Is it possible for DTLA pop to reach 100k?

[JohnG72]

Originally Posted by buzzkillb

I don't see it happening anymore. We were in one of the lofts and rent was raised through the roof. Going from $2150 to $2500 for $845 sq. ft. 12 month lease or $2800 for month to month lease. The security told us they hadn't seen so many people leave in the couple months before we left. They also did a triple take on what our rent would have been raised to and said we were smart for looking to buy a house and save money. It felt like our floor was becoming vacant, so that turned out to be true. I had also heard others talking in the elevators about other complexes doing the same thing. This is for rent.

Now you add the crazy prices for condos where most HOA's are in the $800+/month for the little 900 sq. ft. studios, and I don't know what type of person would want to live down there. Do people earning that kind of money want to live like that when there are plenty of decent places to have a backyard for much cheaper?

After living down there I just don't think its going to happen yet. City Target and Ralphs are too big pluses though.

May I ask what building that was?

My loft is an interior unit, bringing down the price. Still its 840 sq ft and rents not anywhere close to what you are quoting. In fact, the $2150 rent gets you a corner exterior unit in the 1100sq ft range. $2600 gets you a wonderful 1400 sq ft 2 bedroom unit with view.

I see numerous 750-900 sq ft units in the Medallion, the Santa Fe, the Pacific Electric, the Millano, and all the Barry Shy places at around $1450-1800/mo. Of course usually parking is extra, but the lower end Barry Shy places can be as low as $1200/mo for 900 sq ft(SB Manhatten, SB Main, etc)

In fact, the only places with crazy stratospheric rents I can think of are Pegasus(due to financial district proximity), Roosevelt, Watermark, maybe some of the new places by Staples. I know also that Skyline and Cosmopolitan are trying to jack up their rates crazy, but they aren't going to get it. Someones out of their mind if they'll pay $2K a month for a 1 bedroom apartment in those buildings.

My rent did go up $80 a month on my last lease....they wanted a $200/mo+ increase, but I negotiated it down. If they increase it significantly this time, I will leave, but I'll just move else where.

I do know rent is WAY cheaper than buying after factoring in HOA. A smiliar unit in a nearby building will cost around $650/mo more than I pay in rent after factoring in HOA. They are not rent neutral either as there is simply no way they can get $2200/mo for that unit.

[HarryKerryJr]

Well, downtown office space was at peak capacity in the 1980's when the vast majority of the more recent office towers were constructed. What happened, was the Merger Mania that started in the Reagan years and continued into the 1990's. Every industry went through mergers. However for downtown it was the banks, law firms, accounting firms the eliminated the duplication several floors of office space just a few blocks down. For example, United California Bank, First Interstate Bank, Crocker Bank, Security Pacific Bank, are no more and were merged. I'n sure I am forgetting some others. Each of those banks had their own tower and the building named after them as they were the chief tenants. In fact, take all of the tallest buildings in downtown LA and it was a BANK that was the chief tenant and had their name on the vast majority of the tallest buildings.

Well, I think Wells, CNB, BofA were the only banks who didn't disappear at all and still maintained a presence downtown, but BofA was gobbled by a Carolina bank having since adopted the BofA name, but Wells did the gobbling and never got gobbled. So, a lot of buildings lost HUGE tenants and a lot of people lost their jobs and no longer needed to flood downtown LA. Add to that the mergers of the major and even smaller law firms and accounting firms, two other "industries" who were based downtown along with the banks and oil companies, and you can now get the picture of a much quieter and far less crowded downtown than some time ago. Not nearly the energy and crowds today. It was actually more exciting then with a lot more events for the hordes of office workers during lunch hours. I know that today there is more activity in the eastern portion near Skid Row, although Broadway is DEAD today by comparison to what was then the busiest pedestrian street east of Chicago. Wall to wall people and tons and tons of buses and slow moving, and this is way there is the "Bring Back Broadway" campaign today and a movement to put a street car there because Broadway it what it used to be, but that doesn't even begin to come close to feel back then, and even Chinatown suffered as City Hall and Hall of Administration and other government workers along with those in from the Financial District used to crowd several restaurants at lunch time in Chinatown.

