Greater Los Angeles Region: Projects and Developments [Archive] - Page 2

bricky

12-28-2007, 03:02 AM

[/b]
If you mean ChrisLA, or anyone who'd state that many of Paris's older burbs look about as scroungy as many of LA's older burbs, I have to respectfully agree. :(

After looking at the various pics in this thread (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=558849), I didn't see any hood that looked really fugly. Or bad enough that I'd say that a study like this (http://cityplanning.lacity.org/Code_Studies/Other/LincolnCDOSlideshowwebformat.pdf) is as applicable to many hoods or streets in Paris as it is to many hoods in LA.

In my (albeit limited) experience with the bad parts of LA, it's the commercial strips that look the worst. Shitty old strip malls one after the other. But the residential streets that make up the bulk of area don't actually look that bad. I'm just going off of South Central and Compton, which I basically visited as a tourist when I lived in the Westside. The houses there, while not great, where far better and more sightly than what I see in Queens or most of Brooklyn. Everyone had their little houses and their little yards, with large impressive palm trees running down the length of some streets. And if the yards were in bad shape, and the houses rundown... well frankly that's the fault of the residents. It doesn't take much money to pick up the junk on your front lawn, or even to paint the house once in a while in a dry climate like LA.

LA could eventually look much better if zoning regulations were reformed. Allowing or perhaps encouraging parking underground or behind the buildings. Allowing larger buildings on the wide boulevards. Getting some control over signage. Most of LA's built environment problems stem from horrible zoning regulations. One day, perhaps in the next 10-15 years, the powers-that-be (political, media, and other) will wake up and make the changes. Especially as political power shifts ever more to the Latinos, who have to put up with all the disfunctionality in the bad parts of the city.

bricky

12-28-2007, 03:09 AM

Los Angeles is an overwhelming blue collar city whose majority of residents have jobs lifting boxes, filing records or cleaning kitchens. The cityscape clearly reflects the demands of such residents: ugly, uninspired and poorly planned. If the wealth and influence exists as milquetoasts claim it does, LA would attract more movers and shakers and the cityscape as a result would beautify. But that is not what Los Angeles is. edluva is right and all you ahve to do is walk out your front door to find proof. Sorry, but sprinkling a few billionaires here and there on a layer of hollywood glitz does not make a world-class city. HEy I love the city here but I'm not gonna pretend we don't live in an oversized Tulsa by the sea.

Things aren't binary. 1 or 0. Metro LA is not as wealthy as NY or the Bay Area. You have to remember that NY and the Bay Area don't have 5 million or so poorly educated immigrants from rural Mexico and Central America, very often illegal. But nevertheless, there are lots of rich people in metro LA. There must be to support all the luxury shopping, expensive restaurants, and multimillion dollar hillside and coastal homes.

One of the problems with LA, perhaps, is the isolation of the wealthy from from the poor. The Westside was great when I lived there. But when I lived there, I almost never went to the bad parts of town. I suppose I zipped over them on the freeway. Took the wrong exit a few times into what I think were the barrios of East LA, and also did some sightseeing due to "Straight Out of Compton". Well, out of sight, out of mind. If you never come into contact with the bad areas, esconsed in Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Newport Beach, etc, they might as well not exist.

citywatch

12-28-2007, 03:43 AM

HEy I love the city here but I'm not gonna pretend we don't live in an oversized Tulsa by the sea.Most of LA's built environment problems stem from horrible zoning regulations. One day, perhaps in the next 10-15 years, the powers-that-be (political, media, and other) will wake up and make the changes.
And why did things go so wrong, & so far down, in the first place?

Look at Pg 4, the pic & comment, & pg 19, the pic, in particular (http://cityplanning.lacity.org/Code_Studies/Other/LincolnCDOSlideshowwebformat.pdf). I bet no one would have thought such a study was necessary a long time ago. I bet most ppl yrs ago, & even today, would have said, or will say, "no BFD! No BFD!" Or they would have yelled, or will yell, "you're ridiculous!!!"

And so nothing got improved cuz too many ppl either were snoozing, rationalizing away the problem, over intellectualizing the issue, or too busy with life behind their white picket fence to care one way or the other.

yeah215

12-28-2007, 05:28 AM

[/b]I think it's the biggest downer or flaw about LA, to more ppl than not (http://www.travelandleisure.com/afc/2007/category/7). :(

This quote unfortunately sums it up: (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-south13nov13,1,6680033.story)

[/i]
Many ppl in LA complain about being stuck in traffic & not having good transit as an alternative way of getting around. Or some of them gripe about condo bldgs having parking podiums, or being too short, or being next to sidewalks that don't open up to enough stores. Or hoods being too burban & bland. But all of that is made way, way worse by too much of it being filled with, or surrounded or served by scenes not much better than this:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/12/14862611_f3f46d2c83.jpg?v=0
Omar Omar at flickr.com

You are wrong. ;)

Paris suburbs
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Hauts_chatou.jpg/600px-Hauts_chatou.jpg
Picture by frederic masson
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=558849

Actually......

I feel like most LA inner suburbs are covered in apartment buildings that look like this....

And here are some pics of the valley. Probably LA's most famous "suburb". The quotes are because most of the Valley is actually in the city of Los Angeles.

http://www.apartmenthunterz.com/upload/91367/22100erwin/001.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/v3/91/43791/1/44729817.CRW_5699_SanFernando_Valley_Van_Nuys_Boulevard.jpg
http://www.apartmenthunterz.com/upload/e/7/src25.44291883.1.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/60/Woodland_Hills_vista.jpg/275px-Woodland_Hills_vista.jpg

Vangelist

12-28-2007, 06:33 AM

Some of the posts on this thread are not just mind-numbingly stupid, but subtextually racist in their ignorance. As bricky mentioned a while back, Silicon Valley has more wealthy "influential" people by %, and yet it's still suburban; LA's sprawled out geography, zoning regulations and the fact it came-of-age in the automotive era (as all Sunbelt cities did) combined shape its built environment.... not the fact that it houses an unbearable (to some) amount of day-laborer Mexicans.

There isn't really any factor of causation in "adding influential people" + "adding millionaires" = beautiful city! Looking at the list citywatch linked to: hm, is Portland a "world class" city, filled with members of the hoi polloi that "influence the global economy" ? Do you know how retarded it even sounds to discuss whether or not a city is "world class" - as if we're 14 year olds having a pissing match? (Oh wait, what are "urbanity forums for!) And WHY are we comparing LA to Paris? This is all so ridiculous - I feel like I've lost 365094078 million brain cells just reading this thread

Oh and Westside: you shouldn't have edited your post - I saw it. What are you afraid of? Being labeled a non-world class suburbanite? :)

edluva

12-28-2007, 07:07 AM

Vangelist, now you're confusing two different topics and responding to an assertion which never existed. The economic influence argument is a response to ignorant statemnts regarding, and limited to, LA's economy.

That discussion lies completely seperate from my statement regarding citywatch's complaints of central-LA's aesthetics, in which I make the case that what he's really complaining about is lack of investment in the city-core, a symptom of wealth being distributed everywhere *but* the city-center, and not due to fucking telephone poles, or whatever other tired theory he keeps on bringing up. And that the dilapidated state of much of LA is due to poverty, a state that any realist would admit changes in generations, not overnight, and that this reality is often at odds with what is many folks' well-meaning but idealistic desire to see gentrification sweep the city center in some as-yet unseen manner such that the millions of uneducated poor are sipping lattes alongside pastely white-yuppies in gay merriment by the time South Park gets all metro again. My off-the-cuff statement, in other words, was a commentary on the hyprocritical viewpoints held by naive kids like, probably you. But apparently you prefer responding to imaginary arguments which noone on this forum has ever made. I guess it's good to practice talking past people once in awhile.

ps - read up on portland, and other topics, before getting all self-righteously ignorant and juvenile. Reading racist subtext into everything possible is an exercise in existential naivety.

citywatch

12-28-2007, 08:10 AM

That discussion lies completely seperate from my statement regarding citywatch's complaints of central-LA's aesthetics, in which I make the case that what he's really complaining about is lack of investment in the city-core, a symptom of wealth being distributed everywhere *but* the city-center, and not due to fucking telephone poles, or whatever other tired theory he keeps on bringing up.
A problem with lack of investment?! I guess the proper, snotty response should be: No fooling, Sherlock!

And that theory of yours is a bit less tired than the claim that lousy transit----presumably before & after the era of LA's huge network of Red cars-----is a primary reason LA lost so much $$$, & the ppl & businesses that go with it, a long time ago.

My theory----tired or whatever, & yet a fundamental reality (& truth)----is that if more of LA had been properly & nicely developed from the very beginning, the type of ppl who are more picky & discerning about where they live----& who often have more money than the types who couldn't tell the difference between Paris, France & Gardena, Calif-----would've been less likely to flee to the burbs or other cities.

Echo Park

12-28-2007, 03:58 PM

citywatch go away. shoo. scram

sopas ej

12-28-2007, 06:21 PM

This is off-topic, but reading the post above that mentioned the Red Cars, some people have the tendency to romanticize the past without finding out about the reality. My friend's grandmother who is now 84, was born and raised in Los Angeles (which is not common for someone of her generation, most people that age are transplants to LA). She remembers riding the Red Cars, which broke down often, and she remembers getting groped by perverts when the cars got really crowded. She grew up in what would now be called South Los Angeles. My friend and I remarked to her that Pico Blvd through central LA probably used to be really nice, and she burst our bubble when she said "Oh no, that section of Pico was always crappy." We all seem to forget that LA had an influx of conservative and not so sophisticated Okies and people from the South who lived in the working-class sections of LA in the era between the World Wars. But even when my friend's grandmother was young, downtown was THE place to go for heavy duty department store shopping and going to the movies (I feel fortunate to have visited the original Robinsons' department store downtown with its wooden escalators, right before it closed in 1992). She said her family never really went to Hollywood for movies, they always went Downtown. My friend's grandmother also said that the May Company on Wilshire Blvd. (now part of LACMA) was actually considered to be an upper-class store, or at least the upper-class people shopped there, which surprised me, because I remember going there as a child and it was just a run-of-the-mill May Company by then (1970s-80s).

The Pacific Electric Red Car was a privately owned and operated system, something we can't fathom today, being that our public transportation now really is public. The PE went out of business simply because it was no longer making a profit, and people actually started thinking early on that streetcars were a very antiquated, 19th Century way to get around. LA was already a city on wheels by the 1920s, with many people already owning cars, probably more so than any other American city at the time. So it would be incorrect (and a myth) to say that it was the car companies who bought out the PE system and forever got rid of "the best public transportation system in the world." More people just started buying cars because they thought it was a better (and modern) way to get around. You can also say that LA's far-flung sprawling metro area was created by the PE Red Car system and NOT by automobiles, so, there's an irony there; it's true that since Angelenos took to the car very early on that developments were made more accommodating to the car, but it was actually real estate booms and the luring of the PE rails to those developments in the late 1800s, that contributed to LA's sprawl.

sopas ej

12-28-2007, 06:28 PM

Yes it is also a part of the vast and diverse place wich is the suburbs of Paris
In other way most suburbs look like at the picture that I posted than at Clichy sous Bois.

I'm just saying, you shouldn't misrepresent. Not all suburbs of Paris (or Europe, for that matter) are all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows. I remember when I first went to Paris and saw some of the suburbs. I remember seeing graffiti along the freeways and being somehow let down, but at the same time comforted by the fact that it's just not American cities that have graffiti along some of their freeways. European cities have their fair share too.

Minato Ku

12-28-2007, 07:39 PM

Never said the oposite, when I said "you are wrong" it was about the skyscrapers. ;)

bricky

12-28-2007, 07:52 PM

The economic influence argument is a response to ignorant statemnts regarding, and limited to, LA's economy.

I was thinking about something you wrote earlier: that the only way members of the port industry could exercise power would be by going on strike. Obviously power is linked to discretion. The port of LA is a vital and integral part how America's economy operates. But workers in the port industry lack discretion. In the sense that they just do their jobs, unload containers, load trucks... whatever it is people do in port facilities.

But how much real discretion do others have? Think about finance... now there seems to be an industry with discretion and power. Very large amounts of money that get allocated all the time. Billion dollar allocations that often make or break companies, or entire industries. Groups of allocations, which taken together, even break countries (financial crises in Mexico, SE Asia, Argentina, etc). But then again, the port industry "allocates" trillions of dollars worth of goods, without which the global economy would grind to a total halt. What's the perceived difference? Discretion. Short of a strike, what discretion do the ports have? Increased efficiency at ports reduces prices and increases trade. But that's so boring. Not like a banker buying out a company and its thousands of employees with one phone call, a la Wall Street the movie. Much more attractive on a visceral level.

But when you think about it, how much discretion do even bankers have? Financial allocations are based on bankers' calculations of returns. It's the calculations that have "power", not the whims of the bankers. They don't allocate money to one company because they "like" the CEO or the town where the company is based. If they did, they wouldn't last too long in the industry. They allocate capital based on calculations (and they are most often complicated mathematical calculations) about rate of return, risk, variance, etc. Just like I guess port workers calculate how best to move materials.

Lots of things are necessary for the operation of a modern economy. Try running an economy or company without trucking, modern supply chain management (the great unsung productivity enhancer of the past 20 years), computer networks, or even plumbing. I wouldn't say that any of them as industries or services are less important than finance. All are necessary for the operation of the modern economy. Why do so many people give special weight to financiers? Because financiers are thought to have more discretion (aka power)? I guess, if you think "Wall Street" the movie is how the banking industry really works. But more than that, I think it's because financiers very famously make lots of money. They live large, going to expensive restaurants, flying first class, wearing $2,000 suits, etc. Hollywood makes movies about them. Port executives, supply chain managers and even tech workers are nowhere near as glamorous.

Anyway, I don't think the putdowns about LA's economy here have much to do with power or importance, per se. They have to do with prestige and money. Outside of Hollywood (a very special and flakey industry), there aren't very many professional career opportunities in LA, at least compared with NY, London, or even Boston, Washington and SF. There are plenty of rich people in metro LA (I looked at some numbers, and metro LA would be 2nd nationally in the number of millionaires), but they are often self-made, with small companies, in real estate, or Hollywood. Not many in prestige fields like finance, FT 500 management, technology, etc.

If you went to the Ivy League or equivalent schools, LA is not a very good place to start or continue a conventional upper-middle-class career path. That's what bothers some people, I think. The local wealthy are viewed by some as unintellectual, vulgar or low-class. Not like those suave, worldly, intelligent bankers in NY, who do "important" things.

citywatch

12-28-2007, 08:12 PM

citywatch go away. shoo. scramThe level of your debating skills is impressive, echo park. You----& NOT me----did say that LA is "Tulsa by the sea". So, therefore, I guess I can't expect much from ppl who live in "Tulsa"?

My friend and I remarked to her that Pico Blvd through central LA probably used to be really nice, and she burst our bubble when she said "Oh no, that section of Pico was always crappy."

We all seem to forget that LA had an influx of conservative and not so sophisticated Okies and people from the South who lived in the working-class sections of LA in the era between the World Wars.In a few words, that sums it up. Since many of our older hoods originally served ppl like the ones you describe, or were built by ppl like that, we're in the shape we're in today. I'll add that Bunker Hill, originally where LA's $$ crowd lived, started to go downhill over 80 yrs ago. Less surprising cuz there were some cheap bldgs & houses built right next to or around various mansions. IOW, it went into the dumper BEFORE our fwys got congested, BEFORE a lack of good transit became a big issue & problem.

You can also say that LA's far-flung sprawling metro area was created by the PE Red Car system and NOT by automobiles, so, there's an irony there; it's true that since Angelenos took to the car very early on that developments were made more accommodating to the car, but it was actually real estate booms and the luring of the PE rails to those developments in the late 1800s, that contributed to LA's sprawl.I recall someone saying that the BART system in SF, cuz it provided another option for commuters, made it even easier for ppl in the Bay Area to run to the burbs. The reason I mention that is not to diss transit, since LA in particular needs a much better rail system. I mention that to those ppl who think that turning around a hood like DTLA is totally dependent on improving transit.

Or the question is what is more important? Or what comes first? Creating a fantastic rail network in LA or making more of its hoods nice enough for ppl with $$?

Both goals are important----all halfway decent cities have advantages in those 2 areas----but a hood like DT won't move to the next level based on transit. No, the hood will move to the next level based on getting rid of alot more of its various fugly qualities, including gaps & deadzones.

Echo Park

12-28-2007, 08:27 PM

^*gets the broom*

WesTheAngelino

12-29-2007, 02:40 AM

Ok..........sigh...........I said I would never contribute to another LA thread due to endless, pointless, rediculous "debates" like this one, but I feel I have to point out the obvious thing that people are completely forgetting here: children.

