means any store located in them will have a much, much tougher time attracting any or enough shoppers or diners.
I won’t jump in on the architecture point at this time because even though I want some diversity, that’s a matter left up to the developer.
However, there ARE certain things that the community IS allowed — hell, encouraged — to discuss and help mitigate. The days of Los Angeles allowing developers to run roughshod over communities is over.
The thinking goes, if a community is forced to live with the impacts of a development (traffic, parking, increased density), then the community should also have a say in how the development is built.
That comes in the form of public hearings when a developer applies for a zone change or variance.
So in this case, yes, beggars CAN be choosers. In the end, I want Palmer to make a profit. I want more density. I also want it to be respectful of our wishes since we’re the ones that are going to have to be looking at it for years (decades) to come.
There is empty retail space with ‘for lease ‘signs in the windows all along 7th where the Medici is. This just makes downtown look empty.
He is just getting permits by saying its “mixed use”. Just say what it is if your not gonna rent it out. If you look in the windows half of these “retail” spots are being used for parking.
No one asked me before Versus opened if I embraced a bunch of out-of-town knuckleheads to physically and socially contaminate a landmark building, spray painting bronze doors and inviting noisy cornholes to scream on Spring until 4 in the morning. I doubt the Palmerstocracy will be handing out questionaires to the locals.
Still happy their toilets clogged like crazy on opening night.
NEWS FLASH: DOWNTOWN IS REALLY UGLY. Let’s face it! It’s NOT pretty / interesting / well-designed and it’s not heading in that direction. I went on a long walk tonight: Chinatown = ugly. Crossing over the freeway = ugly. That Spring / Broadway / CChavel intersection = toxically ugly. Broadway after 7 = ugly. Spring = pretty bad, considering all that’s been done. That Mosaic piece of housing shit across from Senor Fish = screech. We’re victims of developers who obviously never travel to Europe, Asia or Scandinavia and see what good design is. They’re not schooled in design nor is any contemporary research being done. When Sci-Arc is downtown, for example, why does a mess like Pershing Square exist?
So whether it’s a decaying body in a Maytag washer box, a rat farm feasting on a 7th street trash can, or a faux-Romani McCondoComplex, downtown is, and will be for a long time, aesthetically crippled.
sci-arc moved downtown several years after pershing square was last overhauled.
A lot of people think downtown is ugly.
I for one just think it needs “tweaks.” - Historic core IS beautiful, if the right kind of upkeep was done and plants and trees were added.
We have probably 40 years of straight up deterioration and abuse to the streets of downtown.
Have you guys walked up and down the meat packing dist in NYC sober? Its aint all roses either.
btw, i live across the street from Versus, and I wasnt a fan of the theme of the place, and the place is already closed. But the fact that anyones putting $$ into downtown in this economy is awesome.
This comment thread is hilarious… isnt the reason that people live in urban areas and not in the suburbs to be “authentic” and “grimey”… I agree, with Ankur, at least we dont have mounds of trash piling up outside our doors.
@Tamara- That shabby old building was a great neighborhood restaurant with quality food that had a strong following. It was not shut down because of financial problems, they were paid off by Palmer et al. And you can tell they had a following by checking out the line at their new location in the Financial District.
My concern with this new development is not architecture or parking… its the low occupancy rates of its current developments and obvious lack of commitment by Palmer to secure ANY retailers. The math is simple they subtract one quality, affordable retail space (BBQ King) and have added ZERO back in terms of retailers… it doesn’t add up.
So Rich, thank you for sharing information about the public hearing. I have a right to define what is built in my neighborhood!
Downtown is Ugly? Compared to what? Fairfax and Sunset? Culver City? The freeway interchange at the 10 and the 405? Give me a break. Downtown may not be kept up well in places, or may have had some unfortunate interventions, but ugly it is not.
And FYI, the European design you think is so superior got its inspiration from Frank Lloyd Wright. There’s a lot of bad design in Europe too. They have some great old cities but their new urban environments make LA look beautiful.
Further to Bert’s point is the book, “Britains Lost Cities” by Gavin Stamp. The destructive force of modernist architecture was global in its impact. Europe was/is not immune.
http://www.amazon.com/Britains-Lost-Cities-Gavin-Stamp/dp/1845132645/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211631145&sr=1-1
I’ll take downtown’s beauty over the rest of L.A. any day. Not even close. She never fails to take my breath away.
+1 for Bert & David.
If Downtown LA is ugly, then what would you consider the rest of Los Angeles? I vomit every time I travel down the 710/110/105/134/5.
DTLA is no SF or Chicago or NYC and it never will be. But save those few examples of glorious metropolia, DTLA is about as good of a historic urban setting as you’ll find in the U.S.
Also keep in mind that when we’re talking about raze/build as a way to “beautify” or “revive” an area of land, we are not talking about a short-term band-aid that can be thrown away and replaced in 5-10 years when it loses its appeal. These are buildings that should be designed to stand for 30-100 years, depending on the purpose. Otherwise, this great DTLA resurgence is going to fall apart by 2020 and it will be Deja Vu for Downtown.
