Delijani Looks to Add 155 Bite-Sized Condos in the United Building

By Eric Richardson
Published: Tuesday, April 01, 2008, at 04:04PM

State Theatre -- 703 S. Broadway Eric Richardson [Flickr]

The United Building, located at 707 S. Broadway, could be converted to 155 condo units.

The United Building, better known as the State Theatre Building, could soon become home to 155 live-work condo units. An application for the Vesting Tentative Tract was submitted to the city in November, and a hearing has been set for mid-April. The 12-story building, built in 1921, is currently home to office and jewelry manufacturing uses. Delijani had previously talked of a potential boutique hotel on the site.

Most interesting about the plan is the size of the units the building would contain. The smallest unit would be only 304 sq. feet, while average unit area would be 494 sq. feet. Only one unit per floor would be over 1,000 sq. feet.

And why such small units? The Request for Variance says that "the design and structure of the existing building, including its existing historical elements, do not allow for the minimum and average units sizes as specified in the Adaptive Reuse Ordinance." It cites "historical elements (i.e., interior walls and doors)" as special circumstances that should lead to the city allowing such small units.

Last August the City Council passed new planning rules that would allow such smaller units within Downtown. At the time there was much discussion of whether there would be a market for such little units in Los Angeles.

A hearing on the tentative tract is scheduled for April 16th at 10:45am.




Comments

1
John Crandell writes:

This is exactly where rehabilitation of Broadway could go wrong. Very wrong, ten years down the line. The city planning department and the redevelopment agency ought to foresee what could happen with the prevalence of such small units in the historic core. Small units for people without motor vehicles would be fine - included into a mix of sizes within new buildings, say in South Park. The negative factors or elements of living in the historic core ought to be counterbalanced by larger size units. Turning the entire structure over to small size living spaces could easily backfire, especially at 7th and Broadway.

# on Apr.01.2008 AT 05:38 PM
2
Jared Fledman writes:

This actually sounds like it would be nice little hotel. 155 rooms between, 304 sq.ft and 1000. Sounds perfect to me.

# on Apr.01.2008 AT 06:28 PM
3
Eric Richardson writes:

Jared: Agreed. And it's a possibility that the move to get a tract map is just a hedge bet to leave the condo option open should that market look more fruitful.

# on Apr.01.2008 AT 06:30 PM
4
Metro Local writes:

Eric is likely right that this is more about adding value to the building rather than a conversion in the current market.

However, at a certain price point, there is a large market for pied-a-terres to stay off daily commute marathons. Small units for people who either take the train in for the week or park their car at the office Monday morning and drive it home Friday night.

With increasing gas prices, don't be surprised if people who clock 90 minutes each way in an auto realize that there is a cost benefit to just crashing in town for the work week.

# on Apr.01.2008 AT 09:06 PM
5
Juanito writes:

A boutique hotel and an intimate theater in the same building, clad in a very unique shade of terra cota and situated at the nexus of two major pedestrian/retail corridors. I'm trying to think of where in southern California there is such a combination. If only Bill Graham and Ian Schrager could have partnered on such a venture. I imagine that Ms. Ronstadt would prefer to perform in this type of venue, rather than the dump she got thrown out of in Vegas for talking politics. There could be series for the Boomers, for Blues seekers, Jazz, Folk/Bluegrass, Hop, whatever - all a short walk from two Redline stations. Conventioneers would gravitate as well for evening entertainment. (No Country allowed; those bozos still think we belong in Iraq. Oops).

# on Apr.01.2008 AT 11:23 PM
6
Bert Green writes:

Looks to me like there ought to be a lot more than 155 units that could fit in the building at those sizes. Maybe not all of the building will be residential?

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 12:04 AM
7
Dr Boris writes:

Currently I run my burgeoning Chiropractic practice out of "Lofty" two room office on 12th Floor of the United Building. Thru the large original windows I have great views of the Historic Downtown skyline. The building has many historic details, for example the corridors are lined with marble, granite, and terrazzo.

The theatre on the ground floor, which currently is home to the "Iglesia Universal" is well preserved and is filled to capacity weekly by the church. The rest of the building seems to be well occupied mostly by jewelers, and it would not surprise me if some of those potential "condos" may of the commercial variety.

However the building would need an extensive amount of work, new pluming, electrical, and seismic retrofit. Also the layout of the building is in a L - shape due to the theatre on the ground floor, so it looks larger than it actually is.

Perhaps one day the interior of the building will match the beautiful exterior.

For Chiropractic treatment and a peek inside my office on the "Penthouse" level of the this Historic Edifice you can call

Dr. Boris Mayzels, at (213) 481-1400, or visit www.drmayzels.com

707 S. Broadway #1221

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 12:09 AM
8
Eric Richardson writes:

As Dr. Boris noted, the building isn't a square. The office tower is really just a thin facade on the Broadway and 7th street sides. Take a look at the back of the building from 7th closer to Hill.