For a myriad of reasons (because they're gay, focused to much on urban form and not people, not even thinking about getting married, or simply just too young to think about it) members of this forum simply forget that perhaps the single most driving force that brings people from the cities where they went to college and got their first high paying job and one bedroom apartment to the burbs is because they want their children to have a nice childhood. Cheif among parental concerns are schools and safety (and those two are often the same thing). The current state of LAUSD schools and the lack of affordable, quality private schools (I really haven't researched this, but something tells me that Boston, NYC, Chicago, etc, have a more extensive system of parochial schools and private academies) would a main reason parents would be loath to raise a child here. With homogenous populations (both in terms of race and income) the burbs offer a natural since of security, and the schools are usually (but not always better). It's certainly not impossible to turn this around. But I really think it has less to do with transit, aesthetics, economics, or any other arguments people are using here and far more to do with making a city more practical for parents and their children. After all, don't we want to make a city that people want to STAY in their whole lives rather than just making LA more DINK friendly than it already is?

milquetoast

12-29-2007, 10:40 AM

They live large, going to expensive restaurants, flying first class, wearing $2,000 suits, etc. Hollywood makes movies about them. Port executives, supply chain managers and even tech workers are nowhere near as glamorous.

So you're saying edluva was...influenced by-gasp-Hollywood? It all makes sense now. He saw "Wall Street" a few too many times and has a jones (some might even say a 'Dow' jones) for Michael Douglas! Like many before it and since, just another gift from L. A. to NY. This answers some questions, but not all. By the way, that's naivete'- coincidentally a French word, so I'm going to have to take everything edluva states from now on with an immense grain of salt.:yes:

Camwoz

12-31-2007, 10:14 PM

Triyar Hospitality and Warburg Pincus Launch Joint Venture Targeting Select Service Hotel Development

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Triyar Hospitality announced today that it has launched its first $160 million joint venture with Warburg Pincus Real Estate I, L.P. to acquire and develop select-service hotels in the Western and Southwestern United States. The JV primarily targets the development of select-service hotels such as aloft, Starwood's new select service concept aimed at business travelers. In addition, the JV will consider the acquisition, repositioning and development of lodging assets within other sectors and brands.

"We believe that Starwood has created a unique product that fills a market void between full-service boutique hotels and traditional select-service and limited-service properties," commented Michael Mahoney, Triyar Hospitality's Chief Executive Officer. "Our joint venture with Warburg Pincus will enable us to react quickly to opportunities and build a portfolio of state-of-the-art hotel assets," added Mahoney.

Commenting on the JV, Steven Yari, a Triyar Hospitality founder said: "Warburg Pincus provides Triyar with a long-term partner who shares our opportunistic vision in the select-service hospitality space. This relationship will allow us to deliver quality, technologically-advanced and affordable rooms to business and leisure travelers in select infill markets throughout the Western and Southwestern U.S." Triyar is a partnership of brothers Steven and Shawn Yari and Bob Agahi.

"Triyar has an established track record of successfully acquiring and developing real estate assets across multiple U.S. markets," said Michael Profenius, a Warburg Pincus Managing Director. "We believe our joint venture is well positioned to identify and invest in attractive opportunities in today's current lodging environment."

citywatch

01-03-2008, 02:36 AM

But I really think it has less to do with transit, aesthetics, economics, or any other arguments people are using here and far more to do with making a city more practical for parents and their children. After all, don't we want to make a city that people want to STAY in their whole lives rather than just making LA more DINK friendly than it already is?I'm not sure what you mean by "practical", even more so since the LAUSD is pouring big bucks into new schools in & around DT. And the fact some of the most crowded schools in LA are in the hoods in or near the center of the city indicates that for at least one group of ppl, LA is more than practical enough. Of course, I know you're referring to satisfying the needs of parents & kids who are in the middle & upper class.

So how can more of the families who til now have headed straight to the burbs, or to hoods like SaMo or the Palisades, be persuaded to move to DTLA?

Considering the fact that famous urban settings like SF or NYC, or DT chicago, have traditionally lured alot more young, childless adults, or empty nesters----whose kids have flown the coop----than a typical burban family means that it isn't too realistic to believe that DTLA somehow will be any different. That's even truer cuz DTLA, unlike NYC, SF or chicago, didn't attract anyone with $$ til very recently, much less those couples with 1.4 children, with one on the way.

IOW, the heart of the matter is how does a hood attract anyone who's well educated & likely to be successful in his life & career?

I'll mention again that Bunker Hill started to go to seed over 80 yrs ago, when ppl with $$ in LA first started migrating to other hoods. And so that was in spite of the fact that DTLA has always been greatly loved, long famous for its charm & beauty?

Wright Concept

01-03-2008, 08:48 PM

Ok..........sigh...........I said I would never contribute to another LA thread due to endless, pointless, rediculous "debates" like this one, but I feel I have to point out the obvious thing that people are completely forgetting here: children...
...After all, don't we want to make a city that people want to STAY in their whole lives rather than just making LA more DINK friendly than it already is?

Wes, Amen to that.

This is the key thing that is missing, the children!

I've mentioned that many times on these boards in the 3 years logged in here. (Damn has it really been 3 years?)

The best part about Downtown LA is the fact that it's not the traditional sense of what Downtown is planned or designed around. Sure it had it's headquarters and centers and such but with the new residents moving in provides LA a unique opportunity to kick every other "traditional" city's behind in how to lure families to the city and keep them there. Make the place safe for the kids to play and a person to raise a family.

With LA's Polycentric layout Downtown is merely a figurehead one of many such throughout the city, like Westwood, Hollywood, Mid-Wilshire, Van Nuys Warner Center. What makes Downtown LA's stronger lies in the fact that USC, Loyola Law School, FIDM, Sci-Arc, CSULA, LAC/USC Medical Center and school and UCLA extension (i.e. locations of Higher learning where future white collar workers are going to balance out the blue collar workers that are in the area) are within Downtown's reach and if that isn't a reason to clean-up the streets and to add amenities for a future families to stabilize and strengthen the local economy so that these ideas can spread to East LA, South LA so that their hoods are revived in the process, which in turn strengthens the city.

If that isn't a reason to do it, I don't know what is!:yes:

jlrobe

01-03-2008, 10:34 PM

[/b]I'm not sure what you mean by "practical", even more so since the LAUSD is pouring big bucks into new schools in & around DT. And the fact some of the most crowded schools in LA are in the hoods in or near the center of the city indicates that for at least one group of ppl, LA is more than practical enough. Of course, I know you're referring to satisfying the needs of parents & kids who are in the middle & upper class.

So how can more of the families who til now have headed straight to the burbs, or to hoods like SaMo or the Palisades, be persuaded to move to DTLA?

Considering the fact that famous urban settings like SF or NYC, or DT chicago, have traditionally lured alot more young, childless adults, or empty nesters----whose kids have flown the coop----than a typical burban family means that it isn't too realistic to believe that DTLA somehow will be any different. That's even truer cuz DTLA, unlike NYC, SF or chicago, didn't attract anyone with $$ til very recently, much less those couples with 1.4 children, with one on the way.

IOW, the heart of the matter is how does a hood attract anyone who's well educated & likely to be successful in his life & career?

I'll mention again that Bunker Hill started to go to seed over 80 yrs ago, when ppl with $$ in LA first started migrating to other hoods. And so that was in spite of the fact that DTLA has always been greatly loved, long famous for its charm & beauty?

NYC is a good example. Lets look at 1994. Not a particularly low point or high point in Manhattan's history.

Lower Manhattan's Financial district was largely a business center. Few families, if any families lived there. Only the rich who made 10 million per year lived in the Fidi simply because they had more money than time.

Even Manhattan's coveted Midtown was WAY more of a business center than a neighorhood. Again, VERY few families lived there. The only people who lived their were international power brokers with more money than time.

Hell's kitchen, Chinatown, the lower East side (including the present day East Village) were also home to only POOR families who couldnt go anywhere else. Tribeca, Meat packing, and Chelsea were not known as places to live for families over the long term until around 1990ish. Meat packing is still only a place for the super trendy and VERY few families live their. The Garment district didnt have many middle class families who chose to live there.

All in all, most of Manhattans Midtown and "down"town were NOT intended for families to live there. Very poor people lived there (like South LA or City West). Manhattan north of the park was home to Harlem, and thus only poor people lived there (again like south LA or Pico Union). If it werent for the influx of artists and ultrahip yuppies, most of Manhattan would be occupied by the poor, and not by middle class families.

This is independent of the cost of living in manhattan. People simply did not want to live in many industrial areas (like SoHo, meat packing, garment, etc) of manhattan, and places like East Village,Harlem, lower east side, etc had long been abandoned by the mobile middle class.

the only long standing middle to upper class neighorhoods in all of manhattan since after WWII were the upper west side, upper east side (murray hill), planned communities around kips bay (etc), greenwhich village and a few splashes of intended residential neighorhoods here and there.

I can make the same long discussion about SF's chinatown, Fidi, downtown, SoMa, and mission bay neighorhoods.

People think places like DTSF and Manhattan have always had a strong middle and upper class family population.

That is completely false. Most middle-upper class families in SF live in Richmond, Sunset, Excelsior, Russian Hill, greater Filmore Area, and Cow Hollow. Most of these areas, with the exception of lower filmore, russian hill, and cow hollow, are anything like what most people perceive as super urban SF. These areas are mostly single family homes, low desnity, lots of schools and PTA meetings, just like everywhere else in America.

SoHo doesnt attract families. Mission Bay in Sf doesnt attract familes. Why should downtown LA?

jlrobe

01-03-2008, 10:37 PM

Wes, Amen to that.

This is the key thing that is missing, the children!

I've mentioned that many times on these boards in the 3 years logged in here. (Damn has it really been 3 years?)

The best part about Downtown LA is the fact that it's not the traditional sense of what Downtown is planned or designed around. Sure it had it's headquarters and centers and such but with the new residents moving in provides LA a unique opportunity to kick every other "traditional" city's behind in how to lure families to the city and keep them there. Make the place safe for the kids to play and a person to raise a family.

With LA's Polycentric layout Downtown is merely a figurehead one of many such throughout the city, like Westwood, Hollywood, Mid-Wilshire, Van Nuys Warner Center. What makes Downtown LA's stronger lies in the fact that USC, Loyola Law School, FIDM, Sci-Arc, CSULA, LAC/USC Medical Center and school and UCLA extension (i.e. locations of Higher learning where future white collar workers are going to balance out the blue collar workers that are in the area) are within Downtown's reach and if that isn't a reason to clean-up the streets and to add amenities for a future families to stabilize and strengthen the local economy so that these ideas can spread to East LA, South LA so that their hoods are revived in the process, which in turn strengthens the city.

If that isn't a reason to do it, I don't know what is!:yes:

The only problem with families is blandness. Deep down inside, every mom and dad wants the stabiltiy and listlessness of a suburb. they dont like loud noise, or bohemians, or ultra liberals, or protests, or gay pride parades, or thousands of strangers with foul language and pink hair walking around. They want peace and quiet, sweet neighbors who also have kids, Quiznos, El Torito Grill Platinum Plus, and PTA meetings.

Wright Concept

01-03-2008, 10:50 PM

The only problem with families is blandness. Deep down inside, every mom and dad wants the stabiltiy and listlessness of a suburb. they dont like loud noise, or bohemians, or ultra liberals, or protests, or gay pride parades, or thousands of strangers with foul language and pink hair walking around. They want peace and quiet, sweet neighbors who also have kids, Quiznos, El Torito Grill Platinum Plus, and PTA meetings.

Be careful of that generalization because there are people who are spending loads of $$$$ into new loft developments Downtown who are causing this revitalization are the same who want the "stability and listlessness" you're describing.

Stability could be something as simple as an environment for their kids to go to and explore on their own afterschool and they don't need to be babied something Downtown could provide. Where music practice could be watching a concert at the park or at Chandler Pavillion.

A genuine urban neighborhood, bringing back to LA's roots. Amenities that would be a wonderful selling point to people.

This planning tool is essential for creating amenities like a good park and why some plazas like Pershing Square suck so much because you can't even throw a bloody frisbee there because there are so much going on in the surfaces, changing from grass, to concrete to some terrazzo, back to grass, oops back to concrete. You can break your ankles trying to describe it.

What's to say that these Bohemian, Ultra liberals or gay pride members don't want to raise a family of their own here? With the laws/rights changing this is something cities will have to adapt to and get ready for.

What's difference between these things compared to other cities Downtown's with the same Gap, Borders or other chain stores lining the Main boulevard and we want that as a symbol of success or what we should aim for?

sopas ej

01-05-2008, 01:17 AM

Since many of our older hoods originally served ppl like the ones you describe, or were built by ppl like that, we're in the shape we're in today.

Neighborhoods can change. I don't think it's correct to say that working-class neighborhoods will always stay working-class or will get worse. Look at San Francisco's Castro District. Prior to it becoming a gay ghetto, it was populated by a large working-class population. Gay people started moving in when the established, working-class population of the Castro started moving out in the 1970s and left a vacuum of then-cheap housing. And now of course other areas of SF have been gentrifying; Noe Valley used to be somewhat affordable in the early 1990s, but I hear even that section is now expensive. I've heard even Potrero Hill is starting to gentrify, and I used to always think that Potrero Hill was ghetto.

I'll add that Bunker Hill, originally where LA's $$ crowd lived, started to go downhill over 80 yrs ago. Less surprising cuz there were some cheap bldgs & houses built right next to or around various mansions. IOW, it went into the dumper BEFORE our fwys got congested, BEFORE a lack of good transit became a big issue & problem.

Old Bunker Hill went downhill for a variety reasons; it was no longer fashionable to live in Victorian-style houses, newer subdivisions started sprouting, the rich didn't want to live in a congested, noisy city center...

It's funny how people's attitudes about architecture change. In Pasadena, South Orange Grove Blvd., once known as "Millionaire's Row" in the very early 1900s, fell out of favor among the rich there and they started moving to other neighborhoods, like the Oak Knoll neighborhood. By the 1950s and 1960s, no one cared that there were plans to redevelop the area with "upscale" apartments and that those homes would be demolished, because by that point, most of them were old, dilapidated Victorian mansions. The attitude of saving buildings older than fifty years-old really didn't start until the 1970s/1980s in Pasadena when the horrendous Plaza Pasadena was built. Myself, I used to not like any of the architecture from the 1950s and 1960s, I wouldn't have minded all of those buildings being demolished. But it's only within the last 10 years or so that I started appreciating some buildings built in that period, though I do still find some of them ugly. I can't even imagine being nostaligic or wanting to preserve buildings from the 1970s.

sopas ej

01-05-2008, 01:19 AM

What's to say that these Bohemian, Ultra liberals or gay pride members don't want to raise a family of their own here? With the laws/rights changing this is something cities will have to adapt to and get ready for.

I feel the same way, I would think some parents would WANT their children to be exposed to many different kinds of people and cultures. But maybe that's the exception and not the rule.

citywatch

01-05-2008, 08:45 PM

Old Bunker Hill went downhill for a variety reasons; it was no longer fashionable to live in Victorian-style houses, newer subdivisions started sprouting, the rich didn't want to live in a congested, noisy city center...I think the primary reason was that the hood didn't have enough nice devlpt to begin with. For every impressive Victorian mansion there were alot of small wood framed bldgs or cheap looking apt bldgs.

Another problem with that & other hoods in LA was pointed out by bricky:

In my (albeit limited) experience with the bad parts of LA, it's the commercial strips that look the worst. Shitty old strip malls one after the other. But the residential streets that make up the bulk of area don't actually look that bad.
I can think of hoods that have an OK to even very good mix of housing, block to block, but where in order to get to that hood a person has to drive or wallk through some really fugly main streets. That also was a problem with Bunker hill over 70 yrs ago, assuming it originally was made up of a large mass of very good devlpt, which in actuality it never had.

SantaCruzGuy

01-06-2008, 02:44 AM

Does anyone know any updates on this?! I know it does not directly deal with LA County, but most Angelinos (since we do not have an NFL team) support the SD Chargers since they are the closest NFL team to our region...

By Ronald W. Powell
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

December 16, 2007

The Chargers are huddling with Chula Vista officials to see if they can agree on a site for a new stadium by the end of this month.

Graphic:
Stadium options
in Chula Vista
If they don't, it's not clear what the team will do next. Many believe the Chargers might leave the San Diego region, since they scouted other locations in the county before narrowing the search to Chula Vista.

And despite pressure from some prominent business executives, team officials have ruled out a deal with the city of San Diego – specifically a plan to rebuild at the Qualcomm Stadium site, where the team has played for 40 years.

“The numbers at Qualcomm just don't pencil out today,” said Mark Fabiani, the Chargers' general counsel and spokesman. “Real estate prices have gone down and construction costs have gone up. What's the breakthrough idea that makes that site work?”

In 2002 the team introduced a development plan that would have worked at the Qualcomm site, Fabiani said. The plan included more than 6,000 condominiums, offices, retail space, a hotel and road improvements – all on the 166-acre property. Any profit would have paid for a new $400 million stadium. The team dropped the proposal in 2006.

