ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- This iconic sports stadium underwent a $315 million renovation, reinforcing its structure and stripping it of the displays that covered its historic structure. Transforming what was old to be new again, here’s a tour of the historic Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.
DLR Group provided architecture, interiors, and planning services.
🟥 SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHANNEL HERE:
/ @dlrgroupdesign
🟥 RESOURCES MENTIONED IN VIDEO:
www.dlrgroup.c...
www.dlrgroup.c...
www.lacoliseum...
Note: some links may be affiliate links to provide a small kickback to support our channel
FIND US AT:
🌍 www.dlrgroup.com/
FOLLOW US ON:
📸 Add us on Instagram: ( / dlr_group )
💭 Add us on Threads: (www.threads.ne...)
💼 Add us on LinkedIn: ( / dlrgroup )
📕 Add us on Facebook: ( / dlrgroup )
🐦 Add us on Twitter: ( / dlrgroup )
#LosAngeles #LosAngelesMemorialColiseum #losangelesmemorialcoliseumphotos #architecture #design
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum looks better than ever
You guys did an admirable job in modernizing the Coliseum while honoring the historic architecture. It remains the Coliseum in every meaningful way.
Not the Colosseum… The Coliseum !!
You must be friends because this is generic work and doesn't match the spirit or the aesthetics of the stadium at all.
There is a reason why they don't show exterior shots, the side South Los Angeles sees. It's as ugly as the signage that they took off.
Huge fail.
Are you kidding me? The seating arrangement was done by a drunk idiot. Dozens of people can't see most of the playing field, with several seats only seeing less than 10% of it. The architect that designed it should never be allowed to work on such project ever again.
@@AtomicSaundersIt's a protected structure. The facade and the original bowl could not be changed. The outside has never been iconic except for the arches and peristyle which were restored during this renovation. It's never looked better. And never been more user friendly. It's a much better stadium to see a game or any other event.
@@joso5554Autocorrect, I detest it.
LA 2028, let's go! Glad they removed all that tacky advertising from the exterior in advance of the Games.
That’s good. I hope it stays that way. It’s the most capitalist conservative brain rot thing to support putting ad screens next to historical buildings and symbols. If conservatives could, the entire Washington DC obelisk and front of the Lincoln Memorial would be covered in LCD screens selling ads
I wonder why the interior designers decided not to create suites and lounges that are esthetically more in keeping with the style of the architecture? Couldn’t they incorporate Art Moderne elements? I know it will cost more but I feel this beautiful historical landmark deserves something that is truly special.
Exactly.
I disagree. The interior designers have chosen many individual design elements you find in both Streamline Moderne and Mid Century Modern. These design styles complement each other because they share a history. In fact, you can argue that MCM is the "newer" version of Streamline Moderne. Both styles emphasize clean lines with limited ornamentation. Also, an emphasis on horizontal lines.
@mrxman581 just stop. It looks awful.
About time
What about a new bar for us regular folks
You get what you pay for. You want a nice bar, then buy a suite.
@@dorothygale1104 "You get what you pay for" What an arrogant statement considering the coliseum was a beautiful piece of Los Angeles history PUBLICALLY owned privatized in a sweetheart deal. The Coliseum Commission was charged with bribery, embezzlement and conflict of interest as well as violating the Brown Act, which stipulates that a meeting regarding the 42-year lease of this PUBLIC property should have been in public; not in secrete behind closed doors. The lease was just another instance of corruption in a series of instances. Just use your favorite search engine to read some snippets of how ugly this whole thing was.
"You get what you pay for" yeah, you also get what you steal. These private amenities are gross and represent a theft from the people of California.