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 12:11 AM
9
VictorAtomic writes:

wow maybe I should get my back checked out so I can be nosy as well :)

Great LA pics on Dr. Mayzels site btw.

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 01:30 AM
10
Jon writes:

Smaller units like that is a good thing. Not just downtown, but all over the city. You go to other major cities in the world and these small units are the norm. Most people don't need such large living spaces.

Plus it will help with the increasing population that Los Angeles has.

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 11:04 AM
11
Wake up writes:

Don't we have a traffic problem here in LA? Why would we want to build more condos and have more people live in a conjested area. It's not a good idea for this project. Buil more parks not more condos. I really hope this plan gets rejected.

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 12:30 PM
12
Eric Richardson writes:

Wake up: Why would you not build more condos in the one part of L.A. where the transit system is decent and plenty of jobs are nearby?

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 12:32 PM
13
Jared Fledman writes:

Quick question. What about the condotels. How are they zoned? Maybe that is the ultimate idea?

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 03:09 PM
14
Karin Liljegren writes:

While I know nothing about this particular project and what the Developer's goal or demographic buyer is . . . In general, small loft units are needed and there is a strong demand for them. In all the projects that we've designed (many Adaptive reuse lofts), the first to sell or lease are the smallest ones. Unfortunately, the cost of living downtown is getting more expensive and smaller units are a way for many, specifically younger singles, to be able to afford a space of their own.

# on Apr.02.2008 AT 09:26 PM
15
Bert Green writes:

Wake up: Do you really think the people who move into the micro-condos are going to drive everywhere? They will walk, bike and take Metro, like most other people downtown, and unlike people in the rest of LA.

# on Apr.03.2008 AT 12:21 AM
16
loveandhatela writes:

I like the idea of smaller units. Though 304 sq. feet seems really small. I do have experience living in a 450 sq. feet, one bedroom unit before. Right now I live in 1200 sq. feet, 8 miles south east of downtown los angeles. I do plan on down sizing. Like the saying goes- "less is more" and not just in wearing make-up..lol I spend more time in my kitchen and bedroom than anything and backyard patio(in the spring/summer). Smaller living quarters make you think about what you really, seriously "need" vs. "want". By the way i make my environmental contribution by choosing not to drive a car(since 2004), not easy but also not impossible either. :)

# on Apr.03.2008 AT 12:37 PM
17
David Kennedy writes:

loveandhatela: Check out the apartments above Grand Central Market. Their units are quite small, but very thoughfully designed. I remember living in a studio apartment there and having so much storage space. The architect who did the conversion, Brenda Levin, did a wonderful job. Prices tend to be pretty reasonable, too.

# on Apr.03.2008 AT 02:06 PM
18
jON writes:

Wake Up needs to wake up. Where are all the people moving to LA going to live. Not only is the population of LA growing, but so is Californias and the entire country. Should we just keep building sub divisions farther and farther out in the desert. Yeah, urban sprawl is the answer.

No, more density in the city is the only answer. If you don't like living in a mega city, then move to Lancaster.

# on Apr.08.2008 AT 08:55 AM
19
Urban Trojan writes:

Let's not engender Blade Runner claustrophobia in downtown, or anywhere else. If the new zoning/building ordinances allow a developer to construct a building made up entirely of 304 sq. foot spaces, it would be highly unfortunate. Back in the day I lived in a small building made up of 200 to 250 sq. ft. units in an upscale part of town. The limited amount of space was bad enough, but with a substance/rock and roll addict living next door, life sometimes bordered on insanity. There was no resident manager and the owner of the property remained indifferent to problems caused by the addict. Police visited the location many times. I wrote a letter to the chief of police. That solved the problem, for like three months. The building was constructed in 1929 to house the domestic staff of a prominent family involved in the entertainment industry.

In short, it's not too hard to imagine if certain developers of the sort similar to one particular property owner in the Historic Core are allowed to build rental or condominium buildings cram full of subhuman living spaces, what will result.

# on Apr.08.2008 AT 01:07 PM

Add Your Comment:

YOUR INFORMATION:
Name:
Email:
URL:
CONNECT:

Use your Facebook account to log in to blogdowntown and get share comments and stories straight to your social network!

Don't use Facebook but want us to remember your information? Create a blogdowntown account or log in to your account.


COMMENT GUIDELINES:
Keep it civil, everyone. If you're attacking people instead of arguments, or being overly profane, expect your comment to get deleted.
Comments should be on the topic of the post or they will be removed.
Use the live preview below to see how your comment will look before posting.

COMMENT:
FORMATTING BASICS:

blogdowntown uses Markdown formatting.

_Italics_
__Bold__
<http://url.to.link>
[link text](http://url)

PREVIEW:

Start typing...