OVERVIEW

Background: A 19-month search around San Diego County has led the Chargers to two possible sites for a new stadium – both in Chula Vista.

What's changing: Chargers executives are planning to meet with Chula Vista officials this week to discuss the pros and cons of the proposed sites, as well as information the team received from residents in two town hall meetings and several other community forums.

The future: Team executives say they want to choose a site this month. If neither Chula Vista site is selected, the team's future in the county is in doubt because Chargers officials have ruled out a deal with the city of San Diego.
Today a new stadium at the Qualcomm site would cost $1 billion, and the road improvements, which the team previously calculated at $175 million, have more than doubled in cost, he said. The escalating prices of concrete, structural steel and other building materials account for much of the increase. Added to that, the market for condominiums has gone cold, eliminating the underpinnings of the team's strategy for generating revenue.

“I don't know what kind of development you could build (at Qualcomm) to support the kind of debt you would have,” said Fabiani, who is planning to meet with Chula Vista officials this week. “These are huge numbers. It's not theoretical.”

Others, however, are still working to keep the team in San Diego if the South County effort collapses. County Supervisor Dianne Jacob and several San Diego business executives have been pushing for a Qualcomm plan.

Jacob said San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders and Council President Scott Peters have shown no interest in working with the Chargers, but she has not given up on the Qualcomm idea.

“If Chula Vista is no longer an option, I hope the city of San Diego will come to the table,” she said.

Advertisement
San Diego businessman Ted Roth also supports a Qualcomm deal, although he said the Chargers are sincerely considering a move to Chula Vista. But in case the effort comes up empty, he is working to remove what he considers a major roadblock to the team making a U-turn for “the Q” – City Attorney Michael Aguirre.

Team executives have repeatedly blamed Aguirre for sabotaging their Qualcomm plan. Aguirre maintains that the city's previous agreements with the team were bad deals for taxpayers and that he is trying to be fiscally responsible.

“I think you need to listen to what the Chargers are saying,” said Roth, an investment banker and former chairman of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce. “I don't think they can enter into any negotiation involving the city because they think he (Aguirre) will be subversive. He'd find a way to kill anything they'd negotiate.”

Aguirre is up for re-election next year, and Roth said the Chargers issue is one of the reasons he is pushing for his defeat.

But it will take more than Aguirre's ouster to revive a deal in San Diego, Fabiani said.

While the city attorney is a key figure, “the one that counts is the mayor,” Fabiani said. “If the mayor is not pushing for it (a stadium deal), it won't happen.”

Sanders said in 2006 that his priority is mending the city's fractured finances – including the employee's pension system, which has a $1 billion deficit. Since then, Sanders has disengaged from the stadium search.

“I'm not getting involved because I want to give Chula Vista every chance to succeed,” Sanders said.

The Chargers have a lease with the city of San Diego to play at Qualcomm until 2020 but can leave before then. However, a financial clause in the lease is a huge incentive to keep the team here for at least two years.

If the team leaves at the end of the 2009 season, it must pay off the entire debt for the city's 1997 expansion of Qualcomm Stadium, which would total $56.2 million. But if the team leaves after the 2010 season – when the balance will be more than $55 million – it will only have to pay $24 million.

That would leave the city with a debt of more than $30 million, an old stadium, and no National Football League team.

The City Council approved the bond payoff plan in July 2004 when it renegotiated the Chargers' contract to play at Qualcomm Stadium.

Team executives say they aren't looking outside the county. But if they do, a handful of cities, including Los Angeles, San Antonio and Las Vegas, are in the market for a team.

Andrew Zimbalist, who writes extensively on the business of professional sports, said he believes the league's owners want to keep a franchise in the San Diego market. But that doesn't mean they would stop a move.

“If they can find a good city and a good stadium deal, the NFL might allow them to move as long as the team pays a relocation fee,” which can be tens of millions of dollars, said Zimbalist, a professor of economics at Smith College.

Fabiani said the team is focusing on Chula Vista because its elected officials are willing to negotiate. The city also has two sites to choose from – the current South Bay Power Plant on San Diego Bay and a 500-acre vacant parcel on the city's east side.

If the eastern site is chosen for the stadium, a public vote would probably take place in November. The bayfront site is more problematic, since the power plant would have to be demolished first, and there is no set date for that.

San Diego businessman Malin Burnham, who has been part of the group pushing the Qualcomm site, said he believes a joint powers authority should be formed to help fund the stadium. The authority would include the county, the city of San Diego, the Port District, the city of Chula Vista and perhaps other local governments.

County Supervisor Ron Roberts said he supports forming a joint powers authority, which in other cities has imposed car-rental and other taxes to help pay for sports facilities. Roberts said the local authority would decide what form of assistance, if any, should be provided.

Echo Park

01-06-2008, 04:37 AM

Does anyone know any updates on this?! I know it does not directly deal with LA County, but most Angelinos (since we do not have an NFL team) support the SD Chargers since they are the closest NFL team to our region...

As long as L.A. continues to have no realistic prospect on a new stadium, then there will be no existing team coming to L.A., regardless of proximity of the team whether they're nearby like the Charges or far away like New Orleans Saints. Los Angeles needs a new stadium before considering any team. Also I'd contend that "most Angelinos" are Charger fans. After the Raiders, loyalties become quite dispersed among LA residents. I've seen flags on cars here supporting teams as far away as Pittsburgh. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find a Chargers fan here.

jlrobe

01-06-2008, 09:50 AM

Be careful of that generalization because there are people who are spending loads of $$$$ into new loft developments Downtown who are causing this revitalization are the same who want the "stability and listlessness" you're describing.

Stability could be something as simple as an environment for their kids to go to and explore on their own afterschool and they don't need to be babied something Downtown could provide. Where music practice could be watching a concert at the park or at Chandler Pavillion.

A genuine urban neighborhood, bringing back to LA's roots. Amenities that would be a wonderful selling point to people.

This planning tool is essential for creating amenities like a good park and why some plazas like Pershing Square suck so much because you can't even throw a bloody frisbee there because there are so much going on in the surfaces, changing from grass, to concrete to some terrazzo, back to grass, oops back to concrete. You can break your ankles trying to describe it.

What's to say that these Bohemian, Ultra liberals or gay pride members don't want to raise a family of their own here? With the laws/rights changing this is something cities will have to adapt to and get ready for.

What's difference between these things compared to other cities Downtown's with the same Gap, Borders or other chain stores lining the Main boulevard and we want that as a symbol of success or what we should aim for?

You can have parks, schools, day cares, etc. but be careful not to positoin your downtown as a suburb with tall buildings. People who want families typically choose a suburban lifestyle. Even in china, korea, and tokyo, families try very hard to leave the congested and lively urban centers for calmer waters.

It is what it is. That being said, ANY neighorhoods should have some parks and schools and basic services. Although, how many schools for kids do you see in Manhattans Fidi or DTSF?

Wright Concept

01-07-2008, 02:35 AM

You can have parks, schools, day cares, etc. but be careful not to positoin your downtown as a suburb with tall buildings. People who want families typically choose a suburban lifestyle. Even in china, korea, and tokyo, families try very hard to leave the congested and lively urban centers for calmer waters.

It is what it is. That being said, ANY neighorhoods should have some parks and schools and basic services. Although, how many schools for kids do you see in Manhattans Fidi or DTSF?

Hello!!!

It's happening now by the design of those buildings tall residential towers that are nothing more than enclosed suburban style boxes in the air, what do you call the stuff in Westwood and Century City? Certainly not urban and bustling.

BTW in NYC FiDi most of the schools are private there.

LA's Downtown is not like any other cities Downtown and we shouldn't try to emulate that because that would be fitting a square peg in a round hole. Let's treat Downtown as a culturally rich neighborhood as it should be.

Wright Concept

01-24-2008, 05:13 PM

Hello!!!

It's happening now by the design of those buildings tall residential towers that are nothing more than enclosed suburban style boxes in the air, what do you call the stuff in Westwood and Century City? Certainly not urban and bustling.

BTW in NYC FiDi most of the schools are private there.

LA's Downtown is not like any other cities Downtown and we shouldn't try to emulate that because that would be fitting a square peg in a round hole. Let's treat Downtown as a culturally rich neighborhood as it should be.

The Baby Brigade Grows
New Residents Ponder Daycare, Loft Living, and Did We Mention Daycare?
by Kathryn Maese

The other week I got a panicked email from a soon-to-be Downtown resident who was days from closing escrow on his loft when he found out he and his wife were expecting a baby.

They're moving in March to a space near the Historic Core but had to reevaluate what it would mean to live Downtown with a child. They contacted me because of a recent column in which I wrote that my husband and I are also expecting our first baby, and that we too have questions about what will come next.

"This kind of freaked us out because we weren't sure how conducive Downtown is to raising an infant as well as little kids," he wrote. "We haven't moved in yet and had to take a step back in understanding the impact of living Downtown and having a newborn baby.

"We have several close friends that live Downtown and have young children and they make out okay but they all warn us that it may not be ideal, especially as the kids get a bit older," he added. "Any advice or words of wisdom from your time living in Downtown as well as how you are 'baby proofing' your loft and overall experience Downtown?"

Although our baby isn't due until March - actually, that's not so far away anymore - I've become something of a de facto urban baby expert. The funny thing is, I have just as many questions and concerns. My advice to this soon-to-be neighbor was simple, if not overwhelmingly insightful.

"I can understand how you might be freaked out, but it's really a personal decision about how you want to raise your child," I responded. "We have a one-bedroom loft and so we plan to have the crib in our room for quite a while. As the baby gets older, we may have to find another space or else create a bedroom in our living area, which some of our neighbors have done quite nicely."

In terms of preparing for the new arrival, we're soundproofing our bedroom window to cut down some of the noise - it'll cost about $1,200 for peace and quiet. This weekend we're painting the bedroom and getting into nesting mode by ridding the space of clutter and setting up the nursery.

I've scoured every modern baby site where space-age high chairs can cost upwards of $500 and designer cribs start at about $1,000 (with bedding an extra $300). I've got my eye on a minimalist mobile with abstract wooden birds for $150. We recently registered at two baby stores, trying to imagine what we'll need when walking down Broadway or taking the baby to the City Hall farmers market - I decided on the Baby Bjorn carrier and a lightweight European stroller that doesn't take up too much space.

What became clear in the wake of the last column is that a lot of babies are coming Downtown, and that many parents have a lot of questions. A large chunk of the emails I received inquired about daycare options Downtown, namely where to go.

"I read your article this morning and related to it as I'm expecting our first child next year," wrote one reader. "We bought a loft in Downtown, and love living here but have gone through some of the same questions you posed in your article.... Is Downtown child-friendly? I'm wondering about specific daycare centers you referred to in your article. Or at least one to get started with. We're a number of months off, but I just am beginning to case Downtown for baby stuff."

There are a few options I know about within several blocks of my home: Tiny Dots at the Caltrans headquarters; the Ronald Reagan office building; the Joy Picus Learning Center at City Hall; and the La Petite Academy near Chinatown. There are others in Little Tokyo. All of the above are open to the public (though, since baby isn't here yet, I don't know many details). The downside is that, like daycare centers across the city, there can be long waiting lists.

My neighbor takes his baby girl to a daycare across the street, and though he has a list of pros and cons about living Downtown, he and his wife plan to stay put. They're expecting their second child this summer.

"Actually, raising a baby in the city has been a pleasant experience for the past nine months and yes, we do plan on staying in the city for quite some time," he emailed. "Living with a child(ren) is very doable."

I ran into a colleague the other week in a restaurant with her 5-year-old; they live in the Pacific Electric Lofts and are moving into the Roosevelt Lofts in a few months. She told me she takes her son to school on her way to work in Santa Monica, and they commute home together.

As an architect, she has instilled some of her own curiosity about urban planning in her child, who is endlessly fascinated by how "space" in the city works. Downtown is one big playground for him to explore. Still, she'd love to see more primary schools open in the near future.

I'm surprised at the amount of interest people have expressed in raising a child Downtown. I confess I'm no expert on the subject, at least not yet. So it has actually been nice to share my fears, worries, joys and anticipation with others in the same boat.

As I waddle up First Street on my way to work these days, I can't help but wonder what life will really be like with a baby Downtown.

I have 57 more days, give or take, until I find out.

Contact Kathryn Maese at kathryn@downtownnews.com (kathryn@downtownnews.com).

page 5, 1/21/2008
© Los Angeles Downtown News. Reprinting items retrieved from the archives are for personal use only. They may not be reproduced or retransmitted without permission of the Los Angeles Downtown News. If you would like to re-distribute anything from the Los Angeles Downtown News Archives, please call our permissions department at (213) 481-1448.

dragonsky

03-10-2008, 01:40 AM

Federal agency includes funding for Perris Valley Metrolink line

08:19 AM PST on Wednesday, February 6, 2008

By DUANE W. GANG, The Press-Enterprise

A proposed Metrolink extension to Moreno Valley and Perris received a major boost Tuesday when federal officials included $50 million for the project in a budget proposal now before Congress.

The $168 million Perris Valley Line would run 22.7 miles from Riverside to Perris and include as many as seven stations. Advocates of the project say the new line will ease congestion and boost economic development efforts in the region.

"We have been waiting years for this to come down," Perris Mayor Daryl Busch said Tuesday.

Busch, a member of the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Metrolink board, said the proposed line will benefit Perris and the surrounding community.

Others have raised concerns.

Riverside County Supervisor Bob Buster, whose district includes much of the proposed line, instead has favored a special bus lane.

An express bus service would be cheaper and build public-transportation ridership before money is spent on a rail line, Buster said.

He said he also is concerned about the effects the rail line would have on nearby residential areas, particularly around UC Riverside.

The commuter rail line is one of 13 so-called Small Start projects included for possible funding in the Federal Transit Administration's 2009 budget recommendations.

The projects must be less than $250 million and can receive up to $75 million in federal money.

The money still must work its way through Congress. If approved, the Perris Valley Line would receive $50 million in 2009 and another $25 million in 2010.

The rest of the money for the project would come from state aid, local taxes and federal grants.

Sherry E. Little, the transit administration's deputy administrator, said the 13 projects, including the Perris line, are cost-effective ways to reduce congestion.

Construction costs for all 13 projects average $2.8 million per mile, Little said.

"It is a great bargain in terms of ridership and community improvement," she said in a conference call with reporters.

Construction on the Perris Valley Line could begin in 2010. Trains could begin running by 2011, with an estimated 3,400 average weekday boardings and 800 new daily riders, according to the transit administration.

The line would take about$6.5 million a year to operate.

The transit administration in January raised concerns about the cost of the Metrolink extension and urged local officials to control costs.

John Standiford, deputy director of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, said the county might not be able to build all the proposed stations at once and might have to phase them in.

Meanwhile, money for a$164 million, 16.5-mile express bus line connecting the cities of San Bernardino and Loma Linda was not included for funding in the federal budget proposal.

A spokesman for the transit administration said Omnitrans needs to resolve budget and environmental issues before the project could be a candidate for funding.

The bus service, called sbX, was included in the transit administration's small starts project list but was not among those receiving funding in the 2009 fiscal year budget.

Rohan Kuruppu, Omnitrans director of planning, said Tuesday the bus service has been approved by the federal government. He said he expects the project will be listed for funding in next year's budget.

Staff writer Imran Ghori contributed to this report.

http://www.pe.com/imagesdaily/2008/02-06/r_mp_020608_metrolink06_400.jpg

dragonsky

03-16-2008, 07:17 AM

Stretch of Highway 91 to get carpool lane in project that won't start before 2011

08:33 AM PDT on Saturday, March 15, 2008

By DOUG HABERMAN
The Press-Enterprise

RIVERSIDE - Caltrans calls it closing the gap.

The state agency plans to add a carpool lane in either direction on Highway 91 between Adams Street in Riverside and the 60 /91 /215 interchange.

The $240 million project, which will start in 2011 at the earliest, includes replacing several bridges over the freeway as well as adding some new onramps and offramps.

The work will take four years, said project manager Nassim Elias.

Occasional full freeway closures, lane restrictions and detours will be part of the temporary price motorists will pay, Caltrans spokeswoman Terese Lagana said.

Knowing a big stretch of Highway 91 will face traffic delays for four years makes Moreno Valley resident Helen Claire want to avoid driving in the Riverside area altogether.

"I'll probably consider moving," said Claire, 26, as she envisioned the traffic hassle.

She drives through Riverside regularly and wishes the region had a better public transit system so she could have other options, Claire said as she filled up her car at a downtown Riverside gas station.

Carpool Lane Coming

The six miles in question make up the last section of Highway 91 in Riverside County without a carpool lane.

The carpool lane on eastbound 91 now ends near Jefferson Street. Heading west it starts near Mary Street and Brockton Avenue. Caltrans will widen the highway portions needed to complete the lanes.

Between 150,000 and 175,000 cars a day pass through the stretch on average, according to Caltrans traffic counts between the interchange and Adams.

Not all of the stretch needs widening to add the carpool lanes.