@@AtomicSaunders You seem to conveniently forget that USC paid for the $315 million renovation of the stadium. You also forget that under the previous lease the Coliseum Commission was on the hook for paying $100 million in renovation costs, which they did not have the money to fund and failure to fund the$100M renovation would have put the Coliseum Commission in default under the previous lease. Even if the new lease was for $1/year, the public facility got a $315 million renovation that was paid for by the lessee. Had USC not leased the Coliseum, please inform me what you think the prospects of that facility generating any revenue would be. You are so certain that the lease was a steal, therefore, you must have knowledge about the alternative sources of revenue that could have been generated had the lease with USC not been signed. If such other demand to lease the Coliseum actually existed, USC would be leasing/renting out the Coliseum when they are not using it, but that has not happened because there is no demand by other parties to use the Coliseum. You have it twisted, sister, as the City is fortunate that they have a tenant at the Coliseum who paid for a major $315 million rehab of that facility ad saved the Coliseum Commission from defaulting on the devious lease, which would have allowed USC to walk away from the Coliseum or, at a minimum, put USC in an even stronger negotiating position. Otherwise, the city would have a 90+ year old stadium in need of significant renovation on its hands leading into the 2028 Olympics. Under the new lease to USC, the Coliseum Commission is certainly receiving less revenue compared to the prior lease terms, which is where your analysis conveniently ends. But under the new lease, the Coliseum Commission got out from under a $100 million obligation to fund Coliseum renovation costs, which you conveniently don’t factor in. Additionally, USC ended up funding a $315 million renovation, which far exceeded the Coliseum Commission’s $100 million renovation obligation under the prior lease, which you also conveniently omit from your “steal” analysis.
Lady, don’t even try to call me arrogant when you have the arrogance to spew a false narrative. You are correct that this information is easily obtained via basic web search and you apparently didn’t do such a search to get all the facts….or thought you could get away with spewing an incomplete and misleading narrative.
So, like I originally did,if you want a bar in the cheap seats, then pay for one.
That’s All
@@AtomicSaundersArrogant - Probably the most common one-word description of $¢
@@AtomicSaunders I think it is you who needs to use your search engine and read about the lease deal, as your claims do not match the reality of the revised lease that USC signed (which is, btw, a 98-year lease, not a 42-year lease, but who cares about getting correct facts, right?). Under the previous lease that was in force at the time the new lease was being negotiated, the Coliseum Commission was obligated for no less than $100M in renovations, which the Commission did not have the money to pay. Under the previous lease, if the $100M in renovations were not made by a certain date, the lease would be in default and USC had the right under the lease to: (1) vacate the Coliseum or (2); undertake the renovations at their own expense and then hold the Coliseum Commission liable for repayment with interest. It is because the Commission was faced with being the defaulting party under the previous lease and at risk of losing USC as the sole tenant that negotiations for a new lease were undertaken. Under the new lease USC pays rent of $1.3 million annually and receives all concession revenue and 90% of parking revenue in Commission owned parking lots…..and here is the most important part that you conveniently left out of your rant….USC became obligated to undertake a minimum of $100M in renovations. USC ultimately decide to do far more in renovations to the publicly-owned historic property that you claim was a steal, as USC paid for $315 million in renovations to the Coliseum. So, USC saved the taxpayers of LA at least $100M under the new lease and at worst the taxpayers would be left owning a vacant, tenantless stadium that was built in the 1820’s and unneeded of significant renovation he USC decided to let the previous lease go into default and then vacate. Do you know how much a sports stadium without a tent is worth? Having worked in commercial real estate finance for over 20 years, without a tenant the Coliseum is worth land value less demolition costs (if it could be demolished bd the land sold to a developer). Since the Coliseum has a historical designation and can’t be demolished, the taxpayers would face owning a white elephant if USC had decided to let the Commission default under the previous lease.
As for the corruption you mention, all of that happened before the new lease with USC was caring negotiated and nobody from USC has ever been charged with any crimes at all. If you read the types of things member of the Colesium Commission were charged for illegally receiving, they were things a university wouldn’t typically have direct access to, like SuperBowl tickets. Now, as I recall there was another team that also played at the Coliseumon a temporary basis when those corruption charges made the headlines….rhetorical Rams. I doubt the rams were bribing the Cimmission to give USC sweetheart deal that would obligate USC to pay hundreds of millions in renovation costs ion publicly-owned property.
Lady, before you come at me with claims of arrogance, you would be best served to have correct facts or risk being dragged further down the pavement. Now go clean your scrapes before they get infected.
That’s All.
Fine stadium 👍🏾
I saw what they did with the Olympic stadium in Berlin that is a true renovation we barley did anything, that kept the old Olympic flame added the roof and fix the seating I can’t wait til Europeans say man this stadium still looks like the last time the Olympics were here.
Terrible tower for the rich. Ruining the symmetry and sight lines for hundreds of seats.
