Civic Center Park Proposals "Uninspired"
Eric Richardson
[Flickr]
A view of the four block park space connecting City Hall and the Music Center.
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — At a Tuesday evening meeting the Grand Avenue Committee and Rios Clementi Hale Studios will present two proposals for the redesign of the Civic Center Park. The four-block stretch from the Music Center to City Hall is currently three parts park and one part parking lot, and $50 million for its redesign was committed as part of the agreement for the Grand Avenue Project.
The two alternatives represent a base plan possible with the existing $50 million and an alternate plan takes a more idealized approach to the project costs. In a critique posted to the Times site this afternoon, architecture critic Christopher Hawthorne calls both "uninspired".
It's beyond rare to see a project packaged this way for public consumption. It's one thing to present a design as a series of phases, to be built one after the other. But this approach is essentially a preemptive strike against possible complaint. We realize, the designers and the developer are implicitly pleading, that what we've come up with isn't particularly exciting. But budget-wise, our hands are tied. And just look at what we could do if they weren't!
The double-design strategy would be far more effective if the plans themselves had more to offer. The base plan is uninspired, a collection of scenic overlooks and arcing gardens that with the exception of some clever updates to the 50-year-old fountain on the Civic Center mall never rises past the level of brightly hued practicality. Even the enhanced design -- which adds a large pedestrian bridge across Broadway -- is largely prosaic.
Unmentioned in Hawthorne's review is the lack of progress in addressing the hulking County building that line the site. While many have been outspoken on the need to remove and consolidate the low-slung buildings that separate the park site from parallel streets, no plan or funding has been arranged to make that happen.
In a January talk, architect Frank Gehry suggested that plans to redevelop the park should be scrapped, and that a park should be built along the northern end of Olive street instead.
Tuesday's presentation of the park proposals is open to the public, and will run from 6 to 8pm. Information can be found on the Grand Avenue Committee's website, which requests RSVPs. A telecast of the meeting is also scheduled for Channel 35 on Wednesday, April 23rd, at 4pm.
Urban Bruin on April 20, 2008, at 08:13PM – #1
Even if we only incorporate some elements of Millennium Park it would be great. That park has an interesting interactive water feature that doesn't take must space. In addition, the snake bridge would work well with this site since the park will cross both Hill and Broadway.
Hopefully it will not become a shaded shelter for the homeless or a Pershing Square II
Juanito on April 21, 2008, at 12:01AM – #2
Thoroughly predictable, considerting that no imagination or effort was put into the issue of the two county buildings. It is a PRIMARY mistake to have ignored this one issue. The county and Related need to start from scratch. Let Grand Ave. Phase I go in as designed. The third phase, east of Olive, needs to be planned in conjunction, in resolving the issue of replacement of the county buildings. Perhaps the county functions could be located on Phase III. Related could then construct residential towers at the northeast corner of First and Grand and at the southeast corner of Temple and Grand. New towers for county functions could go in at the northwest corner of Hill and First and the southwest corner of Hill and Temple. Reprogramming the county law library site and utilizing the abandoned state building site across from the Times are also options which need to be explored. Remember how 10% for art paid for MOCA?
Spending so much money to redecorate the mall and have it remain so isolated from First and Temple streets is lucicrous. Whatever solution, the matter of an imaginative transition from Grand down into the mall is the most important and it appears to me as though the new scenario will fail on this count.
"Pershing Square II" is quite apt.
John Crandell on April 21, 2008, at 01:15AM – #3
With the county buildings removed, people can look north along Olive Street and they would be able to see the east face of the cathedral (with Robert Graham's entrance in profile) and beyond that, the view would lead directly to the, let's call it the 2008 - A Space Odyssey Theme Tower of the high school of the performing arts. WHAT A VIEW! Quick, someone go tell Eli. He can replace those two buildings all by himself and the mall could be renamed Broad Acres.
Raymond on April 21, 2008, at 06:25AM – #4
They could possibly use the plots either on 1st between Bway & Spring aka the old courthouse building that was torn down and footprint left standing or they could demolish Parker Center since LAPD will have a new headquarters and possibly use that site. I think the first option would be excellent seeing that the Criminal Courthouse is across the way They could use that site for the LA County Courthouse and the Parker Center site for the Hall of Administration replacements.
Jon on April 21, 2008, at 01:05PM – #5
It's a no-brainer to realize those two hideous government buildings need to be torn down. Unfortunately government moves at a glacial pace. Yes, the issue of funds is the main reason, but it is rediculous that people have to continue working in earthquake damaged buildings and it is rediculous to have these hideous eyesores in the most central and important part of the city.
BobbyD on November 22, 2010, at 08:35AM – #6
$50 million? The park cost zero for the trees and design and 11.5 hours by a county architect to draw a plan to give to the construction firm that built everything else for $33,000. And why not tear down every building in the LA basin so that a very few can see for a long way. Put those people on a deserted island in the middle of the pacific ocean to see for a thousand miles- they probably would still complain.