Between University and the interchange, for example, only re-striping will be necessary because the 60 /91 /215 interchange project extends that far out and has been built with the carpool lane in mind, said Mark Petrile, the senior Caltrans transportation engineer who is designing the project.

The interchange project is intended to end this spring. The carpool-lane project will:

Replace the bridges that go over the freeway at 14th, Cridge and Ivy streets.

Widen the freeway bridges over Jefferson, Madison and Mary streets and over Arlington and Central avenues.

Build a new offramp to take eastbound traffic to Vine Street east of 14th Street. The offramp will start before 14th Street and go under the new 14th Street bridge.

Build a new 14th Street onramp onto the eastbound 91 that will go over the new offramp.

Build a new onramp to the westbound 91 at 10th Street to replace the existing onramp at 9th and Lime streets. That will give more room than now exists on Lime for vehicles that get stacked up as they wait to get on the freeway.

Build a new 14th Street offramp on the westbound 91 starting farther back than the existing one. It will go over the new 10th Street onramp but will end where it ends now, at Mulberry Street near 14th Street.

The new onramps and offramps are meant to separate vehicles that are exiting and entering the freeway, Petrile said.

Change access to the eastbound 91 from Arlington Avenue for motorists heading east on Arlington. Instead of making a left turn onto the onramp, they will turn right onto Indiana and enter the freeway via a new onramp that will be built at Jane Street, next to the existing Arlington Avenue offramp off the westbound 91.

Eastbound motorists on Indiana will turn left onto the onramp at Jane instead of entering the freeway after crossing Arlington.

Tom Boyd, the city of Riverside's deputy public works director, said these last elements of the project are needed to improve the flow of traffic at the Indiana/Arlington intersection.

"It will make it a lot better," he said.

But a few businesses will have to move, including Feola Automotive Repair, which is at Indiana and Jane where the new onramp will go.

Head mechanic Don Carlile said the 40-year-old shop, in business at that location since 1990, is aware it will have to move for the onramp.

Caltrans hasn't come by with an offer for the property yet, Carlile said. He is hoping to find a new location nearby.

"I want to stay right around here for the customers," Carlile said.

Caltrans has been working closely with the city to come up with a project that will benefit freeway drivers while limiting the temporary and long-term inconveniences to drivers on city streets, Boyd said.

The public won't like the delays and detours the work will cause, but "those things are part of building freeways," he said.

http://www.pe.com//imagesdaily/2008/03-15/carpool15_grf_750.jpg

dragonsky

03-22-2008, 07:34 AM

http://www.aegworldwide.com/img/04_future/ontario_image_long.jpg

Ontario's coming events center a notable addition
OUR VIEW: Professional hockey team and concerts will be a notable addition to Inland Valley leisure and lifestyles
Article Created: 03/18/2008 07:49:12 PM PDT

Local professional hockey moved another step closer when Ontario Reign executives unveiled their new team's logos on Monday.

Reign players will wear the logos on their jerseys when they play at Ontario's coming event center, the Citizens Business Bank Arena, starting Oct. 25.

By then, construction of the new arena will be finished, bringing the Inland Empire its only such sports and entertainment center, not to mention its first pro hockey team.

This is a big deal for Ontario in particular and Inland Valley residents in general.

Hockey fans will have an alternative to driving to Los Angeles or Anaheim, as baseball fans already have in the Rancho Cucamonga Quakes. With gas prices on the rise, that alternative will be particularly welcome; and lower ticket prices compared to Kings or Ducks games offer a more affordable family outing.

The same goes for concerts at the new arena, which will present acts that can attract 10,000 or 11,000 fans.

In Ontario, the arena is already driving high-end development in its vicinity that will improve the city's job picture and tax base.

And fiscally, the city has kept its eye on the ball (or should we say puck?) in the arena deal. The city is paying for the $150 million arena from the proceeds of land parcels around the arena site that it bought years ago and sold off after the price of the real estate skyrocketed.

AEG, which runs the Staples Center in Los Angeles and the Home Depot Center in Carson, will operate Ontario's arena under a deal that guarantees the city $1 million a year plus a cut of profits from events staged there.

That's a pretty good deal, secured by City Manager Greg Devereaux and his staff.

Team owner Barry Kemp, who is also a TV and film producer, joked Monday that it takes a couple of years to get a TV show on the air, maybe four for a film and, it turns out, about 10 for an arena.

It was actually more than a decade ago when Councilman Alan Wapner started pushing the arena idea, and it's been through quite a few twists and turns - different plans, different sites, different team owners, different City Council members.

But the city has stuck with it, secured good partners in Kemp and AEG, and now is on the verge of opening the kind of facility that will have a big, positive impact on the Inland Valley's leisure time and quality of life.

http://www.cbbankarena.com/images/main_img1.jpg

dragonsky

03-23-2008, 04:08 PM

Santa Monica Place Redevelopment

http://www.macerich.com./redevelopments_santamonicapalace.asp
http://www.santamonicaplace.com/

StethJeff

03-23-2008, 11:40 PM

Santa Monica Place Redevelopment

http://www.macerich.com./redevelopments_santamonicapalace.asp
http://www.santamonicaplace.com/

looks good.

imo, santa monica is already a lost-cause in terms of keeping it a clean, protected part of the coastline. along with venice, its essentially a tourist attraction that will be inevitably become over-developed and exploited. personally, im all for that. as long nearby beaches like malibu, the south bay, oc retain their local identities, im totally cool with santa monica/venice becoming waikiki.

maybe not the most popular opinion, but whatever.

dragonsky

03-25-2008, 03:47 AM

California regions battle over housing money
Southern California officials complain Prop. 1C funds should be allocated by population, which would mean less for Northern California.
By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
March 24, 2008

SACRAMENTO -- More than a year after state voters approved a $2.85-billion bond issue for affordable housing, a geographical tug of war has developed over the money, with Southern California's elected officials complaining that their area is getting short shrift.

They say the money from 2006's Proposition 1C should be apportioned based on population. If it were, Southern California would get 61% of the bond measure proceeds, instead of the 48% it received in the first round of funding.

Northern California officials, including Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), who wrote the legislation that put the measure on the ballot, see things differently. With their support, the rules for divvying the money not only reflect a "reasonable geographic distribution of funds" but also require state housing agency officials to consider such factors as the readiness and proximity to commuter rail lines of the projects proposed by developers, cities and counties that are competing for the funds.

So when the first round of money -- about $286 million -- was awarded last year, Southern California ended up receiving less than half of it. Some of the region's proposed projects simply were not as good as those elsewhere, state housing agency officials said.

And things are not likely to change much in the next two rounds, expected in June. For "infill" housing improvements in older neighborhoods, state officials plan to give 45% each to Northern and Southern California after setting aside 10% for the Central Valley. Money from this $240-million pool is to go for street and property improvements.

Southern California is slated to get at least 45% of another pot of money, $95 million to be allocated for housing projects near mass-transit stations and rail lines.

None of this sits well with Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has promised to increase the city's scant supply of affordable housing.

"Southern California is being deprived of its fair share of funding under Prop. 1C despite the fact that this region is home to a majority of the state's population," Villaraigosa said in a recent interview. "The city of Los Angeles expressed serious concern at the state's funding guidelines because they seem to favor Northern California projects."

Protests have poured in from Los Angeles city officials to the state Department of Housing and Community Development, which helped devise the funding formulas and is overseeing distribution of funds.

"We remain steadfast in our assertion that the current allocation . . . is not equitable," Mercedes Marquez, general manager of the Los Angeles Housing Department, wrote in a Feb. 4 letter. She believes Southern California should get at least 55% of the infill housing money.

Most of the complaints have been rejected by state housing officials, who also are under political pressure from legislative leaders in other parts of the state not to give one region too much of the limited pie.

"Los Angeles needs even more than it got," said Assembly Speaker-elect Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles). "But it is a challenge to convince colleagues in the Assembly of that."

When Perata and other legislators drafted the housing bond measure, they did not address how the money would be divided, probably because of concerns that to do so would hamper the measure's chances with voters.

They left it to state housing agency officials to devise a system for distributing the money. The funding formulas were drawn up after talking with housing advocates and politicians throughout California and are based loosely, but not entirely, on population, said Russ Schmunk, assistant deputy director of the agency. One consideration was to ensure that no single part of the state received significantly less than other areas, he said.

Southern California housing experts side with their elected officials. Los Angeles County is the homeless capital of the country, with 80,000 people lacking permanent housing on any given night, and has the largest gap in the state between wages and housing prices, according to Peter Dreier, professor of politics at Occidental College.

"The need is greater here," Dreier said.

But advocates for affordable housing in Northern California said their area has its own housing crisis.

"There needs to be more funding in all parts of the state," said Paul Peninger, policy director of the Non-Profit Housing Assn. of Northern California. He said the state should evaluate the funding formulas after the first rounds of funding to see if any portion of the state was shorted.

There clearly is not enough money to go around. For the $95 million in transit-oriented projects, for example, applications totaled $544 million , including $247 million from Southern California and $297 million from Northern California.

Perata and state housing officials say their guidelines for future awards are flexible enough to meet the needs in Southern California.

And he cautioned that constant battles over the funds could delay the badly needed projects they are meant to build.

"If these bond dollars are going to get caught in formula fights in Sacramento, then they will never be put to work," Perata said. "We owe it to the voters to get this money out the door and projects completed."

"Dollars," he said, "should follow the demand, and priority should be given to projects that are ready to go."

Perata demonstrated the many ways to determine funding by noting that 41% of the applications for the transit-oriented development came from Southern California but that the state still is planning to allocate it 45% of the funding.

"That appears fair," he said. "Let's move on to actually building the necessary affordable housing."

JDRCRASH

03-25-2008, 05:15 PM

looks good.

imo, santa monica is already a lost-cause in terms of keeping it a clean, protected part of the coastline. along with venice, its essentially a tourist attraction that will be inevitably become over-developed and exploited. personally, im all for that. as long nearby beaches like malibu, the south bay, oc retain their local identities, im totally cool with santa monica/venice becoming waikiki.

maybe not the most popular opinion, but whatever.

I agree with that!:D

dragonsky

04-18-2008, 03:20 AM

California subsidy for NFL stadium is blocked
State lawmakers balk at a plan to use tax money to lure a team to a proposed site in the city of Industry.
By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 17, 2008

SACRAMENTO -- Faced with angry opposition from Los Angeles County supervisors, state lawmakers Wednesday sidelined an effort by the city of Industry to get millions of dollars in tax subsidies that could help lure a National Football League team back to the area.

Backed by developer Ed Roski Jr., who wants to build a football stadium on 600 vacant acres he owns in Industry, the city had asked for power to divert $829 million in county property tax revenue from basic government services to subsidize unnamed development projects.

But county officials, complaining that much of the money would come from their already tight budget, blitzed state lawmakers with letters and phone calls demanding that they vote against the proposal.

Minutes before its first hearing, Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), who had gutted an unrelated bill of its contents and replaced it with Industry's bid, pulled the proposal from consideration. Her Senate district includes Industry, home to 804 people.

The bill she changed, SB 1771, originated by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Los Angeles), would initially have provided counseling for homeowners imperiled by the mortgage crisis.

Roski, his firm and employees have contributed more than $1 million in the last five years to California political causes and candidates, including Romero and Padilla.

County Supervisor Gloria Molina, whose district also includes the city, denounced Industry's effort as "an abuse of power," saying that it would use redevelopment money improperly.

"They are not using it to reduce blight," she said. "They are using it to attract a football stadium. . . . Everybody wants an NFL stadium, but I'm not so sure taxpayers should be footing the bill for that."

Molina was joined by county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, the county's lobbyist, firefighters and others in calling state legislators to voice opposition.

"This is a rip-off," Yaroslavsky said in an interview, explaining his message to legislators.

The bill would have allowed the city of Industry's expiring redevelopment program to be extended for another decade while no longer requiring state review or proof that there is still blight.

Romero said her primary reason for carrying the proposal was the city's promise to build hundreds of units of affordable housing, with or without a stadium.

Supporters had hired a team of high-powered lobbyists, including former state legislators, who pitched the legislation as essential to the plan for affordable apartments.

"It would be great to have a football team once again in Los Angeles County, but it wasn't an issue for me in terms of moving the bill forward," Romero said.

The http://Industrycity of Industry is a 2-mile-wide, 14-mile-long strip of land along the 60 Freeway that is home to industrial parks, scrap yards and strip clubs.

Incorporated in 1957, it has a checkered development history.

One of the city's founders spent three years in federal prison for his role in a kickback and bid-rigging scheme. Roski is a major landowner and builder in Industry.

A spokesman for Roski said the site of the proposed NFL stadium is not within a redevelopment project area, and there is no plan to ask for public funds for the project.

That the bill is being supported at the same time the NFL stadium is being proposed is "coincidental in timing and unrelated in purpose," said John Semcken, a vice president of Roski's Majestic Realty.

Semcken said Majestic has large holdings in the redevelopment area, so it supports helping the city with economic development.

Opponents of Romero's bill say there is no more blight in Industry, so it would be improper to divert money from police and fire services to build streets, sewers, traffic lights and other public works that would primarily serve a stadium and provide commercial development to make the area more attractive to the NFL.

City Manager Phil Iriarte said the proposal by Roski's firm calls for private financing of the stadium, and he does not believe that any redevelopment money spent to enhance the area and its streets would be a deciding factor for the NFL.

NFL staff members have visited the Industry site and met with Roski. Though the nation's No. 2 television market has been without an NFL team since 1995, placing a team in the Los Angeles area is not a top priority, league officials say privately.

Roski, chief executive of Majestic Realty, had partnered with billionaire Philip Anschutz to build Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles, and is a minority owner of the Kings hockey team, Lakers basketball team and Staples Center arena.

Backers plan to seek a parliamentary waiver to revive the legislation.

"There are sufficient concerns that have been raised by folks that we obviously pay a great deal of attention to," Romero said.

http://www.latimes.com/media/thumbnails/mapimage/2008-04/37947626-16210754.gif

dragonsky

04-24-2008, 03:49 AM

Steve Lopez:
Rick Caruso shows off his new world in Glendale
The developer gives a tour of his dream of luxurious living and consumptive indulgence -- with a ready-made forest trucked in at night.
April 23, 2008

The invitation arrived in a jewel box with a faux diamond garter around it, or maybe a faux diamond necklace.

"A Return to Glamour," said the platinum, beaux-arts card. In the black velvet case was a sprinkle of artificial rose petals.

Rick Caruso, who is remaking Southern California as a constellation of lifestyle centers anchored by Cheesecake Factories, was inviting me to a black tie affair on May 1 -- the grand opening celebration of the Americana at Brand in Glendale.

Even before I could accept the invitation, Caruso e-mailed me to see if I wanted a sneak preview.

I thought he'd never ask.

Caruso greeted me at the entrance on Brand Boulevard one morning last week as dozens of workers put the finishing touches on his $400-million vision of residential and retail nirvana, a project so fantastical it will -- for better or worse -- transform the center of Glendale and blow the adjacent Galleria mall back into the last century.

Caruso was tan and loose as a Rat Packer at a cocktail party, a man who could not be more comfortable in his own skin. He wore pressed slacks and a sharply cut dress shirt, along with a Swiss coffee-colored hard hat that said "the Americana at Brand" on it, with his name underneath. He handed me a hat of my own, with my name already affixed. In Caruso World, details are everything.

He is, of course, the man who gave birth to the Grove at 3rd and Fairfax, a wildly popular, Disneyesque Main Street of chain stores, dancing water and babes in strollers. Rockwellian nostalgia is blended with Pottery Barn modernity at the Grove, and a Sinatra-and-friends soundtrack brings a little bit of Vegas to the party.

Americana is clearly a first cousin of the Grove, except that it's not just a destination, but an address, with 238 apartments and 100 condos (priced from $700,000 to $2.4 million) built into an upscale village Caruso says he modeled on Madison Avenue in New York and Newbury Street in Boston.

The stores include Barneys New York, Juicy Couture, Anthropologie -- the kind of places that will "redefine" the retail experience in Glendale, my guide explained. A two-car trolley will transport shoppers through an undisturbed dream of consumptive indulgence, a movie-set reality dressed up with an 18-screen theater, dancing fountain and massive outdoor crystal chandelier.

"We're trying to re-create urban living, where it's nice and luxurious," Caruso said as we came upon a European-style entryway to the Marc, an apartment building he said is inspired in part by the Four Seasons Resort in Maui. It has a "Caruso Affiliated" symbol blazed into the ground like a medallion. For the busy professional just home from work, he told me, there will be a concierge to answer every need.

"You'd call the Call Center and they'd say, 'Mr. Lopez, how can I help you?' Let's say you want a steak, a Caesar salad and a bottle of wine.' "

All of that would be delivered to my apartment after a massage at the spa and a quick splash in the lap pool.

"Bottom line -- we're operating like a five-star hotel."

