Gehry Candid on Grand Avenue During LA Phil Talk

Tim on January 07, 2008, at 11:29AM – #1

Err... I love the Disney hall and all, but I wouldn't consider it very warm and fuzzy either.

Whitman Lam on January 07, 2008, at 03:04PM – #3

Disney hall is as cold and sterile as it gets. It does not interact with it's surroundings. Does not encourage any outdoor events or programming. Not enough glass windows to allow a more natural sunlight and reflection. I would be happy if they just copied the Sydney Opera House design instead. Frank Gehry is to shock architecture what Howard Stern is to shock jock.

Tim Quinn on January 07, 2008, at 04:53PM – #4

Oh, Disney Hall does OK at meeting the sidewalk with some life. Compare it to its Great Aunt the Chandler Pavilion across the street, which sits up on its acropolis like a haughty old empress.

Gehry is not a shock architect. The metal skins he loves are really very warm in tone and the inside of Disney is fantastic. Imagine pushing all that through during years of abuse and neglect. Gehry isn't a genius so much as a super-human force.

Norbie7 on January 07, 2008, at 05:38PM – #5

Cold and Sterile?!!! Go take a good look at the World Trade Center two blocks away. Disney Hall is a combination of Wagner, Sibelius and Mahler, all in one glorious movement. It is eternal. Anyone that wants touchy/feely should go to DisneyLAND.

VictorAtomic on January 07, 2008, at 10:52PM – #6

"Oh, Disney Hall does OK at meeting the sidewalk with some life. Compare it to its Great Aunt the Chandler Pavilion across the street, which sits up on its acropolis like a haughty old empress."

I can second that, Ive been in and around Disney Hall a number of times on my "before work walks" and never have I stepped foot or remembered to check out the Chandler grounds.

Downtown has alot of the "If I cant see it, why go there/didnt know it was there" areas which prevent non locals from venturing and make them leave with a "There is nothing to see or do in Downtown" remark. (Thats where I come in and change that!)

-V

Scott Mercer on January 09, 2008, at 02:12AM – #7

Gehry makes some good points. It was like pulling teeth to get all the money together to build Disney, and it took almost 10 years, from what I remember. People forget about that. Grand Avenue could be delayed due to lack of money.

At least they're tearing down that Tinkertoy garage though. I'd rather have a dirt lot sitting there for years than look at that piece of junk for one more day.

Don't hold your breath for an extra park on Olive. Remember what happened to the supposed park at First and Main? They're building the LAPD HQ there right now. Yes, I know there will be a "pocket park" on 2nd across from the Higgins. A sad compromise if there ever was one, but I guess better than nothing.

John Crandell on January 09, 2008, at 06:50AM – #8

He also commented on the seismic and asbestos problems with the two county buildings. If you remove those two structures, do you also remove the underground parking between them? The trees and the parking are the chief assets. However, you cannnot remove soil on top of as then there is nothing for new plantings. If you add soil, you have to heavilly re-engineer the structure (I'm talking in view of using the entire site as a park). And if the replacement buildings are constructed somewhere else, you have to pay for the land and the parking as well. So it seems quite foolish to totally relandscape the mall and leave the existing buildings as is. What else is possible? What view would there be of the cathedral from Olive with the county buildings removed? I feel that the best solution is to have four new towers replace those two clodhopper structures and when you have those, include a symbolic element on the mall where the fountain now sits, as well as an imaginative pedestrian transition from the mall up and around a symbol to Grand Avenue. I'm thinking of some sort of angelic equivalent to Gehry's horse's head, stairs, curving escalators and waterfalls. The size of the existing trees along the mall is a great asset. It would be a crime if they were removed. People have been obsessed with the mall ever since Calvin Hamilton first opened his mouth about it way back when - and all the while, all of that empty land has remained now for over four decades to the south. Go figure.

Jerard on January 09, 2008, at 09:25AM – #9

"He also commented on the seismic and asbestos problems with the two county buildings. If you remove those two structures, do you also remove the underground parking between them?"

Simple answer, Hell Yes!

The removal of the buildings would have to be done in a very slow and methodical process. If they do a typical demolision of the two buildings it would weaken the support structure for the existing plaza and the parking underneath it as well as expose the asbestos in the air surrounding the park and it's trees making abatement more expensive than the actual park itself.

Let's not forget, the only reason Related put a $50 M down payment on the park is for the PARKING under the park rather than the actual park. If they demolish the buildings they're essentially putting $50 M down the drain.

