I think it marginally better than the alternative. The developers involved (CIM Group, KOR, Maguire Partners) are not ordinarily inclined to commission decent architecture. Even though in the case of downtown LA it is a marketing stunt, it is still better than the filth spawned by the last round of big development dollars that went into Downtown LA. Apart from the Pei US Bank tower (which also funded the library restoration), I can't think of any building of any consequence that came out of that era.

I agree, Janosh.

Arquitectonica, although not great IMO, has been taking advantage of this high rise craze in Miami (along with a few other locally known architects). Although the bldgs aren't fantastic, they are better than the typical developer alternative. Most of these projects (in Miami, NYC etc) do not represent the best work of the "starchitect" that designed them, but at least they don't suck...

The current high rise housing that is going up is horrible. Basically, instead of "Spanish Revival" it's "Dot Com Modern". I thought everyone learned their lession is San Francisco. I want to like it because it is different than most of the nostalgic crap they put up here, but at the same time I know it is no better because the design of the units and the way the projects address the street are pretty much the same (i.e. parking on sidewalk level).

I don't see this improving with the arrival of the starchitects on the scene either.

that's almost fair, but I would argue that the units and amenities may, in some cases, be more considerate of the end user than their "spanish med" counterparts.

examples to help illuminate?

I think if you look at the Orsini (Geof Palmer, dev.) which is Spanish Med. then look at some of the new loft projects (the one on Grand across from Staples comes to mind, or the new projects on Flower Steet) they only differ in their use of pastiche. My observations (from street level moving at 35 mph in traffic) have been enough to worry me that rather than attempting to bring life to the Downtown area they are no better than most of the post-war housing that has gone up in the city over the past 50 years. There are some that utilize more innovative programatic combinations, but the architectural strategies still seem to lean towards a fortress-like mentality.

Time will tell though. The planning dept. is now allowing developers to build right to the sidewalk if they put shops at street level. I haven't had time to see all the new loft buildings that are going up in downtown, but I'd hope there are some companies that are working that angle.

^more Miami condos etc.

I guess these projects, and others like them, run the gamut from horrible to decent.

this blog has an entry on the "Miami's Manhattanization" complete with tons of renderings of these highrise projects...

the fortress-like mentality is an interesting idea. The Podium housing complexes of Hong Kong come to mind...veritable worlds unto themselves, yet very well linked to city infrastructure.

Well, in LA we certainly have been practicing it for a while now. I think that downtown has a lot of possibility in that it has the potential for the development of the 21st century form of urbanism, which I think is connectivity to other places as opposed to the local neighborhood.

What disgusts me is that most of the mixed use projects in downtown are now taking the form of the Grove (Gruen shopping center in New Urbanist cloak). There is no attempt to re-think the connection of the buildings relationship to not only itself, but the larger city/global village as well.

At least the Miami projects have some funny shapes. Funny shapes go a long way these days.

maybe off the subject but, after the northridge earthquake in 1994, many highrise steel frame buildings were found to have a column to beam welding problems. these buildings, including the ones on bunker hill, were yellow tag danger levels (not to be occupied until fixed), however they were either not fixed or superficially fixed.
anyway to make the long story short, below link of a long article in la weekly explains the situation.
la weekly 9/1999
if you want to go further whats happening now, i suggest to look into;

chinatown
dwindling suburbian market due to long commutes
bunker hill development70/80's
eli broad and his development minded allies
back elevation of caltans
cathedral and disney hall developments
real estate market in los angeles
staples center and convention hall

downtown los angeles about to be tapped heavily by residential real estate development. biggest gamble and arm wrestling yet. hasty and decisive borders, un balanced demographics based planning and misleading glitter sums it up this downtownward ho..
all this hype can go towards el segundo (the sewage treatment capitol of la) if there is a downturn in economy and downtown skyline would be dotted with unfinished rusting steel frames perhaps with faulty welded connections.
i do not know if some of you seen the rusting such frames around westwood thru the 80-90's until they could be finished and sold in profiting prices.
eli broad did tell about his dream to make a seamless high end urban development with civic buildings and cultural centers weaved together from staples center and hollywood freeway to the north, between figurea and broadway, west, east.
borders will be brutal, a near de facto apartheid awaits
i am not a fan of benefactor dreamed/profit driven, politician bending, builder/developer partnered, white art mecca gentrified, polished, signed, sealed and delivered, type of high stakes activities in los angeles, robbing the city of her color favoring short time profits for big investors.

in this case, star architects obtained on the campaign of marketing gurus. as sales gimmicks.

some celebrities are designed


better than others.

I always thought the saying was "Some girls are bigger than others".