We worked our way up to an apartment with a bird's-eye view of Caruso World. From a broad balcony, we took in a perfectly manicured park -- children's play area included -- called the Green. A full-grown sycamore is one of more than 500 trees on the property. You shut down the freeways at night, Caruso explained, and truck in your ready-made forest.

The gold-leaf statuary includes an 18-foot tall replica of "The Spirit of American Youth" from Omaha Beach in France, commemorating the invasion of Normandy, and atop a domed condo stands lady "America" with sword, wreath and eagle.

"This symbolizes for me a lot of my beliefs as to what this country is about," said Caruso.

What's interesting about Caruso's invitation to me was that he knows I've critiqued the Grove as commercial artifice -- the very antithesis of a serendipitous, organic experience in city living. He knows, too, that what he showed me last week is not my cup of tea, and he even joked about dropping the outdoor chandelier on me depending on the drift of this column.

Traffic will be unbearable, I told him. He sloughed it off, saying he paid $7 million for road improvements that will make it work. We'll see about that.

What I like about Caruso is that he is unabashed and unapologetic.

And judging by his success, more of the world shares his taste than mine.

But here's my question: Where do all these shoppers come from? There isn't an unlimited pool of people who can afford places like Americana on Brand or the Grove. So you have to think they're just luring people away from some other shopping spot, including more authentic cityscapes like Larchmont Village or Montrose's Honolulu Avenue.

Caruso has told me he admires those more organic commercial zones, but he is in a very different business. Caruso builds monuments to Western civilization, and while some might find the Americana at Brand a soul-sapping contrivance of nostalgia and patriotism, the masses will undoubtedly flock there.

The truth is that I occasionally go to the Grove, which my daughter loves (though not as much as we both love the adjacent Farmers Market). I could imagine her running across the Green at the Americana too, as I reluctantly surrender my stuffy inhibition, knowing that with several more mega-projects in the works after this one, soon the matter will be indisputable.

It's Caruso's world, and we just live in it.

dragonsky

07-18-2008, 04:14 AM

Development threatens the funky life of Marina de Rey
The locals -- old-timers who live on their little boats -- have a lot to lose as development encroaches.
By Scott Gold, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
7:46 PM PDT, July 17, 2008

All along, Carla Andrus' life seemed landlocked, literally and figuratively: she was born in Utah, raised in Watts and was scraping by in a tiny apartment near downtown L.A. when, one night, her husband came across a magazine ad for classic wooden boats being built in Marina del Rey. That, he told her -- teak decks, billowed sails -- looked more like the life he'd once fancied for himself.

"Well," she said, "load up the truck," and the words would amount to her salvation.

They moved onto a boat in Marina del Rey, the largest man-made pleasure boat harbor in the world and one of the great assets, and enigmas, of L.A. County's 75-mile coastline. After her divorce, she bought the 22-foot sailboat Seguin for $1,400 -- still the most cash she has ever held in her hands at any one time. As of today, Andrus has lived on a boat for half of her 55 years.

The life is not for everyone, Andrus acknowledges. When she stands up, her head brushes the weathered tarp that is her roof. Her bedroll consumes the entirety of the floor space, and when she lies down, her belongings are all within arm's reach: a tiny alarm clock, a tiny bottle of olive oil, three tiny houseplants. "I know the boat could use a couple things, maybe a little varnish," she said. "But to me, it's heaven."

It is a way of life that is under duress in Marina del Rey, where a building boom has added a layer of turmoil to a timeworn throwback.

More than a dozen development projects worth several billion dollars have been built or proposed -- projects that could add 3,000 apartments, as well as hundreds of hotel rooms and tens of thousands of square feet of restaurant and retail space, to an 800-acre area that has only 8,500 residents to begin with.

The most vocal among them are lined up at the docks and pledging to do battle: "live-aboards" like Andrus, boaters, old-timers alarmed to see their local diner closed to make room for "mixed-use" construction. Most, however, say it would be an oversimplification, even a falsehood, to give them the usual no-growth labels.

Instead, they contend, the trouble is that government regulators have forgotten that the marina was built on public land for public recreation. The county earns rent from the businesses that lease the waterfront -- and, cash-strapped, has become intent on maximizing profit.

The activists say the marina's economy is ballooning, with skyrocketing rents and new rules -- against boats that are small, old and decrepit -- that seemed designed to push out the working class. The funky character of the marina, where salty live-aboards have long rubbed shoulders with yacht owners, is being lost.

They point, for instance, to the area known as Mother's Beach, a popular horseshoe-shaped beach at Admiralty Way and Via Marina.

The beach is popular with locals and visitors, from young mothers who gather regularly and gave the beach its name to families who hold extravagant weekend barbecues replete with exotic ethnic dishes and vases of flowers atop picnic tables.

Developers would like to surround it with hotels, new apartments, restaurants and retail, which would probably push aside picnic tables and parking spaces and effectively turn it, critics argue, into a private beach on public land.

"So you can see that we're not anti-development activists. We're humanists," said Bruce Russell, 79, a retiree who has lived here since 2000. "They could do marvelous things here. But if you just ask the developers what they want -- and you don't ask the people who live here -- what do you think you're going to get?"

Marina del Rey is a cash cow. Everyone agrees on that, if nothing else.

The leases will generate more than $35 million this year, much of which goes into the county's main bank accounts and is used to pay for law enforcement, healthcare programs and the like. That figure could double once the development is complete, and that doesn't even include other revenue, such as hotel bed taxes.

"We've got a 45-year-old asset that should be the crown jewel of the county," said Los Angeles County Supervisor Don Knabe. "We need to pick up the pace."

The county has competing agendas: public recreation and raising as much money as it can from the leases. David O. Levine, president of the Marina del Rey Lessees Assn. and chief of staff to Jerry B. Epstein, a prominent lessee, said both agendas can be pursued at once, "but it requires some common sense."

Levine's company has proposed tearing down the dated 202-unit Del Rey Shores apartments and replacing it with a 544-unit apartment complex, a project that would cost more than $130 million.

In 2001, the company submitted its proposal to extend its lease. After a series of public hearings, the county's Small Craft Harbor Commission and county supervisors voted to negotiate a new lease. Then a design committee had to weigh in. Regional planners held five hearings; their approval was appealed to supervisors, who turned down the appeal after two more hearings.

Then, a nearby condo association sued to block the project. Last month, a judge threw out most of the lawsuit, Levine said, but sent a technical question involving displaced soil back to the county. Earlier this month, supervisors approved an exhaustive process for resolving that issue, including more public hearings and a 45-day public comment period before actual soil analysis could even begin. The condo association could still appeal the dismissal of the rest of the suit.

"We started this," Levine said, "before George Bush was inaugurated."

Don't feel too sorry for them, says Nancy Vernon Marino. She's lived here for 20 years and, like many locals, says it's hard to overstate how much even the already completed development has disrupted lives -- and even the wind.

Marino belongs to a small sailing cooperative and recently tried to pass a test that would enable her to check out a class of sailboat. The test required her to show that she could make delicate enough maneuvers to rescue a passenger who fell overboard.

It required deft maneuvering, but she said she would have been fine if she hadn't taken the test next to the Esprit, a new luxury apartment complex. The complex features Berber carpets and sells itself as "urban, urbane and utterly Westside," but it is so big, Marino said, that it has disrupted the area wind patterns.

"I flunked," Marino said.

Tonight, Andrus will lie down on the floor of the Seguin, wrapped in her sleeping bag under the stars, her head pointed toward the stern.

"From the first day I was here, it was like I was free," Andrus said the other day as she got ready to go to work at an after-school program, where she is an instructor.

She pays $375 a month for the slip. That's about what she can afford on her $12,000 salary. The alternative is scary, she said -- "maybe a cardboard box downtown." But the marina has lost hundreds of slips in recent years and one development is expected to cut in half the number of slips in her little marina.

"If people only knew what was being taken away from them, there would be a riot," she said. "I feel so lucky. And when you have real gratitude, it becomes your responsibility to make sure this opportunity isn't lost forever."

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-07/41075011.jpg

dragonsky

08-13-2008, 02:56 AM

L.A. City Council OKs $18.7 million for Plaza Pacoima
Many consider the $59.2-million shopping center, slated to open in 2010, critical to Pacoima's economic revival. Half the center's permanent jobs are to be set aside for locals.
By Joanna Lin, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 13, 2008

The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved spending $18.7 million to help build a shopping center in Pacoima that many view as key to the working-class neighborhood's economic revival.

The $59.2-million Plaza Pacoima project on Paxton Street next to the 118 Freeway will include a Costco and a Best Buy as well as office, retail and restaurant space on 18 acres.

The shopping center is expected to generate $153 million in revenue over the next 30 years, said Cecilia V. Estolano, chief executive of the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency.

"This is truly a transformative project for Pacoima," Estolano said. "We've transformed a polluted eyesore into a vibrant retail center for a community much in need of retail opportunities."

Councilman Richard Alarcon said the project was worth the money, arguing that no other redevelopment project would have as large an effect in the northeast San Fernando Valley.

"That does not even count the wages and other benefits that will accrue to the community," said Alarcon, whose district includes Pacoima.

Pacoima residents worked with developer Primestor Development Inc. of Beverly Hills and city officials for two years to ensure that the project's 438 construction and 354 permanent jobs provide living wages to local residents, Estolano said.

About 30% of the construction jobs and 50% of the permanent jobs would be guaranteed to local residents, and 10% of all positions would be set aside for at-risk people who typically have barriers to employment, Estolano said. Construction workers would be eligible for a union apprenticeship program that could help lead to employment after Plaza Pacoima is completed, she said.

Plaza Pacoima has received strong support from community members and city officials, who lauded its retail, employment and community improvement benefits.

It will be built on the site of a former Price Pfister faucet manufacturing plant, near a Lowe's home improvement store. Once a contaminated site, the area has been cleaned up and is ready for development, Estolano said.

Construction is scheduled to start in December, and the shopping center is to open in 2010. It will include a parking lot with nearly 900 spaces, as well as more than 500 trees and shaded pedestrian routes.

The project would also contribute $637,000 to the Pacoima Cultural Facility Arts Trust Fund, Estolano said.

dragonsky

09-12-2008, 03:26 AM

Santa Monica Place will gain ocean view in major makeover
The Frank Gehry-designed shopping center will feature a broad plaza surrounded by curving walls that open both to the street and toward the beach.
By Roger Vincent, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
10:21 PM PDT, September 10, 2008

The new incarnation of Santa Monica Place, the Frank Gehry-designed shopping center that is getting a major makeover in downtown Santa Monica, will feature a broad plaza surrounded by curving walls that open both to the street and toward the beach.

With flourishes of curved shining material unwinding from a third-story plaza, the $155-million renovation will allow patrons to see the nearby ocean from its rooftop dining level, according to architectural drawings released Wednesday.

The mall's owners, who mostly demolished the original structure, say that upon completion the new center will differ vastly from its predecessor and sport a Bloomingdale's department store instead of longtime anchor Macy's.

Designed by noted Los Angeles architect Gehry early in his career, the old mall, completed in 1980, had an enclosed suburban-style configuration that was incongruously set in one of the most affluent urban shopping districts in the region.

The existing mall is about a block from the beach but does not allow shoppers to see the ocean or local streets. It was one of many inwardly focused shopping centers built during an era when owners wanted to lure customers into a self-contained bubble where there was little to do but shop.

The center's owner, the Santa Monica-based shopping center chain Macerich, launched the renovation in January. The new center, which was designed by the Jerde Partnership, is intended to connect with Third Street Promenad

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-09/42273755.jpg

LosAngelesBeauty

09-12-2008, 10:06 AM

^ It looks FANTASTIC! I can't wait until it opens next year!

LAsam

09-12-2008, 05:29 PM

JDRCRASH

09-15-2008, 02:37 AM

^
Not if traffic advocates have anything to bitch about it...

StethJeff

09-15-2008, 04:32 AM

Agreed, this is a project I'm very excited about. I'm hoping that between this, The Grove, and Westfield Century City's recent upgrades, the Beverly Center will get enough pressure on it to upgrade it's dated building and interior. Not to mention Fox Hills is currently renovating as well...

How is the Beverly Center supposed to improve its exterior? That thing is a fortress. All I can imagine is tearing it down. :shrug:

Wright Concept

09-20-2008, 12:08 AM

http://www.physorg.com/news140796824.html

South L.A. sees big shifts but continues to struggle, report shows
By Letisia Marquez, General Science / Other

A new report on South Los Angeles by the UCLA School of Public Affairs indicates that the area, once mostly African American, now has a Latino majority and continues to experience fewer employment opportunities, higher poverty and more violent crime than the rest of Los Angeles County.
"The State of South L.A." also details the growth of charter schools in the area and cautions that the current mortgage foreclosure crisis could hit South L.A. especially hard.

The report is the first major effort to assess the state of South L.A. — an area that covers about 60 square miles and is home to approximately 885,000 people — since 1993, when UCLA researchers issued a similar report. The current report covers such key areas as demographics, public safety, education, housing and employment.

Geographically, South L.A. is roughly bounded by Interstate 10, La Cienega Boulevard, Alameda Street and Interstate 105. Its residents constitute 10 percent of the total population of Los Angeles County.

"South Los Angeles has changed in many ways, and the most noticeable is in terms of its ethnic and racial composition," said the report's principal author, Paul Ong, a UCLA professor of urban planning, social welfare and Asian American studies. "What was once known as a predominately African American area is now majority Latino, although the African American community remains an important force in South Los Angeles."
"At the same time," he added, "South Los Angeles has not changed, particularly in terms of being economically disadvantaged."

The 1969 poverty rate for South Los Angeles, for example, was twice as high as the rate for Los Angeles County as a whole, Ong said. The same was true in 1989 and again in 2006, the report found.

"Despite calls for improvement after the 1965 riots and the 1992 unrest, South Los Angeles remains on the margins of the region's economy,"Ong said.
The area's demographic shift has been significant, with the Hispanic/Latino population now twice as large as it was in 1990. Based on the latest available census figures, the report notes that while in 1990 47 percent of South L.A. residents were Hispanic/Latino and 47 percent were African American, by 2006 62 percent were Hispanic/Latino and 31 percent were African American. However, African Americans continue to be the most highly overrepresented racial or ethnic group, with about three times more blacks living in South L.A. than in Los Angeles County overall.

The report also reveals that South Los Angeles is "highly job-poor" with only about 0.5 jobs per worker, compared with 1.1 jobs per worker in Los Angeles County.

"This creates a difficult situation for residents of South Los Angeles," Ong said. "Many South Los Angeles residents must travel out of the area to find employment, and the cost of transportation creates an extra burden for them."

South L.A.'s poverty rate, 30 percent, was twice the overall county rate in 2006. And while the percentage of children living below the poverty line fell from 41 percent in 2000 to 32 percent in 2006, the 2006 rate was still higher than the overall county rate of 27 percent.
"The observed lower socioeconomic status of South L.A. residents is related, in part, to the community's economic disadvantage in the labor market," Ong said.

Relative to Los Angeles County, South Los Angeles shows lower educational attainment, with twice as many residents — 43 percent — lacking a high school diploma, the report found. Eleven percent have a bachelor's degree or higher.

Property crime in South L.A. has fallen since 1996. The estimated number of property offenses in 1996 was 42.4 crimes per 1,000 people. By 2006, the rate had dropped to 26.3, closely mirroring the county rate.
The violent-crime rate, however, was twice as high as the county's in 2006, with approximately 15 violent crimes per 1,000 people. Young African American and Latino males were more affected by violent crimes than other groups.

The report shows that homeownership rates vary widely within South L.A., although the community has an overall rate lower than the county's. A little more than one-third of area households were homeowners in 2000, compared with 48 percent in Los Angeles County.
Between 2000 and 2007, home values in South L.A. rose faster than in other areas of the county.

"This is a trend that could not be sustained, leaving some homeowners at risk for foreclosure," Ong said. "Currently, South L.A. has a higher default and foreclosure rate than for the county, indicating that the foreclosure crisis will likely escalate."

The report also found that California's charter school movement has flourished in South L.A., which has a disproportionately large share of the county's charter schools and students. Of the 51 charter elementary schools operating in the county during the 2007–08 school year, 16 were in South L.A., the researchers noted, and these schools accounted for 23 percent of the county's charter elementary school enrollment.

Yet South L.A. Hispanic/Latino elementary school children were much less likely to attend charter schools than African Americans, despite representing a major portion of the area's population. Sixty percent of the area's charter elementary school children were African American, while approximately 37 percent were Hispanic/Latino.

Charter elementary schools in South L.A. are significantly outperforming their local traditional elementary school counterparts, with a weighted Academic Performance Index base average score of 736, compared with 673 for traditional schools. Still, API scores for all elementary schools in South L.A. are lower than for elementary schools throughout the county.

"The State of South L.A." can be found at http://www.spa.ucla.edu/pdf/State of South LA - Final Report1.pdf .