"What view would there be of the cathedral from Olive with the county buildings removed?"

There will not be much of a view of any of the surrounding areas because of the topography of the area.

If you remove the buildings it would be similiar to the space at the Northwest end- where the Gold Line tracks are fenced in- of the new Cornfield Park. Meaning you're not getting much of a view of any surroundings unless it's minimum 7 to 9 stories in height or you move closer to the center.

In other words it's another bunker/pedestal design the does nothing to create an urban design that has been drawn up.

Juanito on January 09, 2008, at 11:09AM – #10

If you want to know anything regarding 'urban design', read up on what architect Paul Rudolph had to say on the subject. If you want to know anything regarding the topography of Bunker Hill, check out a U.S.G.S. quadrangle map of the area. Walking or driving along Olive Street, one might be able to see a portion of the cathedral if the county buildings were removed.

"In other words it's another bunker/pedestal design the does nothing to create an urban design that has been drawn up."

Clearly, you've been drinking too much cornpone at the cornfield. Four civic towers, each atop ground floor retail would be a perfect urban design solution.

Dennis Smith on January 09, 2008, at 12:28PM – #11

Juanito,

Corn pone is a type of corn bread which would be difficult to drink, even when in disagreement about the future of the Grand Avenue Project. Be careful with those malapropisms even when they are supposed to be country witticisms in an urban blog format.

Juanito on January 09, 2008, at 03:15PM – #12

Smithy, let's see.. Try mixing some corn meal, some pork grease and a lot of pertsovska in a blender and pour into martini glasses for the powers that be at the Related Companies.

Clearly, they are in need of a good laxative regarding Olive Street.

Dennis Smith on January 09, 2008, at 03:34PM – #13

Doctor Juanito,

That recipe for your purgative cocktail demonstrates your mastery of mixed-up mixology and for that I must salute you.

Cheers!

Jerard on January 09, 2008, at 08:25PM – #14

Juanito, If the towers are right on the lots that have been demolished then that would work, but if you are talking about the Related Development across the street then you could only see anything over 7-9 stories in height while you're depressed 2-3 stories down inside the park.

In terms of "urban design" I'm trained and work as a practicing Architect and designer and my colleagues see the same thing in relation to one's focus inside the park.

I apologize if I didn't make that clearer.

John Crandell on January 09, 2008, at 08:58PM – #15

Perhaps the vertical separation between Grand Avenue and the existing fountain at the west end of the county mall is a particular opportunity, far more than the problem that it now is. Could there be something futuristic here, yet contain or have the characteristic whereby this one place becomes indelibly tied with or symbolic of the city? Yes, say goodbye to Hollywood!

Such a place inherently needs to reflect aspiration as well, in the collective sense, a quasi-abstract symbolic object with the hint of angels wings(?), cascading water, stairs and curved escalators - all done up and integrated together to point us all towards the future, a breathtaking composition in futuristing mode what would catch notice the world over.

The novel form of the concert hall perhaps need not serve as ultimate symbol. I propose that Gehry and Halprin would be the duo which could pull it off! Who else? Anyone - another idea? The two county buildings need to be handled, sooner than later.

Mike Palecki on January 09, 2008, at 11:12PM – #16

Last Saturday afternoon during the Concrete Frequency Symposium, Frank Gehry commented,"For reasons I don't know why, I was hired to design the project across the street. I tried to make it an L.A. kind of place and create this layered hillside with landscaping terracing down to Olive Street below. The developer was opposed to connecting the project to Olive Street and the rest of the city". He also quipped,"I wanted to open up the lobby of Disney Hall to Grand Avenue implementing roll-up glass walls like a curtain. However the health department was opposed to my concept of an array of sidewalk cafes, saying it would attract rats". The truth of the matter is, developers and building owners control the programing of spaces around their edifices, with the intent of attracting a certain caliber of pedestrians, while excluding others. One of the most significant gestures of architectural democracy was Gehry's design for the interior of Disney Hall. He wanted the rear wall of the concert hall to be glass and inovated the curved wooden walls to reflect sound and eliminate the need for a solid back wall to ricochet it. Gehry's intent was to entice the common man, who might be intimidated by the "high culture" of classical music, to climb the stairway to the Otis Chandler Sky Walk and be able to look into Disney Hall and hear the music and perhaps one day attend a concert. The L.A. Philharmonic has since negated that design feature with a gray fabric scrim. During the symposium, when architect Greg Lynn commented on the need,"To weave the institution of an orchestra into society" the contradiction was apparent. All around Downtown,if each frontage was woven into the fabric of the city by visionaries instead of power brokers,residents and visitors could interact.

