If you were a developer/architect of Los Angeles: How would you design Los Angeles (San Francisco: transporting, construction)

[hipcat]

If it was me. I would have took some of the influences from Spanish Colonial Architecture, Victorian architecture, and Mediterranean architecture to emphasize the Mediterranean Climate. It would look something like a mix of San Francisco and Westlake in the core and Santa Barbara on the suburban parts.

And instead of having Downtown LA be in the Northwestern part of the city. I'd move it to where South LA is, and have a dense urban core around 60-70 square miles or so, and the surburban areas would start 10 miles from the core, and have a bit more green space with less density. Which will be serviced by streets cars as a alternative to using a car.

The Los Angeles River would also be in its natural state like this.



The street grid, would be in a plaza style like in Latin American cities. With main streets leading up to the Plaza in the center.

Something like this would be what Downtown Los Angeles would look like.




What would you do if you had the chance to design Los Angeles?

[ccm123]

An effective subway system with stops every 1/4th to 1/3rd of a mile that runs 24/7.

[PDF]

Originally Posted by ccm123

An effective subway system with stops every 1/4th to 1/3rd of a mile that runs 24/7.

Is that even reasonable? That's what NYC is. hipcat's post is a well-thought plan as to how he would design LA. I just don't see how a subway system like that could exist in LA.

[nightlysparrow]

The L.A. River floods easily and has a wide flood plain; that's why it's in a concrete gully.

Every hub street arrangement city I've been in is a driving nightmare: Detroit, Washington D.C., for example.

Just sayin'.

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by ccm123

An effective subway system with stops every 1/4th to 1/3rd of a mile that runs 24/7.

Way too close together. 1/2 mile at the closest.

I've lived in a place with stops that close together. It's miserably tedious.

[ccm123]

Remember, the question is: "how would you design Los Angeles?" It is a hypothetical question.

Design implies that an architect has the opportunity to structure something before things are built. It could exist (hypothetically) if it was factored properly into the city infrastructure. Again, in reality, it won't occur since LA is already built up.

Originally Posted by PDF

Is that even reasonable? That's what NYC is. hipcat's post is a well-thought plan as to how he would design LA. I just don't see how a subway system like that could exist in LA.

[HuntingtonHenry]

I'd demo all the ghettos and build haciendas and villas. Do the coastal areas like a modern Valencia or coastal Lauderdale or Sarasota.

[sdhkshdcny09]

burn down the city and make it a nature preserve. Let's face it, the city is already a total loss to humanity.


Haha, only kidding. I would probably install more Bus Rapid Transit similar to Latin American cities and create larger, regional parks. I would complete redo the industrial areas south/east of downtown. Lastly, I would create 4-5 subway lines, accompanied by 3-4 at-grade light rail and then increase the density allowed in the areas serviced by the major modes of transport.

I'd also make room for that high speed rail to travel straight to Tijuana.

[NickofDiamonds]

Originally Posted by rhanifin

burn down the city and make it a nature preserve. Let's face it, the city is already a total loss to humanity.


Haha, only kidding. I would probably install more Bus Rapid Transit similar to Latin American cities and create larger, regional parks. I would complete redo the industrial areas south/east of downtown. Lastly, I would create 4-5 subway lines, accompanied by 3-4 at-grade light rail and then increase the density allowed in the areas serviced by the major modes of transport.

I'd also make room for that high speed rail to travel straight to Tijuana.

Maybe after the next 9.0 or greater "big one" hits and does the dirty destruction for us !

[DriveNotCommute]

Assuming that the sky's the limit on what we're allowed to do, I would split DTLA into an inner hub and an outer hub.

The inner hub will be well covered by light rail and/or subway. Nearly all of the roads will be smaller, sized for electric golf carts, bicycles, pedestrians with maybe a maximum vehicle size of something like the old Scion xA. Multiple large parking structures will be at the hub's outer border and serve as hubs for transitioning from standard cars into mass transit, mini cars/carts, bikes, auto-driving taxis. A handful of strategically placed full-sized access roads will be left for transporting heavy cargo and construction materials. Inner hub structures should be very tall and dense, typically for residential, supporting goods and services, tourism, arts, and office work like finance and software.

The outer hub would have more conventional infrastructure, with density about what we see in today's DTLA. It will still be served by Metro light rail and subway but contain full-sized streets like what we have. Heavy manufacturing structures can be placed out here, with freer access to transport raw materials and finished goods. Freeways will cut since they can't go directly through the inner hub.