Steve White () on November 03, 2011, at 10:47AM – #1

Hm... I don't know if I'm happy or sad about this. I think the tower would have been the sort of iconic skyscraper that LA doesn't really have at this point. We have some very iconic buildings, but I wouldn't say any iconic skyscrapers (US Bank tower is close but only because of its height).

Based on the latest streetcar routes, it won't go by this development, but I could see these buildings interacting well with a more "complete street" on Figueroa if the myFigueroa project gets further in motion.

I certainly think it will be better than a parking lot, and I hope for restaurants (both sit-down dinner and quick) to serve the convention crowd.

Chris Loos on November 03, 2011, at 11:03AM – #2

43 stories down to 7 stories. Pretty emblamatic of what's happened to the whole economy in that time span.

The silver lining: at least we won't have that horrendous 9-story podium parking structure.

Simon Hartigan on November 03, 2011, at 12:21PM – #3

I approve of this. When the economy turns around they'll then have to fill in more cracks in DTLA rather than concentrating all the wealth on a few blocks like it has been in decades past. I think more 7-story buildings would do well for DTLA as demand here increases. I agree that 36 stories is nice on a postcard, but 7 stories is more human. I'd rather some of these buildings be lower and instead start focusing nicer developments into places like skid row. And I'd like to add that I think the Bank Tower is beautiful AND iconic. Regarding the DTLA skyline, I'm very proud of City Hall, Bank Tower, Gas Company Tower, and recently I've really enjoyed the glitz and glamour of the hotel at LA Live.

Steve White () on November 03, 2011, at 01:10PM – #4

Simon, don't get me wrong. I LOVE the DTLA skyline. Honestly, it was the first things I fell in love with about this city... before I found the bars, restaurants, entertainment, history, culture, etc...

I love the skyline as a whole, but I just don't think any of the buildings individually scream "world-renown LA icon" for their architecture.

Glad you brought up City Hall... It's apt to think it's the best city hall in the country!

DTLA_Jeff on November 03, 2011, at 02:13PM – #5

I am really disappointed to see this proposal. What downtown needs is more density, a seven story building is not what we need next to staples center, we need exciting, tall, dense, urban development in the area. Seven is better than parking, but not by much.

Brian Tompkins on November 03, 2011, at 02:54PM – #6

I agree with Simon's thought about 7 stories being more human. Also, with regard to density, it its only going from 273 to 250, which isn't a judge drop. This building looks like it will engage the street level better, though the Libeskind building was cool looking.

William Crandell on November 03, 2011, at 09:00PM – #7

What if a developer were to propose an office tower with an equivalent amount of floor space and instead of podium or underground parking space, wanted it all on grade, right next door? Right..... This is the type of case where planning assistants (and their bosses) can rake it in big time, if you know what I mean.

Seven stories of something that looks like it belongs out on Wilshire, about near Hancock Park. Blah!

Give me Libeskind any time. Keep USC-Sorority-Provincial designs OUT of Downtown L.A...... Do it in San Marino instead.

on November 06, 2011, at 08:13AM – #8

Independent of the density issue . . . we need to work much harder at getting buildings (especially the new construction) to have more innovative design. Our city has one of the best stocks of talented Architects in the world, we don't need more suburban office park type of buildings - we need more cutting edge!