LosAngelesBeauty

09-25-2008, 08:26 AM

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-mall25-2008sep25,0,4757492.story
From the Los Angeles Time

REAL ESTATE

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-09/42551133.jpg
Los Angeles developers Jerry Snyder, left, and partner Michael Wise are trying to build Southern California’s first vertical shopping center despite conventional wisdom that such a project would not succeed.

Developers have high hopes for vertical mall in L.A.
The seven-story project by developers Jerry Snyder and Michael Wise would open in 2011 on a Wilshire Boulevard site.
By Roger Vincent
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 25, 2008

Imagine Hong Kong, or Seoul, or the crowded L.A. envisioned in futuristic movies.

Languid sprawl has been replaced by density all around: High-rise apartments have supplanted bungalows, and shopping centers go up instead of out.

Not here, you say?

As urban planners push for ever-increasing density in Southern California, one of the region's biggest real estate developers is preparing to build Southern California's first vertical shopping mall on Wilshire Boulevard. :tup:

Shopping centers that rise several stories are a staple in Asia, Europe and a few tightly packed American cities but have been shunned in the past by builders in land-rich Southern California. Customers here are accustomed to malls that spread horizontally and have balked at traveling up and down more than a floor or two for casual shopping.

Now, Los Angeles developer Jerry Snyder and his J.H. Snyder Co. partner Michael Wise are planning to break with local tradition and put up a seven-story mall near the Red Line station at Wilshire Boulevard and Vermont Avenue that would house perhaps 100 stores under rooftop restaurants and a cinema complex in 300,000 square feet.

Urban planners are ready to embrace the idea, saying it's all part of the verticalization of L.A. -- the push from city officials and others toward building high-rise condominium and apartment buildings near public transit lines, along with equally dense job centers and shopping districts.

"The days of being able to continuously expand outward are gone," said Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, a professor in the UCLA Department of Urban Planning. Rising suburban land costs, traffic congestion and the price of gasoline are discouraging further sprawl, she said.

Already, Snyder has won the conditional support of Herb Wesson, the neighborhood's city councilman. The city's top urban planner, Gail Goldberg, said L.A. was ready for a vertical mall.

Snyder and his architect, Boston-based Howard Elkus, say they hope to create a city landmark on par with the former Bullocks Wilshire department store or the Wiltern Theater -- a new architectural attraction near those classics that would attract tourists as well as local shoppers.

But can a high-rise mall succeed in L.A.?

The conventional wisdom says no. Several local real estate professionals expressed surprise that anyone would even try it, saying that people here are used to going to a big, rambling mall with a huge surface parking lot and looking for a parking space close to the store that they want to visit first.

But Snyder says he can do it. :tup:

"I'm a mad optimist," said Snyder, who bought the property at the southeast corner of the intersection after another developer scratched plans for a large-scale condominium project there as the housing market cooled.

Well aware of the proclivities of local shoppers, he plans to accommodate patrons' desire to leave their cars near where they plan to shop by putting parking on every floor but the top.

The 78-year-old is one of the region's most active developers. He has been building major commercial projects in Southern California for decades and has about $1 billion worth of development under construction or in planning stages, including the $300-million NoHo Commons apartment, retail and office complex in North Hollywood. Snyder also built the $51-million outdoor mall called the River in Rancho Mirage and the $170-million Bella Terra shopping center in Huntington Beach.

He hopes to begin work on the $200-million vertical mall next year and finish by 2011. Financing is lined up, Snyder said, although there remains a chance that the current financial market turmoil could affect his lenders.

"L.A. hasn't got this kind of venue, but why shouldn't it?" said Elkus, whose Boston-based firm designed the five-story retail galleria at Time Warner Center in New York and Pacific Place in downtown Seattle, also a five-level mall, along with the Grove in Los Angeles and Americana at Brand in Glendale.

Los Angeles has filled out to the point where it needs to grow up instead of out, he said, and a site next to a subway station on the city's best-known boulevard is the kind of place to do it. :)

The neighborhood itself is already very dense -- about 1.3 million people live within five miles. And with its large Korean American population, Snyder hopes there will be a built-in comfort level with the idea of a seven-story mall.

Crucial to its success would be a design that kept shoppers flowing easily from floor to floor. One of L.A.'s tallest malls, the four-story Hollywood & Highland Center, was widely shunned when it opened in 2001 in part because people found it difficult to navigate. The developer sold it at a loss of hundreds of millions of dollars, and the new owners have labored to make it easier to get around inside.

Elkus' design calls for a dramatic interior atrium under a large skylight with a seven-story waterfall, glass rails and glass bridges to enhance a sense of openness and make stores easily visible. He hopes the attraction of open-air rooftop dining will encourage people to keep heading up. "In Seattle we couldn't use the roof," Elkus said. "Southern California is a garden world, and we want to celebrate that."

Although the mall is in the Koreatown area, it will not be Korean-themed. And unlike the Grove, which is closed to surrounding streets, this mall would include shops that open directly to the sidewalk in an effort to encourage foot traffic in the vicinity.

Such elements would be in keeping with the city's plans for the area -- and key to winning approval from local officials.

"Vertical malls are absolutely great as long as they activate the street and don't deaden it," Planning Director Goldberg said. "We're looking for designs that support street activity."

The Planning Department will also evaluate whether to allow Snyder to drop plans for the housing that the previous developer was going to put up on the site, Goldberg said.

But some transit-oriented developments have suffered because there has been only housing and no shops or job centers nearby, and Goldberg allowed that retail might be important for the site.

"We want to create lively spaces around transit stations," she said. "You need a good mix of uses to do that."

Councilman Wesson, who represents Wilshire Center, said he tentatively supported the project. "There are going to be hiccups and hurdles" to overcome in the planning process, but "conceptually I love the idea," he said. "Snyder does good work."

Vertical centers are nevertheless a gamble and need to be carefully planned to pay off, experts said.

It's more costly to build tall structures than low ones, so owners need to risk more money to get started and then charge stores higher-than-average rents to recoup construction costs, said retail analyst Greg Gotthardt of Alvarez & Marsal.

The stores, in turn, need customers to be able to find them, Gotthardt said, and L.A. shoppers aren't used to going high and low to match a new sweater and necklace. "It's certainly going to take a change in shopping habits and the right tenant mix," Gotthardt said. "The concept is untested in this market."

Longtime shopping center developer Randy Brant of Macerich Co. said that after hearing about the success of vertical malls in Asia he visited examples in Singapore, Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in recent years but wasn't won over. "When I got above the third floor, I discovered high vacancy rates and non-retail uses like dentists' offices," said Brant, whose company owns several regional malls including Westside Pavilion in Los Angeles and Santa Monica Place. "It was obvious that traffic was off and the landlords were getting lower rents" upstairs.

Then again, Brant said, other developers laughed when his then-partners opened the Beverly Center in Los Angeles in 1982 because it was perched on top of a parking garage and critics thought customers wouldn't travel up to shop.

They did, of course, and still do.

"Everyone thought it was crazy," Brant said, "but that was because we only knew how to build horizontally in cornfields."

roger.vincent@latimes.com

StethJeff

09-29-2008, 02:59 AM

Villaraigosa to unveil L.A. housing plan

The mayor will propose a $5-billion, five-year effort to build homes for the poor and middle class. But some wonder whether it is feasible.

By Jessica Garrison, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 28, 2008

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Monday will unveil a $5-billion, five-year plan to build housing for the poor and middle class. The blueprint, which calls for thousands of new homes along subway and bus lines, and developments with people of all incomes living together, would, according to the mayor's deputies, alter the look and feel of the city forever.

But the plan, which many City Council members and business and housing groups said they had not yet seen, is being released while the housing market is a shambles, the state is facing a massive budget shortfall and the economy is teetering -- challenges that lead some to wonder whether it is feasible.

"I know that budgets are tight . . . credit is almost nonexistent," Villaraigosa said Saturday to a room full of community and labor groups pushing for more affordable housing. "But we're going to reject the cynics . . . and build a brighter future for those kids who are in the corner over there."

The mayor got a standing ovation at the union hall near downtown Los Angeles, and chants of "Si, se puede" ("Yes, we can") from the dozens of people in matching red T-shirts in his audience.

Others were more skeptical when they were presented with the broad brush strokes of the plan. Some developers object to a so-called mixed-income provision that would require affordable housing to be included in new housing developments. They say that such a policy -- which labor and housing groups have been pushing for years -- would cast a pall over entrepreneurial efforts.

"We will work with the mayor, but the policy as it stands now does not work," said Carol Schatz, chief executive of the Central City Assn., a business group that represents many of the city's developers.

"It is going to make housing less affordable for everybody," said downtown activist Brady Westwater.

On the other hand, community and labor groups, key players in the city's politics, are lobbying hard for the so-called mixed-income plan.

"We need a new solution," Donna Rodriguez said Saturday. The account manager, who lives in Silver Lake, said she makes $42,000 a year and spends half of her take-home pay on the $1,150 rent for her one-bedroom apartment. "Look," she said, waving copies of her paycheck and rent checks to illustrate the problem. She added that she shares a bed with her 8-year-old daughter, Lily.

"I want bunk beds," Lily chimed in as her mother smoothed her hair and told her to tell members of the media that she wanted her own bedroom.

Other elements of the plan, such as preserving existing affordable units and building near transit centers, are things the city already has pledged to do.

Housing has become an increasingly pressing political issue in Los Angeles. Last month, the Los Angeles Business Council released a report saying that the high cost of housing, especially in places like the Westside, "threatens the region's continued economic growth."

Los Angeles was designated the least affordable metropolitan area in the country last year, according to the Business Council report, because so many people pay so much of their incomes for housing. The city also has the largest homeless population in the nation. In addition, although private developers have built many high-end apartment units and condos over the last few years, there has not been a similar increase for households earning less than $75,000 per year.

"We do not produce what we need to produce. We just don't," said Helmi Hisserich, deputy mayor for housing and economic development policy.

Under the mayor's plan, the city would pledge $200 million a year for five years from various sources, including the city's Housing Authority, its affordable housing trust fund and its Community Redevelopment Agency, to build affordable housing.

Most, if not all, of that money would have been used for housing already, but by setting out a comprehensive plan the city hopes to use its money more efficiently and to be more competitive in winning grants, tax credits and bond funds from government and private sources. In all, the plan depends on raising an additional $4 billion over five years.

Villaraigosa acknowledged that in the current climate of economic uncertainty, some of the money the city is counting on may not come through, but he said he was confident other sources might open up. Federal dollars may flow to the city because of the foreclosure crisis, for example. He said he "sat down with three economists yesterday" and they assured him the plan was sound.

The city already has one big financial commitment from Enterprise Community Partners, a nonprofit that finances affordable housing across the country and has pledged $700 million over the next five years to Los Angeles to finance affordable housing projects here and to provide matching funds to attract additional private investment -- a crucial role in today's tight credit environment.

Other elements of the mayor's plan include:

* A "Sustainable Communities Initiative" to encourage the development of 20 pedestrian-oriented, mixed-income neighborhoods along the Gold Line in East Los Angeles and the Exposition Line in South Los Angeles.

* Building 2,200 units of permanent supportive housing to get homeless people off the streets and provide them with mental healthcare, drug treatment and other rehabilitation services, as well as making more Section 8 rental assistance vouchers available for homeless people.

* Redeveloping the Jordan Downs housing project in Watts into a mixed-income housing development with some units for very poor people and some units of market-rate housing. Already, the city has purchased 21 acres adjacent to Jordan Downs.

* Buying and rehabilitating foreclosed homes and turning them into affordable housing. On Friday, the federal government announced that the city was getting $33 million for that purpose.

* Preserving existing affordable housing by taking an inventory of all the affordable, rent-controlled and Section 8-eligible units in the city and finding ways to keep them affordable.

dragonsky

11-13-2008, 02:54 AM

Ambitious mall project moving ahead in Century City
Westfield is pursuing an $800-million development that would move Bloomingdale's, add retail and office space, and replace a Westside landmark with a 49-story tower.
By Martha Groves, The Los Angeles Times
November 12, 2008

Unlike some cash-strapped competitors in the shopping center business, Westfield has nearly $7 billion in the bank and can't wait to start knocking down buildings and digging dirt for an ambitious expansion of its Century City mall.

The $800-million project entails relocating Bloomingdale's, adding retail and office space, razing one of the original twin "Gateway" buildings designed by Welton Becket and replacing it with a 49-story tower with 262 apartments or condos.

Despite a boom in high-rise development in Century City that has surrounding neighborhood groups on high alert, the mall expansion has experienced remarkably smooth sailing for a proposal of its size.

On Thursday, the city Planning Commission is expected to approve the Australian company's environmental impact report, paving the way for passage by the City Council. The project has the backing of Councilman Jack Weiss, who represents Century City and has received more than $8,000 in contributions from Westfield executives for his city attorney campaign.

Westfield has also been a big donor to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, giving him $100,000 for his committee to take over the school district and $50,000 for his 2007 U.S. Conference of Mayors, held in Century City.

The Westfield project reflects a new direction in Century City's core, which for decades featured mostly offices and hotels but is now creating hundreds of upscale residences. Westfield says the mall expansion would add to the "live, work, shop and play" vibe.

Neighborhood groups contend that the project is too big and too tall and will produce too much traffic. But traffic isn't their only concern. They say the development will further strain already inadequate services, from police and fire to schools, libraries and electric and water utilities.

"We have a huge project and no corresponding infrastructure to go with it," said David Tyrone Vahedi, an attorney who is running for City Council in District 5, which includes Century City. "When they're selling these condo units for $3 million, do they tell these people that there's very little police protection? That there's traffic congestion and so few officers that response time is unacceptable?"

For years, Century City and environs have experienced an almost unrivaled building boom. Century City in particular has been a hotbed of construction, with projects including 2000 Avenue of the Stars (which replaced the ABC Entertainment Center) and Westfield's $170-million first-phase redo of the outdoor shopping center, including a rooftop dining deck, enlarged movie theaters and, most recently, a parking system that directs patrons to available spaces (green light overhead) and away from occupied spaces (red light overhead).

Also underway is Related Cos.' 39-story condo tower at the site of the former St. Regis Hotel on Avenue of the Stars. Down the street at the corner of Constellation Boulevard, JMB Realty Corp. of Chicago plans three condo towers.

In nearby Beverly Hills, the Montage resort hotel is scheduled to open this month. And the Beverly Hilton is hoping that a final vote count on Measure H will allow it to proceed with a 12-story Waldorf-Astoria hotel and two luxury condo towers.

Some residents say that the accumulation of projects will inevitably exacerbate traffic problems. Westfield's environmental impact report concluded that the expansion would indeed worsen traffic.

"People are saying, 'We can't take any more density until we have the ability to offer [transit] alternatives,' " said Barbara Broide, president of the Westwood South of Santa Monica Homeowners Assn. "We are hoping that the council district office, the Planning Commission and the City Council all realize that a project of this magnitude can't be built as proposed unless some strong investments are made in the community."

Westfield executives counter that urban density beats sprawl. The company plans to encourage other Century City businesses to participate in a shuttle program for the area's 40,000 employees, and it envisions adding a station to link up with a proposed "Subway to the Sea" or another Metro mass transit program.

"This sort of development will lead to a much better and much more integrated Century City," said Peter Lowy, Westfield's co-chief executive, who heads the company's U.S. operations.

By demolishing two high-rise office towers, he added, Westfield will be reducing peak-hour traffic. (The other structure is the Houlihan Lokey office building on Century Park West, which will be replaced with a five-story parking structure with a rooftop parking level and two existing below-ground levels. The project calls for adding 1,899 spaces, for a total of 4,529 spaces for retail, office and residential.)

Lowy said the company is eager to establish a proper retail frontage on Avenue of the Stars and Santa Monica Boulevard, which would be accomplished in part by relocating Bloomingdale's from the mall's core to the new tower on the avenue.

Westfield acknowledges that it is negotiating with a coalition of neighborhood groups, which are urging the company to contribute funds that could be parceled out to police, fire, schools and other community services. As of Tuesday, no settlement had been reached.

Then there's 1801 Avenue of the Stars, one of the twin glass-and-aluminum gateway buildings featured in the 1961 Century City master plan developed by Welton Becket & Associates. After the 1957 repeal of the city's 150-foot building height limit, Century City was conceived as a high-rise satellite commercial center. The full plan, for a pedestrian-friendly, beautifully landscaped zone, was never realized.

In a Nov. 4 letter, the Los Angeles Conservancy urged the Planning Commission to consider alternatives to demolition. But Westfield contends that it would be impossible to convert the building to condos and build a transit station.

"I think there's a lot that's good about this project," Weiss said. "At this point in time, with this economy, it would be public policy malpractice to tell someone who wants to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in your community to go take a hike," he said.

Groves is a Times staff writer.

http://www.latimes.com/media/mapimage/2008-11/43322344.gif

dragonsky

11-14-2008, 02:36 AM

Westfield gets OK to expand Century City shopping center
The Los Angeles Planning Commission unanimously approves the developer's plans after it agrees to make modifications.
By Martha Groves, The Los Angeles Times
5:59 PM PST, November 13, 2008

The Los Angeles Planning Commission has unanimously approved Westfield Group's plan to expand its Century City shopping center after the developer agreed to make modifications.