Lindora on January 10, 2008, at 09:38AM – #17

The L.A. Philharmonic has since negated that design feature with a gray fabric scrim.

The scrim for the rear-facing window (called the "kimono" window, because of its shape) always has been a feature incorporated into the hall's design. A similar scrim also rolls over the hall's skylights.

Based on the preference of the hall's user, such as the Philharmonic, I believe they can easily flip a switch and the window and/or skylights either will be exposed or covered over.

Dan in LA on January 12, 2008, at 02:40AM – #18

If you have yet to walk Disney Hall, you are missing one of architectures best moments. By walk, I mean up the stairs and over the top, around sunset, when the clouds are shifting just right... Was it Bowie or Costello that said 'writing about music is like dancing about architecture'? Well let the music critics write, Mr. Gehry's Hall is worth dancing about.

Alex on January 14, 2008, at 03:01PM – #19

At least Gehry has the stones to say publicly what most people in development know--the project is basically dead, at least for a few years, as the credit and liquidity crisis (which is, by the way, only getting started) has almost completely dried up available funds for mega projects such as Grand Ave. (and mortgages for it's potential occupants). Plus, it's becoming clear that Downtown residential is seriously overbuilt and needs a breather.

Whitman Lam on January 14, 2008, at 03:29PM – #20

I don't buy it... just look at LA Live. The Convention Ctr. Hotel was subsidized with tax breaks ... but the rest was funded, and is now being built by private investment. Because the potential is there, the space sells itself.

Why does Grand Ave. have to be any different ? The space should sell itself, if it doesn't, I'm willing to wait another 10 years until someone comes up with an idea that attracts business and enhances the community.

David Kennedy on January 14, 2008, at 04:39PM – #21

"The developer was opposed to connecting the project to Olive Street and the rest of the city."

If this is correct, this project is dead on arrival and it ought to be. If the developer is determined to cut off the project from the rest of the city, I'd be astonished any city officials would sign on to the deal and support the development. Frankly, I'd welcome a sustained pause of years so this project can be done right. Look at the California Plaza just down the street. Does anyone want a reprise of that space? Do we need another 7th & Figueroa or Macy's Plaza?

John Crandell on January 14, 2008, at 05:26PM – #22

The city needs a dynamic complement to Disney Hall on the east side of Grand Avenue. The PROGRAM that Gehry has had to follow just doesn't do it. A different program is what is needed. Would the Related Companies liquidate any of it's holdings in order to construct what they've proposed? Not in Los Angeles; only for a once in a lifetime locale and only in Manhattan. Could they obtain financing from an unconventional source? Such a source would have a fond eye for downtown L.A. On the other hand, might Mr. Broad partner with a local developer and push Related out of the way if it turns out that there will be two or more years of delay on this project? Might he then build his own museum across from the concert hall? He has invested much in Grand Avenue; he won't be around forever and one doubts that he would sit still for an extended delay.

Alex on January 14, 2008, at 09:04PM – #23

All valid points Whitman, it's simply a matter of timing in the financial markets; LA Live was financed at the top of a speculative real estate bubble, and now it's all come crashing down. Major banks are going out with begging bowls to raise money just to avoid going under, let alone financing billion-dollar, somewhat risky developments. It'll all come back around in a few years, more than likely, though it looks like were going into a Japan 1990's-style deep, long recession. In any event most people seem underwhelmed with Related's vision, so all for the best perhaps.

tutsweet on May 11, 2008, at 07:07PM – #24

Unless developers agree to integrate the Project with Olive Street and the rest of Historic Downtown LA, Grand Street Project deserves to be DEAD DEAD DEAD. Not one cent of city subsidies should be invested, not one tax incentive dangled. This project was sold as a stimulus for downtown's revival; cutting it off from downtown turns it into an enclave for tourists. As a downtown loft dweller, I say to Ghery: grow those cajones a few more inches and officially withdraw from the project unless the developers get onboard.

Downtown ain't no Universal City Walk! Sounds a bit like those barbed wire fences jutting out into the Caribbean on Jamaica's resort beaches. No thanks. LA deserves better. Sweeping problems under the rug leads only to poor urban planning and bad design.

David on October 14, 2008, at 12:46PM – #25

I'm glad to see that the old juror parking lot across from the Disney Hall is open for business again!! Its one of my favorite downtown structures. Our civic center will always be neglected and ugly, but its ours and we love it.