Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd like to hear more about what's happening in LA. Glendale, lol. Been awhile since I was there. My dad grew up in Pasadena and we have friends there. I'll always have fond memories of those areas of LA County.
Here are some projects that have been built / under construction / proposed in Glendale:
What people do not realize (myself included) is that Glendale is actually very dense in its core, which is centered around Brand Blvd and Colorado Street. If you drew a circle with a mile radius from that point, Glendale is every bit as dense as Hollywood. Lots of tracts over 30k ppsm and in the flats, none under 10k (there are a few hillside tracts that fall under 10k).
The fact that Glendale is a suburban wasteland was completely unknown to me before I actually moved to Los Angeles and did some exploring. Anyways, the future looks pretty bright for Glendale, I would say it is booming even more than Hollywood.
We are talking about Chicago and Toronto in this thread (i don't know enough about L.A to comment)... and comparitively speaking - the residential and CBD areas or Downtown Toronto are more intertwined and fused than The CBD and residential nabes of Chicago where there is more of a sep..I know - i went to boystown from the loop and remember how far i had to travel...I'm not saying Chicago is as dead as the loop at night as a whole - you just you have to go further away from the centre to find interesting places... if that isn't clear to you than come here and walk around Toronto's DT core and get back to me.. that is all i'm trying to say. Aside from that Chicago's suburban fabric is more appealing than Toronto's.
LA is even worse than Chicago. The downtown is surrounded by a loop of freeways (110, 101, 10, 5). Another problem is that along the western edge of DTLA there is a very steep hill that leads you to City-West and adds an additional barrier between DTLA / City-West / Westlake.
The only saving grace is that the freeways are grade-separate and sunken below street-level. Because of this design there are plans to cap both the 101 and 110 freeways. I think those parks would be huge in creating a more seamless connection between City-West / DTLA across the 110 and El Pueblo / Chinatown / DTLA across the 101.
But for now, it is pretty bad - DTLA feels a bit like an island or a castle surrounded by a moat.
I think it's close enough such that 2023 is up for grabs. If trends stay as they are, then I can see that being the ranking, but for Los Angeles specifically, the area is still getting significant population growth in its most urban parts, a good lot of development is happening in those areas, the urban parts already have a good lot of population density but lack the infrastructure, and those areas are slated for some heavy infrastructure development (by 2023, the Expo line goes all the way to Santa Monica, the Westside Subway Extension is supposed to reach Westwood, the Crenshaw line is supposed to be developed, the Gold Line is supposed to be extended, the Regional Connector is supposed to add four more underground stations along with the possibility of new routes connecting various lines, and the Metrolink commuter rail system is supposed to have through running tracks allowing for higher frequencies and possibly new, longer combined routes). Plus, the weather's nice.
Garcetti just won the mayoral election by a wide margin - think a more business-friendly Villaraigosa clone.... Lets hope he doubles down on transit and liveable street improvements. If so I think these predictions and more could be possible by 2023.
I think there's a lot more high rises than you think in river north, Fitzrovian. Technically a high rise is anything over 115 feet. Since you think west of Wabash breaks down, I'm going to take this as exactly that - west of Wabash. Now, it does thin out, but there's still a NUMBER of high rises:
* 300 N LaSalle | 785 feet
* 330 N Wabash | 695 feet
* Grand Plaza (540 N State) | 641 feet
* 353 N Clark | 624 feet
* Millennium Centre (33 W Ontario) | 610 feet
* Marina City I (300 N State) | 588 feet
* Marina City II (300 N State) | 588 feet
* AMLI River North (401 N Clark) | 543 feet
* 321 N Clark | 510 feet
* Plaza 440 (440 N Wabash) | 480 feet
* The Sterling (345 N LaSalle) | 466 feet
* Kingsbury Plaza (520 N Kingsbury) | 456 feet
* 400 N LaSalle | 454 feet
* Hubbard Place (360 W Hubbard) | 449 feet
* Silver Tower ( 301 W Ohio) | 433 feet