The panel devoted several hours to testimony from supporters and detractors before voting to approve the project, which calls for relocating Bloomingdale's, adding parking and replacing an original Welton Becket-designed tower with a 39-story, mixed-use building with 262 condos.

The Comstock Hills Homeowners Assn. had protested the original 49-story plan for the tower and was pleased that Westfield agreed to lop off 10 stories.

The company also announced settlements to satisfy some residents' concerns about traffic improvements.

The $800-million project also entails relocating Bloomingdale's and adding retail and office space.

The Westfield project reflects a new direction in Century City's core, which for decades featured mostly offices and hotels but is now creating hundreds of upscale residences.

Westfield officials said the mall expansion would add to the "live, work, shop and play" vibe.

Neighborhood groups contend that the project is too big and too tall, and would produce too much traffic.

But traffic isn't their only concern. They say the development would further strain already inadequate services, from police and fire to schools, libraries and electric and water utilities.

Groves is a Times staff writer.

dragonsky

12-03-2008, 06:53 AM

Beverly Hills voters narrowly approve hotel-condo project
The L.A. County registrar-recorder's final tally shows 50.41% voted for the Waldorf-Astoria project, and 49.59% opposed it. Opponents vow to continue the fight in court.
By Martha Groves
December 3, 2008

With November election results finally tabulated and certified Tuesday, Beverly Hills voters have narrowly approved a plan to add a Waldorf-Astoria hotel and two luxury condo towers to the Beverly Hilton complex.

Opponents of Measure H, however, vowed to continue their battle in court. They contend the drawn-out vote was tainted by irregularities.

The Los Angeles County registrar-recorder's office spent the weeks since the Nov. 4 election counting provisional and absentee ballots. The final tally was 7,972 votes in favor, or 50.41%, and 7,843 votes opposed, or 49.59%.

The battle over Measure H sharply divided the affluent community. The City Council earlier this year approved the proposal by a 3-2 vote. But opponents gathered enough signatures to place the measure before voters.

Advocates said the proposal would revitalize the Hilton's site at Wilshire and Santa Monica boulevards and bring in needed revenue for city services. Opponents decried the project as too massive and tall and said it would boost traffic at the already congested intersection.

The plan would entail adding a 12-story, 170-room Waldorf-Astoria hotel and two condo towers, one of them six to eight stories and one 16 to 18 stories. The new hotel rooms would replace 217 Hilton rooms that would be demolished as part of the plan, for a net reduction of 47 rooms. The Waldorf rooms are expected to draw far higher rates, and tax dollars, than the Hilton's.

Beny Alagem, the Hilton's owner, spent more than $3 million to woo voters, holding lavish cocktail parties, sponsoring coffees and distributing elaborate fliers and brochures.

On Tuesday, opponents of the expansion charged that the final count was flawed, "because they were counting questionable provisional ballots," said Larry Larson, treasurer of the anti-Measure H group Citizens Right to Decide Committee. Larson said he personally reported to the registrar a couple who he says live in Los Angeles but voted provisionally in Beverly Hills on election day.

Larson said his group plans to pin down evidence of tainted ballots and then take its case to court. "You have to convince the judge it's more likely than not that, but for these tainted ballots, Measure H would have lost," he said.

Marie Garvey, a Beverly Hilton spokeswoman, said: "We have full faith in the county's process." She added that the Hilton planned to begin construction on the Waldorf-Astoria hotel in 2009, after the January Golden Globe Awards show, which is to be held at the Hilton. The aim, she said, is to "develop a world-class project worthy of Beverly Hills."

At least one Beverly Hills official said the matter appeared to be resolved in his mind.

"I voted no on Measure H because of its mass and size," said Beverly Hills Mayor Barry Brucker. "But I'm respectful of the process and the outcome. Now we need to move forward to make certain the project is the best it can possibly be."

Aware of voter fraud allegations, he added that he planned to push the state to require voters to show identification at polling places.

"I find it so odd that that would not . . . be required at the polling place, just to ensure the election process is followed to the letter of the law," he said.

Groves is a Times staff writer.

LosAngelesBeauty

12-03-2008, 09:03 AM

Hopefully they can have ground breaking by mid to late 2009...

dragonsky

01-06-2009, 03:42 AM

Crime continues to fall in Los Angeles despite bad economy
Many other parts of Southern California report similar drops. Some officials had predicted the opposite. In L.A., the figures support Chief William Bratton's theories and impress even his critics.
By Joel Rubin and Richard Winton
January 1, 2009

Despite a reeling economy, crime in Los Angeles and many other parts of Southern California fell in 2008 for the sixth consecutive year, challenging the widely held theory that crime rises at times of economic tumult.

The continued decline, while less pronounced than in previous years, comes even as other major American cities, including New York and Chicago, have seen increases in some crimes, notably homicides.

Violent crimes -- such as homicides and rapes -- and crimes involving thefts in Los Angeles were down about 2.5% through Saturday compared with the same period of 2007, according to Los Angeles Police Department figures. The L.A. County Sheriff's Department, which handles law enforcement for dozens of other cities, reported a 6% drop in such crimes committed through the end of November. In all, the declines amounted to about 8,500 fewer serious crimes committed in 2008.

Throughout the region, crime was generally down or stagnant. The Orange County Sheriff's Department, which serves unincorporated areas and 12 cities, saw serious crime drop slightly. In Santa Ana, the county's largest city, there was a rise in homicides, but overall violent and property crimes dropped nearly 10%. Likewise, the city of San Bernardino had 7% fewer crimes through last month and the city of San Diego was projected to finish the year with a modest downturn.

The numbers are striking in part because some law enforcement officials -- notably Sheriff Lee Baca -- predicted a year ago that the ailing economy would probably result in crime increases, particularly in struggling neighborhoods where unemployment was on the rise. Unemployment in Los Angeles County is now near 9%. But the rise in crime has not materialized.

Baca and other law enforcement officials said it still may just be a matter of time.

"Expectation of having more crime occur in dire economic times is practical expectation that has been evident from other cycles of depressed times," Baca said. "We aren't experiencing real hard economic times yet. In my opinion we have to prepare ourselves that things could get worse."

The last time the U.S. economy faltered over a prolonged period, Los Angeles fared badly. In 1991 and 1992, crime soared to levels roughly three times the current figures. At the time, the unemployment rate in the city hovered between 8% and 10% and the crack cocaine epidemic was in full swing. The population also had a higher percentage of young males, who are most likely to commit crimes. Crime rose significantly in Orange County at the time as well.

The number of homicides in the city of Los Angeles, a bellwether crime statistic watched closely by police and the public, continued to fall in 2008. With four days left in the year, 376 people had been killed -- 24 fewer than in the same period the year before. The total marks a 27% drop from the 517 people slain five years ago and is far below the peak of 1,092 killings the city recorded in 1992.

The drop in violence is due, in part, to the LAPD's success in reducing gang-related crimes. Gang killings are down more than a quarter from the previous year, and the number of assaults by suspected gang members is down significantly as well.

The LAPD's success stemming the bloodshed in the nation's second-largest city stands out in a year in which other major urban centers saw homicide figures climb. New York City had 513 killings through last week, a nearly 5% increase over last year. Chicago suffered a more pronounced upsurge in violence, with 479 homicides through November, a 17% jump.

That Los Angeles' lower numbers come after months of severe economic turmoil is especially satisfying for Police Chief William J. Bratton. He has long feuded with criminologists over the effect police have on crime rates. Academics have criticized the chief harshly, dismissing his vehement claim that police, more than any other factor, drive crime up or down. They argue that, although officers may have some effect, they are powerless to counter larger forces such as a spiraling economy or drug epidemics that can push people to desperation.

LAPD Assistant Chief Earl Paysinger said the 2008 statistics, coupled with the long-running streak of falling crime, prove Bratton's point. "We have shown time and again that if you invest in law enforcement and hold police accountable . . . you will absolutely have a very definitive effect on crime," Paysinger said.

Bratton, in recent interviews, attributed the LAPD's success largely to "putting cops on the dots," an often-used reference to the department's strategy of closely tracking and dissecting crimes with computerized mapping systems and deploying officers accordingly. He said he expects crime to fall further in 2009 as several hundred new officers complete their training and join the force as part of a continuing push to increase the size of the department.

Like other criminologists who have been critical of Bratton's reasoning, UC Irvine professor George Tita acknowledged the LAPD's success, saying the department's crime-fighting strategies have reaped results. He did not back away, however, from the idea that a prolonged economic downturn would put Bratton's claims to a rigorous test.

"If the recession lasts for a good long period here, then you are likely to increase the level of frustration in a community," he said. "That might manifest itself in more interpersonal crime such as assault, homicide or robbery."

Baca made claims similar to Bratton's and Paysinger's, giving credit for the drop in crime in the county to the work of his deputies, community outreach efforts and the decision by the Board of Supervisors to spare the department from budget cuts.

In Los Angeles, the historic chasm in levels of violence between rich and poor neighborhoods remained. The department's West L.A. Division, for example, recorded only four homicides and 15 rapes, while in the Southeast Division, which includes Watts and an adjacent part of South-Central, 47 people were killed and 58 raped.

The LAPD failed to meet the goal it set at the beginning of 2008 to reduce overall serious crime by 5%.

Paysinger said the department fell short in large part because of an unusual number of large, unexpected events such as the recent Sylmar wildfire that forced it to divert hundreds of officers away from regular assignments.

Paysinger declined to say what target for crime reduction the LAPD would set for this year, but said the department would "do more than just try to hold the line."

Several LAPD divisions reported increases in property crimes such as burglaries and stolen vehicles, as well as robberies, in which force or the threat of force is used. In the Central Division, which includes downtown's skid row, robberies climbed 21% and property crimes were up 6% through Saturday. The rise was less significant elsewhere, such as in the Foothill, Harbor and Van Nuys divisions, which all saw about a 3% climb in property crimes.

It is too early to tell whether the upticks are a harbinger of things to come. Paysinger and other LAPD officials played down the significance of the increases, saying the figures represented a relatively small rise in the number of crimes being committed and were part of the normal "ebb and flow" of crime trends.

"These things happen," said Capt. Rick Wall, a commander in the Central Division. "Some years numbers go up a little; some years they're down. The important thing is we are not seeing any patterns that point" to larger problems.

http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2009-01/44305814.gifhttp://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2008-12/44305845.gif

edluva

01-06-2009, 06:16 AM

^it's not trendy to be in a gang anymore. don't you see how many of LA's barrio kids are dressing in tight pants and sporting comb-overs?

LosAngelesBeauty

01-06-2009, 07:41 AM

I find the same thing happening over in SGV where many would-be and wanna-be Asian gangsters are now just listening to iPods, gaming, surfing, etc.

dragonsky

01-10-2009, 04:48 AM

Work begins on Pacoima's new Costco
$78-million retail hub, which will include a Best Buy store, is expected to revitalize the Valley community.
By Jennifer Oldham
The Los Angeles Times
January 9, 2009

For years a chain-link fence surrounded the contaminated 25-acre lot near the junction of Interstate 5 and California 118 in Pacoima, a daily reminder of the thousands of well-paying manufacturing jobs lost to Mexico in the last decade.

After a complex clean-up effort, detailed in an 8-foot-high stack of documents, officials on Thursday broke ground on a $78-million project that economists hope will provide a much-needed retail hub in one of the San Fernando Valley's most impoverished communities.

Known as Plaza Pacoima, the 209,000-square-foot project will feature the first Costco built in Los Angeles in a dozen years. It will also include a Best Buy and other stores, plus restaurant and office space. It is expected to create 438 construction jobs and 354 permanent positions at a time when many projects are on hold.

At Thursday's event -- with a standing-room-only crowd repeatedly cheering speakers -- state and local legislators ticked off obstacles the builder, environmental officials and redevelopment experts overcame to begin construction.

Attracting dollars to build in the largely working-class northeast Valley has historically been difficult, lawmakers recounted, not to mention difficulties overcoming significant contamination on the site itself, where metals and solvents were left behind with the departure of plumbing fixture manufacturer Price Pfister.

"What's being created here is truly an economic miracle, especially in this climate," said Bruce Ackerman, president and chief executive of the Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, an organization created in the aftermath of the Northridge earthquake to revitalize the region.

The builder and redevelopment officials also spent months hammering out an agreement with several dozen community groups on benefits they would realize from the project, including first crack at jobs created on the site. Pacoima has among the Valley's highest unemployment rates.

"Jobs were our biggest concern," said Roy LaVoise, director of job development for Communities in Schools, noting that the agreement allows workers to be interviewed without background checks.

"This is a huge gang area, and we're trying to get people off the streets and into a job," he added.

Officials said the project, which will have an 898-space parking lot "landscaped as a grove" with more than 500 trees, would bring hope to a industrial area where residents have long had to travel far afield to shop. The parcel also includes a 140,000-square-foot Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse, which is under construction on about 10 acres that are owned separately.

Readying the site took years, as its former owner, Black & Decker, which bought Price Pfister, undertook an extensive cleanup monitored by state and federal regulators.

Workers trucked 35,000 tons of contaminated soil off the parcel in sealed tractor trailers to prevent toxic dust from escaping and blowing into yards of homes across the street.

They removed 6,000 gallons of oil and 2,000 pounds of solvents used to clean metal fixtures and installed vacuum cleaners to suck toxic vapors out of the soil. They also sank wells to clean contaminated groundwater deep beneath the surface, an effort complicated by contamination that migrated into the water table from a separate site on the other side of Interstate 5, redevelopment officials said.

Development is important not only for the Valley, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said at Thursday's groundbreaking, but also for the city as a whole, as economic leaders seek to boost sales tax revenues to bridge a burgeoning budget deficit.

"L.A. will not lie down in the face of this recession," Villaraigosa said, adding that the Costco project was expected to bring $2 million in annual sales tax revenues into city coffers.

The mayor said Plaza Pacoima is the result of efforts he's undertaken with Robert "Bud" Ovrom, deputy mayor for residential and commercial development, to build the region's sales tax base.

Los Angeles ranks 314 among the 567 entities that collect sales tax in California, according to the state Department of Finance. The city collects $111 in sales tax per capita annually, compared to $175 collected by San Diego and San Francisco, $360 by Santa Monica and $715 by Beverly Hills.

Without $9.8 million in public subsidies to help purchase the site and build new utilities and roads, the project's developer said he wouldn't have been able to construct the project.

Big-box retailers that often shy away from working-class communities were attracted to Pacoima because of the size of the former Price Pfister site and the lack of competition, said Arturo Sneider Primestor Development Inc.

Costco executives and Los Angeles officials agreed the development won't be the retailer's last stop in the city, which Villaraigosa said has the spending power to support 16 Costcos. It has four.

"I will guarantee that this won't be the last Costco that comes to the city," said James D. Sinegal, Costco president and chief executive

To which Villaraigosa, sitting behind the lectern where Sinegal spoke, replied: "That's what I like to hear!"

http://www.latimes.com/media/mapimage/2009-01/44430376.gif

dragonsky

03-11-2009, 07:49 AM

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-03/45504384.jpg

Plans to replace Hollywood Park racetrack progress
Developers intend to unveil a model of the retail district that would be built on the Inglewood site. The project, which would also include residences, must still be approved by the city.
By Ari B. Bloomekatz
The Los Angeles Times
5:57 PM PDT, March 10, 2009

The controversial plan to raze the landmark racetrack at Hollywood Park is coming into clearer focus this week as developers plan to unveil a model of the proposed 620,000-square-foot retail district that would partially replace it.

The Hollywood Park Tomorrow project would mark one of the region's largest redevelopment projects, covering 238 acres in Inglewood -- though it faces hurdles.

The plan has yet to be finalized, and Inglewood officials still must approve it. The developers say that once they get the go-ahead, they're ready to tear down the track and break ground on the roughly $2-billion project.

A question remains about the feasibility of launching such a large project amid an economic downturn that has stalled similar developments.

Hollywood Park officials have guaranteed horse racing only through this summer.

The proposed project's plan is to mix the retail space -- which includes dozens of shops and restaurants, a 15-screen movie theater and a refurbished casino at its existing location -- with nearly 3,000 residential units, 75,000 square feet of office space, a 300-room hotel, 25 acres of park space and a four-acre civic site that could be a school.

"What they're proposing is the Hollywood Park of tomorrow," said Inglewood City Councilman Daniel Tabor. "I hope this is the model of what Inglewood will be, at least to some people, an upscale, growing, livable community where people can own a home, shop for the . . . goods and services that they need, and enjoy themselves at restaurants and night spots."

Tabor said one of his priorities before moving forward is that developers "promise the community that it will create not just employment opportunities during the construction phase, but employment opportunities with livable wages into the future."

Tabor said the council could vote on whether to approve the plan as early as April or May and that he hopes developers are able to break ground around January 2010.