Downtown these days is really quiet by comparison today. In the 80's downtown was too successful for its own good with at least 2 incidents of utter gridlock--and I mean cars and buses sitting still or inching for HOURS--because it just couldn't handle the population heading home. Things had gotten so bad, Mayor Bradley was just about to get his way and ban all truck traffic in the city of Los Angeles during working hours (it sounds unprecedented and beyond the scope today, and it was then, as well) , and it was supported because all of the region was too successful, but the downturn occurred and nixed those plans. Today, it is free and clear through many streets during the evening rush, and I still find that unbelievable today.

The oil (or now referred to as energy) companies went through the same. The current City National Bank tower was actually ARCO Plaza named for the Atlantic Richfield Company (a once great corporation that was known to be among the best companies to work for) as MAJOR tenant, but having since been gobbled by BP. And Unocal (Union 76) left their Crown Hill offices years ago for El Segundo and is now the LA Studio Center. I believe both Unocal and ARCO had a downtown presence going back to the turn of the century.

Well, but the 90's economic downturn, downtown office vacancy was extremely high with huge numbers of floors EMPTY while other parts of the city, mostly the westside, saw very tight vacancies and even growing office demand. From the 90's downturn to just about 5 or 6 years ago for downtown to finally get vacancy rates down to point of optimism, and the opening of some new and good restaurants and even the rehab of Cliftons (was always PACKED, along with most restaurants at lunch time then) are indications that downtown is coming back.

But consider that the growth and new construction downtown isn't office towers but RESIDENTIAL towers. I will say that no matte how incredibly busy and packed downtown was back then (and I mean you have no clue how some streets just didn't move during the evening rush) it was always dead at night. 700,000 people went home for the day. Today, downtown at night is much more active and something like Art Walk was a pipe dream back then, no matter how hard and how much money (tons of CRA give-aways and rehabs of old buildings that could never attract tenants--residential or office) the city spent, they all flopped. They just couldn't get that many people to live downtown. Does anyone remember that theater complex along Spring Street? It had like 4 or 5 stages and produced multiple plays and live performances (I think it was LA Theater Center)? It was a great concept and good facilities and good programming, but they kept draining millions of city dollars (LA really did have that much money to wast back then), and it just couldn't get the numbers to succeed. But I'm glad things are changing for the better in downtown today.

[Kobe25]

Yeah DTLA pop hits maybe half a mil or more in the daytime.

[sdhkshdcny09]

Considering San Diego's downtown will hit 90,000 at build out I'm not sure how LA couldn't achieve 100,000. San Diego also has 500ft height limits due to the adjacent airport. Considering that San Diego is about 1/3 the size of LA and SD Metro is like 1/5 the size of LA metro, I'm not sure how it could be avoided. Eventually LA will urbanize at a faster pace.

San Diego Downtown Population:
2000: 27,000
2010: 37,000
2030: 90,000 (supposedly)

[munchitup]

Originally Posted by sdhkshdcny09

Considering San Diego's downtown will hit 90,000 at build out I'm not sure how LA couldn't achieve 100,000. San Diego also has 500ft height limits due to the adjacent airport. Considering that San Diego is about 1/3 the size of LA and SD Metro is like 1/5 the size of LA metro, I'm not sure how it could be avoided. Eventually LA will urbanize at a faster pace.

San Diego Downtown Population:
2000: 27,000
2010: 37,000
2030: 90,000 (supposedly)

I am pretty sure that at full build out DTLA is entitled to house something like a million residents. That means every lot in the Warehouse District, Skid Row, Arts District, South Park, etc is built to its maximum allowance, etc - in other words never.

I think it is reasonable to expect DTLA to hit 100k residents in the next few decades. If this boom keeps up, the next decade.