* AMA Building (515 N State) | 427 feet
* The Residences at Grand Plaza (545 N Dearborn) | 420 feet
* The Montgomery (535 W Chicago) | 404 feet
* 505 N State | 380 feet
* Merchandise Mart (222 W Merchandise Mart Plaza) | 340 feet
* Apparel Center (350 N Orleans) | 324 feet
* EnV (161 W Kinzie) | 308 feet
* Superior 110 (110 W Superior) | 308 feet
* Kingsbury on the Park (485 W Erie) | 301 feet
* Asbury Plaza (750 N Dearborn) | 300 feet
* River North Marriott (400 N Dearborn) | 298 feet
* Erie on the Park (500 W Erie) | 292 feet
* Flair Tower (250 W Erie) | 289 feet
* The Grand on Grand (200 W Grand) | 286 feet
* Chicago Hilton Garden Inn River North (10 E Grand) | 284 feet
* River Place on the Park (680 N Larrabee) | 276 feet
* Admiral's Pointe (480 W Ontario) | 271 feet
* 757 N Orleans | 271 feet
* West77 Apartments (77 West Huron) | 265 Feet
* Erie Centre (435 W Erie) | 264 feet
* The Hermitage on Huron (70 W Huron) | 262 feet
* Dearborn Plaza (401 N Dearborn) | 261 feet
* River North Park (320 W Illinois) | 244 feet
* Sixty West Erie | 242 feet
* The Grand Orleans (330 W Grand) | 238 feet
* Westin River North (320 N Dearborn) | 237 feet
* Parc Huron (469 W Huron) | 226 feet
* The Farallon (600 N Dearborn) | 221 feet
* Hotel Sax (333 N Dearborn) | 220 feet
* Two River Place (720 N Larrabee) | 218 feet
* Gallery 400 (440 W Ontario) | 212 feet
* Park Place (600 N Kingsbury) | 207 feet
* 340 W Superior | 205 feet
* 350 N LaSalle | 204 feet
* Tri Hotel (501 N Clark) | 199 feet
* Tokyo Hotel (17 E Ohio) | 199 feet
* The Superior at LaSalle (150 W Superior) | 186 feet
* Godfrey Hotel (127 W Huron) | 183 feet
* Huron Pointe (421 W Huron) | 183 feet
* Boyce Building (510 N Dearborn) | 180 feet
* 451 Huron | 179 feet
* ACME Hotel (15 E Ohio) | 178 feet
* The Contemporaine (516 N Wells) | 164 feet
* Superior West (101 W Superior) | 152 feet
* 630 N Franklin | 148 feet
* Hotel Felix (101 W Huron) | 145 feet
* Hampton Inn & Suites (33 W Illinois) | 142 feet
That is 62 high rises right there west of Wabash and south of about Chicago and bounded by the River. However, there is continuation of this to the north which we are not counting yet which would put it at even more.
Last edited by marothisu; 05-22-2013 at 10:35 AM..
I am sorry marothisu, but having just come back from Chicago (as you know), and walked around the area extensively, I think River North is a mess -- at least as compared to the area east of Wabash. There is a drive-through McDonalds on Chicago before you even hit State. A little further, the surface lot on State and Chicago is obscene. There are stretches of River North where you see surface lots on every block. There is even a suburban style Office Depot with a massive parking lot. There are pockets of River North that are more tidy and plenty of nice condos, to be sure, but it's a hodge podge. It will get better with continuing development but right now it's very much work in progress.
That's cool Fitz, but you're forgetting that I live in Chicago just north of State & Chicago in a high rise on the 25th floor with a view directly into River North. I think I know what I'm talking about. As a matter of fact, I am looking out my bedroom window right now into River North as I type this. I walk many, many streets around there every single day of my life (unless I'm out of town of course). I do agree that it's not as "dense" as east of Wabash with the amount of high rises, but there are still many, many high rises there (see above).
State & Chicago is NOT considered River North for the record, it's general Near North Side right south of the unofficial Gold Coast border. Most of the surface/empty lots are around this area and a little to the West (one lot which was approved for a new 33-35 story rental building last week). There are some lots in River North and there are some low rise buildings, but for the most part, it's not FULL of drive throughs, gas stations, and surface lots.
I hate surface lots and yeah they do exist, but it's not tons and tons of them, at least in River North. A lot of the empty lots are around Chicago avenue, which again is NOT considered River North. And also to the NW of that is where the Cabrini Green projects once stood which were torn down within the last handful of years.
I also do not think urbanity is always measured in how many high rises you have in an area. Parts of Lakeview are very urban in areas where the height of the buildings is never more than probably 50-60 feet.
