Results for “josef van der kar”

@bigcityofdreams: Thank you. I feel like a lot of the people commenting on this have no idea what the Valley looks like 2014, nor do they understand how improving transit to and from the Valley would improve life for the entire city.

The proposed Van Nuys corridor has a more density than the middle section of the Expo line (which mostly runs past warehouses) or the Gold Line extension.

And "they made their bed, let them sleep in it!" is an attitude that ignores the basic fundamentals of city planning, and displays an ignorance of shifting SF Valley demographics.

@bigcityofdreams: However, I do think a Van Nuys/Sepulveda Pass light rail line would be a sound investment (Ventura Blvd. as well, while we’re dreaming.)

I’m a huge proponent of rail transit and in the past I’ve argued that rail is the way to go for the Orange line and I think eventually it will be but I’ve come to the realization that, given the limited funds, we should focus on fighting for rail on future corridors and spend the money on separating the Orange line from the grid on major streets like reseda, balboa, Van nuys, Sepulveda etc building bridges that could later support light rail. If it were up to me and I had unlimited funds I would have rail all actoss the county so that every resident could have access to a line within walking distance but that’s unrealistic.

Van Wyck designed thedecor for the Highline benefit this past June - it was well received

@Chewie: NoHo, Valley Village, Valley Glen, Van Nuys all have population density at or above 14,000 people per square mile. The majority of the rest of the line hovers around 10,000 ppm. To put that in context Walnut Creek CA (one of barts busiest lines) has a population density of 3,200 ppm, Alexandria VA (popular washington metro) has a population density of 3,600 ppm. The communities along the proposed rail lines in The Valley are ripe for a robust commuter rail network and in certain locations urban heavy rail.

Gotta say, having moved from NYC to CHI not too long ago, I welcome this contemporary tip-of-the-hat to Art Deco in the Windy City. I’ve quickly become a Chicago-phile since moving here, and while I love the stark, big-shoulders, Mies van der Rohe inspired (and designed) structures here, it doesn’t hurt to include some NYC-style terraced forms. BUT (and this is a huge "BUT"), the one thing I find completely inappopriate for a 21st century global city is adding 900 parking spaces to an already parking-garage, parking-pedestal, parking-lot saturated downtown for all the SUV-driving "Joneses" to clog up our streets, jack up our air quality, accelerate climate change… etc, etc. It’s beyond ridiculous. I say lose the parking or lose the building altogether.

@lsecommenter: Mies Van Der Rohe made a living creating black boxes. Frankly, I’m bored of boxes, and Jeanne Gang’s aqua, and this upcoming building is a are a welcome respite. Whose your father?

this is so ugly. i live in lakeshore east and aqua is an eyesore. my dad is a notable architect and is disgusted as well. horrific. mies van der rohe is rolling over in his grave!

@pierce
While I agree with much of what you have to say about the ubiquitous Michael Van Valkenburgh landscape work, I couldn’t disagree more about the quality of the existing park at this site. It’s horrid, always has been, an exercise in geometric masturbation which I bet looked really modern and cool as a design drawing, but is positively inhuman in execution. It lacks any element of natural beauty that makes a more traditional park attractive, pleasurable and inviting. Most parks improve with the passage of time as vegetation matures and hard edges soften….not this one. If anything it’s colder and less hospitable today than when it was new, a lot of the original low-level planting having died or been killed off long ago. No one ever lingers or relaxes here because it’s about as inviting as a bare, concrete parking structure (which, of course, is pretty much what it is) …..just walk the dog through and leave. I have no idea what you’re seeing when you claim to see nuance and design which interacts with the city around it. It’s a harsh, foreign object on streets and in a neighborhood (my neighborhood) which desperately just needs a generous infusion of green.

@DTLA Star:
That’s not true. States have tolled federal highways in the past depending on circumstance. The rule of thumb is the federal govt will block any toll that it determines is primarily to fund the state DOT rather than serve the federal goal of improving traffic. This is one for the lawyers to solve but to this layperson it sounds reasonable that a congestion toll would be interpreted in the latter case….

I agree so strongly with @thanks4goingmetro. People think of LA is belonging to this massive land area but really the basin isn’t that different from San Francisco when it comes to natural borders. Don’t forget that in addition the the Santa Monica mountains we have the LA river to the east whose bridges could be tolled as well… the south would certainly be harder but the sprawl almost acts as a barrier that forces people to take the 110 or the blue line anyway….

While I think the congestion tax is certainly a winning idea I could imagine pushback to tolls from people who just purchased homes or moved to locations just on one side of the border – like Boyle heights or sherman oaks. We could allow discounted tolls for people whose address is especially near the new city border. In fact we could (and should) have congestion tolls be dynamic not only with time but by point of origin. Those who have an address within a few miles of the border could pay less than those who commute from mich farther a way…

We have a friend who just purchased a 5 bedroom home in Corona rather than a nice 3 bedroom home in mid city for the same price range… She has one kid and works for the VA hospital in westwood…. thithis is a choice we want to encourage people not to make…

For what’s it’s worth the federal govt is doing its (very small) part. Federal employees who work in westwood and live over 30 miles away were able to get to work user shared commuter vans the hold at least 3 employees. Until a few months ago these vans were payed for (including gas) by the govt. Now the commuters pay a monthly fee for the van pool and are no longer given a free parking spot… Sure it’s still subsidized but it gets them to slightly increase the size if the vanpools and hopefully encourages a few employees not to live 50+ miles from where they work. Progress!