I would like Mr. Palmer to explain to me what is wrong with the restore/renovate model…
Palmer is a criminal for destroying a historical landmark in the middle of the night.
Yes his buildings are ugly, but worse they do not at all fit in with the existing neighborhood.
Demolishing an entire block of housing, to then put up a project for people (usually white) who have a bit more money than the ones before them does not enhance quality of life in Los Angeles.
A downtown should be a place for peoples of all ages, races and incomes. but most of the faux urbanites moving downtown feel safe in
pretend renaissance-style fortresses.
I love how both Bert and David K get all sphincterized when anyone criticizes downtown. YOU guys should run to tag-team the Mayor position. Bert, why compare downtown to other parts of Los Angeles? There is a world outside of downtown Los Angeles. (A globe will show you…) Been to Tokyo? Toronto? Sao Paulo? Madrid? Helsinki? Brussels? With young, hungry architecture students working at SCI-ARC, why doesn’t the city work with the school to help save the school’s own back yard?
And Bert, fYi, a dude who ran around with the handle of Le Corbusier way-pre-dated FL, right?! Um, he was like in, um, Paris. And that’s like in France and stuff.
Mikah, learn your history. Wright predates Le Courbusier by two decades (Le Corbusier: October 6, 1887 – August 27, 1965, Frank Lloyd Wright: June 8, 1867 – April 9, 1959). His inspirations for modern design are a fusion of Japanese and American ideas, and were imported to Europe in the 19th Century. And FYI, I have lived in Paris, Berlin, New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Chicago, and traveled all over Europe, South America, and the US.
People love to bash LA because it’s the hip thing to do, but the worst is when people in LA bash downtown. The reasons are usually laughable. Some imaginary respect for other world cities that they don’t really know well, mixed with an underlying distrust for urbanism at the same time.
And Sci-Arc? Green blob architecture? Show me any buildings built by Sci-Arc grads that are anything but hostile to urban space. There aren’t any. Sci-Arc even opposed public transit to its campus.
Provide some accurate criticism that is based in reality and I’d agree with you. I’m not a zealot. But I call it the way I see it.
“Sphincterized”? Hmm, I’ll take that as a Freudian slip and likely revealing of Mr. Mikah’s personal pecadillos.
To the matter at hand, I merely sought to buttress Bert’s point with some empirical evidence. I’m sure post-war modernist architecture has its adherents, although I think the results are mixed at best. Obviously, I have great affection for downtown and enjoy jousting with its numerous detractors. I certainly don’t want to convey the impression that I will brook no criticism of my beloved downtown. On the contrary, I welcome vigorous debate and thoughtful criticism of all things downtown. I have no sacred cows. (I will admit to getting testy on occasion with those who diss my mother-in-law or who romanticize genocidal dictators.) However, as Bert points out, it is better if you get your facts correct.
To the larger point, yes, there are parts of downtown which aren’t the most attractive. But, the important point is the ability to see the beauty of downtown. In fact, the contrast with the ugly only makes the beauty more vivid. Moreover, the ability to see the inherent beauty is important when discussing how to make downtown more beautiful in the future. Beautiful in a way which is humane and respectful to the people who live here.
Your suggestion that Sci-Arc be more involved in downtown development is well intentioned. But, as Bert points out, it is flawed. I, too, would be skeptical of their ability to create beautiful and humane urban spaces. The gestalt of the school is more about architecture as sculpture. When it is successful, it is brilliant. Alas, typically, the results are monuments to the architect’s meglomania and awful as any modernist monstrosity.
I hope that clears things up for Mikah el al.
P.S. Personally, I’m no fan of Le Courbusier or Wright.
you guys dont like them because they are Gay enough for u guys
nerd, your comment is a little cryptic. Please clarify who “you guys”, “them”, “they” and “u guys” are. I’m puzzled by your suggestion that anyone’s sexual orientation is of any relevance here.
Goodness> NYC is dirty and crumbling. SF is dirty as well. Cities are dirty. Chicago is dirty too. I know these three cities well. I can give you street-by-street, neighborhood by neighbood of these cities. LA is dirty too. SOOOOOOOOO What! At least DTLA is building, recreating itself, and holding on to good historical buildings…thanks in large part to Gilmore (Bless you)- and the DT urban pioneers and investors like BERT GREEN. I don’t ever agree with everything and everyone but to think somehow other cities are cleaner than LA is silly or that the architecture is better is simply unture. Even the Near North in Chicago has major problems. How about the West side of Chicago, OMG dirty!