Originally it was called in 1932 Olympic Stadium and was open to the public in 1923, at a cost of $1.7 million with a seating capacity of 105,000 up to 125,000 , BUILT FOR THE PUBLIC, not this elitist USC nonsense, and was later designated the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum in honor of the service men killed during World War One. What they have done violates the intent and agreement of the Coliseum as a war memorial. Politicians were purchased in the halls of city government but I guess to save the stadium you must cut deals with the devils of city government. Like putting Starbucks coffee stands through out Arlington National Cemetary. I have one of two souvenirs known to exist of the Coliseum in its original case commemorating the 1932 games. My late grandmother attended the 1932 games, and my mother since deceased attended the 84 games and gave me some special items from the 84 games she attended. 2028 here I come.
european history is a strong subject in california schools
I personally think they screwed up on the suits. They made the mistake of to making this section of suits inward instead of outward. By going inward they eliminated some seats in the stands.
The Colesium doesn’t suffer from a lack of seats even with some seats being eliminated by the new suites. Also, you are not factoring in the seats that are now in the suites. The seats that were used to be in the stands and were eliminated are now inside the suites. So, most of the eliminated seats that were outside of the suites are now in the suites, so there was really minimal seating that was actually eliminated. Lastly, USC is going to make way more on the suites than they made on the seats that were located where the suites are now located. So, they didn’t screw up at all.
The Coliseum is a protected historical structure. You can't permanently changed the outside of the building in any significant way.
@@dorothygale1104 those seats are still available but nobody wants to see have the field also you’re right those seats are available in the suits but that’s not an affordable ticket for a lot of us.
@@mrxman581 by adding the suits is that not changing the structure of a historical stadium? The design in my opinion is not right but that’s just my opinion.
@@mrxman581 Come on guys!!
Not the Colosseum… The Coliseum !!
1) This is basically fancy digs for the RICH fans. 2) Did you take a look at the seats right next to the new digs ? Their view of the field is totally blocked ! Ridiculous
There are tons of seats in front of the suites and on thd other side of the stadium. If those seats have blocked views, they won’t sell or will be discounted. But I doubt the views are actually blocked because each side of the suites is at the 20-yard lines. So the seats younare talking about look right down the 20-yard line.
@@dorothygale1104the view is clearly blocked for the seats to the side of the suites. It is impossible to see one of the end zones.
@@battleford3574Those blocked seats are not sold.
Those blocked seats are not sold.
@@mrxman581 Blocked seats - What were they thinking when they were planning this renovation?
❤❤❤❤❤
I am going to be a volunteer at the 2028 Summer Olympics. I would like to carry the Olympic Torch.
You can carry it on Skid Row
@@ponyclub3198 Dude...
why? the IOC and it's sponsors make a lot of money out of a for-profit event. why would you work for free to fill their already full pockets?
Olympic*
@@wolfiethedog76 I fixed it.
"Premium" as in seating for the posh class and something normal fans will almost never enjoy
Yes , they can watch the Game on their phones . They don't need to be at the stadium .
Where are Lucifer or Bob "Snake" Plissken ? Asked because of earthquake. 😁
I live in Palmdale and they are shipping the homeless up here instead of helping them, just to make them look good for the Olympics. They will spend money on The Coliseum but not help the homeless.
California has spent $24 billion since 2017! Besides this renovation was paid for by USC. Google it before commenting.
add cover roof
A roof is hugely expensive to build, especially as s refit on an old stadium. Besides, there is no need for a roof. Are you predicting a rainy football season?
How the athletes and spectators survive with LA summer heat without ac?
They can't. It's a protected structure. Adding a roof would drastically change the overall architectural design of the Coliseum.
@@mrxman581. Not the Colosseum… The Coliseum !!
@@dorothygale1104 They did it in Berlin on a stadium, which is only 13 years younger and the same size, a roof is essential for such a stadium, in LA it could provide sun protection. The summer heat in California could be unbearable, especially for guests from other countries, who are not used to such intensive sunshine.
Mt USC looks awful.
Everything for the rich.
"nothing for the fan, for premium seating, for suites and clubs" i dont think you know who fans are. there are no fans in premium seating, suites and clubs. those are places for billionaires and companies to buy. the fan is on the common seat under the sun. a renovation that thinks of them would put a roof over everyone's head and improve the common restroom for everybody. also, so tacky! a roman soldier wallpapers!? yikes!
Hmm...nothing outstanding be an olympics stadium.
If I had to watch that crap football team I’d be hunkered down inside a suite drinking too.
USC beat LSU.
They renovated everything except the actual coliseum. Still the ugliest fuckin stadium in the world.
You know nothing about good architectural design. It's a beautiful structure.
What a strange comment.
You have zero taste.