That's cool Fitz, but you're forgetting that I live in Chicago just north of State & Chicago in a high rise on the 25th floor with a view directly into River North. I think I know what I'm talking about. As a matter of fact, I am looking out my bedroom window right now into River North as I type this. I walk many, many streets around there every single day of my life (unless I'm out of town of course). I do agree that it's not as "dense" as east of Wabash with the amount of high rises, but there are still many, many high rises there (see above).
State & Chicago is NOT considered River North for the record, it's general Near North Side right south of the unofficial Gold Coast border. Most of the surface/empty lots are around this area and a little to the West (one lot which was approved for a new 33-35 story rental building last week). There are some lots in River North and there are some low rise buildings, but for the most part, it's not FULL of drive throughs, gas stations, and surface lots.
I hate surface lots and yeah they do exist, but it's not tons and tons of them, at least in River North. A lot of the empty lots are around Chicago avenue, which again is NOT considered River North. And also to the NW of that is where the Cabrini Green projects once stood which were torn down within the last handful of years.
I also do not think urbanity is always measured in how many high rises you have in an area. Parts of Lakeview are very urban in areas where the height of the buildings is never more than probably 50-60 feet.
I think we both know what we are talking about, but our standards for what constitutes a "mess" may be different. It depends on the context, but if we are using Manhattan or the Loop/Magnificent Mile area as the standard bearers then most of River North is a mess. In fact it's staggering that you could walk 3 or 4 blocks from Michigan Ave and see such a dramatic change in the urban landscape.
And I didn't say its "tons and tons of surface lots". We are not talking about Houston. But there is probably at least 20 (I am guesstimating) in River North, some of them are very large, and they make a big impact on the atmosphere and quality of the urban fabric.
I think we both know what we are talking about, but our standards for what constitutes a "mess" may be different. It depends on the context, but if we are using Manhattan or the Loop/Magnificent Mile area as the standard bearers then most of River North is a mess.
Again, Manhattan and the Loop/Mag Mile aren't similar, and River North is basically the same as the Mag Mile.
The only difference is River North is less central, so there are more lowrises and development sites as you head out further from Michigan Ave. But the built context is essentially the same. River North basically is defined as "the blocks west of Michigan Ave. and north of the River".
There is a similar feel to parts of Manhattan NOW within one small area of Chicago but they are not exactly similar, I agree. It's a small area. I have friends and family visiting from Manhattan all the time say the same thing "This reminds me of Manhattan" but really it's only for a small area.
And I didn't say its "tons and tons of surface lots". We are not talking about Houston. But there is probably at least 20 (I am guesstimating) in River North, some of them are very large, and they make a big impact on the atmosphere and quality of the urban fabric.
Some of the surface lots are there because the people who own them are just...yeah. For example, the huge lot at State & Chicago is owned by the Archdiocese of Chicago. Holy Name Catholic Church is across the street and they pay 0 taxes on it. So really, in the long run, they might make more money off of it than just selling it off (although possibly not).
The parking lot across the street to the north next to the Lawson House YMCA is parking for Loyola University's campus right near there. The other lots though are different. The one at Chicago & LaSalle was owned by the Moody Bible Institute and finally sold to put a 33-35 story high rise on it. The half lot at State & Chestnut is going to be a 35 story rental tower completed by 2015. 212 W Illinois might be back in action soon for a 25+ story building. The lot at Clark & Chestnut might become a Mormon church (well, at least it's better than a surface lot).
Wolf Point on the river is also starting. Groundbreaking for a 525 foot residential tower is supposed to begin on July 31st. The next phases are supposed to be a 70 and 90 story building.
Remember the infill of River North is pretty recent. River North was a sleazy, sleazy area even 25 years ago. In 10-15 years if what is ramping up right now continues, there will be many more high rises in the area and the density of high rises (and ones over say 300 feet) may be denser.
I mean, it's not great but does it really hurt your urban experience to walk past one parking lot and a single drive-thru restaurant??? That lot will probably be filled in within the next five years anyways.
If anything, that part of Chicago looks like a more well developed DTLA. So yeah saying it is like Manhattan is an exaggeration, but it is still pretty premier for the United States and aren't we comparing this to Toronto and Los Angeles anyways?
Next thing you know Philly will weasel its way into this conversation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