If you dislike our city, its history and vision there are lots of other places to be. I thank God for the people that have put their lives, talent, and fortune in the historical heart and start of Los Angeles, DOWNTOWN. I don’t especially like the architecture of the lets say, Orsini, but thank goodness they are here. And to “Nerd”, grow up.-Don
I’m not a fan of Palmer’s design but his product is VERY well built and he pays extreme attention to detail in his builidngs. He also provides very nice amenities that appeal to many types of people. This is why his projects are all essentially full and genrate some of the highest PSF rents in all of DTLA. I haven’t seen anyone criticizing his design point to anything built in DTLA as an example of something better.
I think we’d all love to see the retail full but full of what? The locations he’s chosen are pioneering for new development. Look across the streets and there isn’t shit. Also, many, many retailers don’t have any desire to take the space for virtually free becasue the retail is so poorly designed. The city required something for which there really is no demand. There are plenty of much better retail locations in DTLA.
The “historic” Queen Anne he tore town was a boarded up crack house he couldn’t give away because it was in such poor condition. There was absolutely nothing worth salvaging and the fact that the city and the hysterical conservancy tried to make him salvage it is ridiculous (especially if you consider the hypocracy that the city and the CRA are respnsible for tearing down an entire neighborhood full of historic Victoians when they redeveloped Bunker Hill).
My understanding is he also tried pretty hard to fit a small grocery store chain into the Orsini III (not TJ’s) but that to do it he would have lost an entire floor of units becasue the city wouldn’t give him a variance of a few feet in height (the grocery need higher ceilings than the original design).
BTW - The BQ King was decent BBQ, nothing more. Head down to Philip’s in Leimert Park or Mr. Cecil’s at Pico an Bundy for two FAR superior establishments. Don’t get me wrong, I ate at BB King frequently (and it absolutely destroys the Spring St Smoke House) but it always made me wish I had the time or ambition to go to another BBQ joint. Do they actually do any smoking at the 7th St location? Looks too small and I haven’t seen/smelled the smoke.
BBQ King does not have a full kitchen at their 7th street location… so unfortunately you cannot get things like french fries. My understanding is that everything is prepared at their South LA location.
I agree Phillips is probably the best BBQ in LA and there is also Smokehouse down the way and their fries are amazing… I will check out Mr. Cecil’s…
@Tamara: sunset turns into cesar e. chavez ( or visa versa ) @ the figueroa intersection hope this helps. Also BBQ king was ugly but delicious and provided something for the neighborhood. It was constantly populated and provided a public space of sorts with its outdoor seating and parking lot.
—————————————————————————————-
The problem with the retail space in the orsini is a few reasons, primarily the fact that any buisness you run just looks like the orsini. I don’t see a place for signage or major aesthetic changes so anyone driving by will just think its apartments. If i was investing money in opening a new restaurant or coffee shop, i don’t want faux italian architecture with dark windows and brick arches to be my only option.
As far as downtown haters, it’s fine let people say its dirty or ugly, I rather live in a community that has affection for its surroundings then try and convert people living in glendale or sherman oaks that downtown is worth moving to.
#22 and 23 - Anything is NOT better than nothing. A vacant lot represents the potential to develop something exceptional. Giant, faux-fortresses with skimpy styrofoam details and no sidewalk presence represents a wasted opportunity.
Hey Mary, relax. The buildings are ugly. There are ugly buildings all over LA County. Have you been to Burbank lately? Ugly happens. Unless you want to build your own buildings to your personal taste, learn to avert your eyes.
there is beauty in imperfection.
Good point. What’s another ugly building in a city filled with them…
BBQ King was AWFUL. I went there twice and both times the meat was chewy, the sauce was unexceptional and the side dishes were bland and tasteless. I will not go to their new location. The dumpy ugly building they tore down was a cinder block bunker former gas station, a hideous nightmare of a structure.
N EXT!
P.S. I do wish Palmer had been forced to move that last Queen Anne house to Heritage Square where it could have been restored. Would have been a nice capper to their collection of buildings. Oh well.
Ok everyone. Please be serious and honest here. If you do not like Palmer then that is your constitutional right and your freedom to express yourself.
But let’s all face it. LA is a toilet. It always has been and it always will be. There is big business in those bi towers, but at the end of the day it is a toilet.
Where did all those homeless people go that used to set up small neighborhood type cardboard homes in fron of the Ronald Reagon Building, or the Trade center. Those people found job? They are not homeless any longer? No they were pushed away to the outskirts.
Thank god there is something nice to live in in Downtown. Thank god you can now actually walk outside without get approached by thiefs, muggars, homeless people.
It is projects like these that make neighborhoods more successful, more attractive, and more safe.
Just like downtown Anaheim, Brea, Bella Terra in Huntington Beach. All of these places were toilets like LA. Thanks to proper high end development they are now attractive and good paying, upscale people with money and good credit scores now finally occupy this neighborhood.
I hope Palmer builds more. We need more people like Palmer. He should run for Govenor. He would get my vote.
You should all stop being envious of his success and his tranformation of a downtown toilet to a masterpiece.
Thank you Mr. Palmer. Keep up the great work.