A small-scale model, 5-by-5-feet, will be shown Thursday to Inglewood's city leaders and will be on public display this weekend at the racetrack to provide a glimpse of what the future could hold.

Gerard McCallum, a project developer for Hollywood Park Land Co., a subsidiary of Bay Area developer Wilson, Meany, Sullivan, estimated that the project would take two to three years to complete.

Although there is broad support for the project at Inglewood City Hall, some race fans at Hollywood Park have been hoping the track will be saved.

The closure of the Hollywood Park racetrack and the construction of a major mixed-use development would be a definite milestone for Inglewood, which several years ago lost its beloved Los Angeles Lakers when the team moved from the Forum to Staples Center in downtown L.A.

Hollywood Park opened in 1938 -- and was known as the racing track of the stars. Hollywood moguls Jack L. Warner, Samuel Goldwyn and Walt Disney were early leaders, and the park attracted its share of Hollywood types well into the 1980s.

StethJeff

05-01-2009, 12:13 PM

I totally agree with the community that any new developments in the Mission District should adhere to the construction guidelines that the city has placed. Santa Barbara is a tourist/local draw partly because of the city's red-roofed old Spanish feel - I don't see why this would be so hard to understand if you're building within a couple of blocks of an old California Mission. :shrug:

Also, this article further cements the fact that a Metrorail line (not a shitty bus corridor :rolleyes: ) should travel East of Union Station with stops at LAC+USC Medical Center, CSULA, Downtown Alhambra, and SG's Mission District.

Visions for the future collide in historic San Gabriel

Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times

By Corina Knoll
May 1, 2009

Inside a Chinese restaurant on a narrow street, a grapevine grows.

More than 50 years old, its thick, gnarled trunk sits in a courtyard beneath an open sky. At night, when strung with lights, the limbs make for a pretty canopy under which to dine.

And dine they did at Mission 261.

Foodies and restaurant critics and tourists once packed into the San Gabriel restaurant to feast on Peking duck and dim sum that came in fanciful shapes of birds and fish. Within the labyrinth of private rooms and banquet halls, birthdays were celebrated, brides and grooms were toasted, elders were honored.

Harvey, York and Lewis Ng were proud to own a business that drew customers to the Mission District, home to the San Gabriel Mission, founded in 1771. Their purchase, the brothers believed, proved that even recent immigrants from Hong Kong could carve a place for themselves in historic American soil.

It felt like a natural move to draw up plans to expand their restaurant into a $25-million four-story, 54-room hotel with a condominium complex and retail stores.

They didn't expect hundreds of opponents.

The Ngs' project is now on hold after residents complained that the development would ruin the look and feel of the Mission District, a sleepy collection of Spanish-tiled businesses, and outshine the mission.

In some ways, the debate centers on the identity of San Gabriel, one of the region's oldest communities, which in recent decades has seen a surge in immigration from Asia. Although the proposed Mission Village is tiny compared with the 451-room Holiday Inn the Ngs built in Macao, it is taller and larger in scope than is allowed in the Mission District Specific Plan, a set of bylaws adopted in 2004 to maintain the integrity and historic nature of the area.

"We want Mr. Ng to build his development; we just want it to remain in the district plan," resident Eloy Zarate said. "The plan is an expression of what the community feels is appropriate and keeps with the tradition and history of the changing community."

Zarate, 42, and his wife, Senya Lubisich, are known for galvanizing the community when it comes to preserving and using its landmarks. The two history professors have lived in Italy, France and Australia, but returned to Zarate's hometown a few years ago. They knew they wanted to raise their four children in San Gabriel.

The city 10 miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles has changed since Zarate was a boy riding his bike around the neighborhood.

Called the birthplace of the modern Los Angeles region, it was once inhabited by Tongva Indians who helped a Spanish priest build the mission. Mexican settlers later flocked to the area, which became one of the county's first townships.

Once overwhelmingly white and Latino, the city experienced an influx of Chinese immigrants in the 1980s and is now more than 48% Asian.

The evolving diversity of San Gabriel is welcomed, Zarate said. He and his wife's main concern is preserving the past.

San Gabriel may be a city of less than 45,000, but its historic core, the couple say, deserves the same kind of respect given to Old World cities like Paris, where skyscrapers in the city center were banned after the 689-foot-tall Tour Montparnasse arose, and, many felt, ruined the skyline.

Constructing something outside San Gabriel's Mission District Specific Plan would be disregarding the painstaking efforts residents made to maintain the heart of the city, the couple say.

"In a historic district you have to be very careful, especially with developments, because there's no second chance," Lubisich, 36, said. "One of the things the development is lacking is a survey of what residents want."

Eileen Leiva, 49, lives down the street from the proposed development, and if she could design the area, she'd make it look like the painting her father commissioned back when he owned and operated Panchito's, a lively Mexican restaurant where customers praised the marinated steak and albondigas soup. Frank Ramirez's vision for the future of the Mission District was a row of quaint, one-story shops with red roofs and mission bells.

Now that he lives in a rest home, his daughter feels a responsibility to speak for him, especially because Mission 261 was once the home of Panchito's, which was shuttered in 1993 after its clientele dropped. Leiva was grateful when the Ngs kept the property's grapevine and invited her father to teach them how to care for it.

But Leiva admits she rarely ventures out to the Mission District. The through traffic that clogs its two-lane artery keeps her away, as does the fact that the district offers few attractions. Although the historic San Gabriel Mission Playhouse, formerly the Civic Auditorium, has a robust schedule of dance and theater performances, she'd be more likely to walk over if there were a Jamba Juice or Starbucks -- something a little more everyday.

Pulciano's Deli and Cafe has been able to survive in the district since the business opened in 1994, but its owner was in favor of the proposed village and thinks more foot traffic would allow him to expand his hours.

"We're strictly 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. -- the area's pretty dead after that," Michael Pulciano, 48, said. "We have a nice lunch crowd, all local people. But I do have a banquet room on the side I could turn into a dinner hall easily. And I have a beer and wine license I'd like to put into use one day."

On Saturday, Mission Drive was alive with food vendors, entertainers and families enjoying the annual Grapevine Festival, an event that pays homage to the three aged grapevines in the Mission District. "They are tangible pieces of our history -- it has to do with a sense of continuity," explained Ellie Andrews, co-president of the San Gabriel Historical Assn.

But organized celebrations won't tide over business owners. And Councilman David Gutierrez thinks Mission Village -- with some tweaking -- ultimately holds the answer to revitalization.

"It really did hit the nail on the head," he said. "I'm hopeful the Ngs don't get frustrated to the point where they throw their hands up in the air and don't do anything, because that would be a big loss."

The Ngs will present a revised design to the City Council in August, but the opposition from residents has stung -- especially when they see fliers that read "Save the Mission District." That's what the brothers thought they were doing.

"We're in love with this space," Harvey Ng, 46, said. "It's our dream. If we go somewhere else, it will be totally based on economics, but this project was about passion, not profit. It was a long-term investment. But if you give someone a first-class ticket and they say, 'No, give me economy,' what can you do?"

In the meantime, Mission 261 will remain a ghost of its former self. Bought by the Ngs in 2002, it closed Feb. 10 in preparation for the construction whose start date has yet to appear. Leftover paper lanterns from a Chinese New Year celebration still hang from overhead lamps. Its ballrooms are empty, its kitchen silent.

The grapevine in the courtyard continues to grow.

dragonsky

06-02-2009, 07:31 AM

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-05/47229576.jpg

Rancho Palos Verdes gives luxury resort an $8-million bailout
Developers of Terranea Resort, slated to open June 12, say the credit crunch forced them to ask the city for a loan. The council unanimously OK'd the deal despite concerns from city staff.
By Jeff Gottlieb
From the Los Angeles Times
May 31, 2009

When the owners of a $480-million seaside luxury resort said they needed more money to ensure it would open, they turned to Rancho Palos Verdes.

The City Council last week unanimously agreed to give Terranea Resort what amounted to an $8-million loan by allowing Lowe Enterprises to defer payment of its hotel tax for several years. The vote came despite concerns from city staff members who said the loan was "not fiscally prudent."

The 102-acre resort is scheduled to open June 12 where the Marineland of the Pacific oceanarium once stood. It will include three restaurants, a nine-hole golf course, a 360-room hotel and 20 bungalows. Also on the grounds are 82 casitas and villas that range in price from $2 million to $4 million.

Mayor Pro Tem Steve Wolowicz said the city, which has few businesses, has never provided an economic stimulus package like this one, or dealt with a project like Terranea.

"We have not had anything like it before, and our city is not likely to encounter something like this again," he said.

According to the deal, Terranea will be allowed to keep the 10% hotel tax customers pay. The resort will receive $8 million or collect the taxes for 27 months, whichever comes first.

The loan will be repaid by 2013 at the London interbank offered rate, plus 8 percentage points. LIBOR is a benchmark used globally, similar to the prime rate. The deadline can be extended for a year at a higher interest rate. The rate for three-month LIBOR loans last week was .66%.

The council made its decision Wednesday morning at a special meeting that ended around 1:30 a.m.

Robert Lowe, chairman and chief executive of Lowe Enterprises, said in an interview that he was forced to go to the city for the funds because of the credit crisis.

Asked what would have happened if the city had turned him down, he said, "I don't want to speculate. It's not going to happen."

He said the resort should provide the city with $7 million to $8 million in taxes annually once it reaches "stabilization" in three to four years.

Among the resorts and hotels the company owns are the Resort at Squaw Creek in Lake Tahoe, Stowe Mountain Lodge in Vermont, Sheraton Universal Hotel in Hollywood and the Miramonte Resort and Spa in Indian Wells.

Lowe first approached the city in April with a deal that would have provided the company with about $35 million of hotel taxes over 10 years.

"It was problematic whether the city would be repaid," Wolowicz said. "An outright gift by the government we didn't think was right."

Still, there was opposition to the deal that the council approved. The city's Finance Director, Dennis McLean, wrote that it was "not fiscally prudent."

Wolowicz said the council seldom goes against city staff recommendations.

The councilman said the city had not made plans yet to spend the hotel tax money, so the deal would not require budget cuts.

He said the city has reserves of about $19 million.

The city is low on the list of creditors who would be repaid in case of default.

"We made this decision understanding there is a certain element of risk, but feeling the benefits and safeguards and economic substance of the city's position warrant the decision that we made in granting the request," he said.

dragonsky

07-06-2009, 06:22 AM

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-07/47873931.jpg

Remaking Avalon as a prime island getaway
The Santa Catalina Island Co. wants to turn the tiny harbor community into a 'resort without walls.'
By Louis Sahagun and Roger Vincent
From the Los Angeles Times
July 5, 2009

Eight decades ago, William Wrigley Jr. added amenities to the tiny harbor community of Avalon that transformed Catalina Island into a storied getaway for movie stars and the early power brokers of Los Angeles: steamships, hotels and a landmark "casino" building featuring a theater and a ballroom.

In the 1960s, development slowed as big spenders and tourists gravitated toward newer resorts -- Disneyland, Palm Springs, Lake Arrowhead -- blossoming on the mainland. Now, Avalon is experiencing a steep decline in tourism that has contributed to this year's city budget deficit of $3 million. Its municipal plumbing is in such bad shape that residents worry about polluting the harbor every time they flush the toilet.

Hoping to again make Avalon a leading Southern California destination, the Santa Catalina Island Co., which the chewing gum magnate bought in 1919, has embarked on a series of projects to turn the city into a "resort without walls," featuring upgraded restaurants and shops, eco-adventures, hillside condominiums, a deluxe hotel and an 18-hole golf course with ocean views.

Some short-term projects -- a zip line that will whisk customers by cable from a mountain peak to the beach and an underwater "Sea Trek" attraction that will let people walk through kelp forests while wearing helmets attached to air hoses -- are being funded by the company and are expected to open this summer.

The largest projects, such as the hotel and golf course, would be funded by other developers and investors. The island company would provide the land. These ventures, company officials said, would not be launched until some recovery is seen in the hotel and resort industry.

The projects, which company officials said could total $500 million over the next decade, would be among the most expensive planned or underway in Los Angeles County. The aim is to revitalize the 1-square-mile city of Avalon, spurring growth without destroying its nostalgic charm.

"We're building a brand based on adventure, natural environment, history and exceeded expectations -- and it's full steam ahead," said Randy Herrel, president and chief executive of the land trust company. "Over the next 18 months there will be more investment in Avalon than in the previous 18 years combined."

Gambling is out of the question. "The chances of gambling coming to Catalina are between zero and zero," Herrel said.

New investments in Avalon, a community of 3,500 residents about 22 miles off the Southern California coast, cannot come soon enough for some business leaders.

"For quite some time, Catalina has been battling a perception that there is nothing to do here, a notion fueled by the fact that we've had no new products to offer in decades," said Wayne Griffin, executive director of the Avalon Chamber of Commerce. "We finally have a lot of new things to talk about."

The town has a rich history. Zane Grey wrote Western classics in an Avalon pueblo. NBC broadcast big-band performances from the casino ballroom during World War II. Marilyn Monroe lived in Avalon with her first husband, a member of the merchant marine.

Yet a leisurely and quaint routine unfolds each morning. Tourists clad in flip-flops, Hawaiian shirts and shorts lick ice cream cones as they shuffle past T-shirt and trinket shops, pubs and restaurants. Couples sun themselves on the beach. Glass-bottom boats cruise the harbor. Scuba divers explore the shoals. Fishermen lug poles and ice chests to the water's edge.

The city has been waiting decades for something new to offer visitors from its target market: the coastal communities stretching from Santa Barbara to San Diego.

Earl Schrader, a real estate broker who's lived in Avalon 21 years, is cautiously optimistic about the company's development plans.

"While I'm excited about the prospects, I'll believe it when I see it," he said. "We've been down this road a hundred times."

Serious talk of moving in new directions was initiated two years ago by Alison Wrigley, the great-granddaughter of William Wrigley Jr., and her husband, Geoffrey Rusack, both of whom sit on the company's nine-member board of directors. Another Wrigley descendant, Paxson Offield, also is on the board.

"They are the spark plugs behind this proposal," Griffin said.

About 88% of the 75-square-mile island is owned by the nonprofit Catalina Island Conservancy. The island company owns about 11% of the land mass, and about 1% is owned by private individuals and the city of Avalon.

"We appreciate that a revitalized Avalon will continue to be a gateway to the island's 42,000-acre nature preserve," said Ann Muscat, president and chief executive officer of the conservancy. "And we think the revitalization of Avalon and the nature preserve are consistent with the original vision William Wrigley Jr. had: that the island would be a destination for people to enjoy in many different ways."

The company initially intended to announce its investment plans after a significant uptick in the overall economy. But with financing for new resorts all but nonexistent and cross-channel visits plummeting, Wrigley family members were not willing to wait any longer.

"Alison and Geoffrey said, 'It's time,' " Herrel said.

"That's extremely exciting news," said Avalon Mayor Bob Kennedy, owner of the ScubaLuv dive shop and operator of the new "Sea Trek" concession. "The era of the Santa Catalina Island Co. planning improvements but not pulling the trigger on development for fear of making a mistake is over."

The company's long-term goals include a complex starting on the western edge of town at scenic Descanso Beach that would be anchored by a 71-room boutique hotel, an 18-hole championship golf course, luxury homes and condominiums on the surrounding hills.

A partnership of the Koll Co. and Lambert Investments has selected Auberge Resorts of Napa Valley to develop the hotel, homes and condominiums.

Jack Nicklaus Cos. has been selected to develop the golf course, which would replace an existing nine-hole course built just south of town in 1892. Several holes would be developed on nearby mountain ridges overlooking downtown Avalon and the Pacific.

These large projects would require approval from the city of Avalon, Los Angeles County planners and the state Coastal Commission. They would also require city infrastructure improvements to accommodate the growth.

Construction has begun on 17 middle-income houses in a canyon at the south edge of Avalon.

Later this year, the company plans to spend $3.5 million remodeling the downtown 73-room Pavilion Lodge to include what developers described as "quasi-private outdoor living rooms." Remodeling is also planned for two popular waterfront restaurants -- Antonio's and Armstrong's -- as well as a block-long stretch of commercial space dominated by a vintage hotel, a Chinese restaurant, a hardware store and a post office.

Near-term improvements such as the zip line and underwater kelp walk should attract more visitors and provide a financial boon to the island, said Lisa Grobar, professor of economics at Cal State Long Beach.

"It really would broaden the appeal of Catalina a little bit more to families," Grobar said. "It's a nice romantic place to go for the weekend, but if you have kids, you wonder what there would be for them to do."

As for whether a deluxe hotel and golf course would pan out, she said: "Eventually, consumer spending will recover -- and they are not talking about having to fill a Las Vegas-style hotel with a thousand rooms each night."

"Given that, plus the uniqueness of the island," she added, "I think they have a shot at it."

http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2009-07/47876874.gif

dragonsky

08-05-2009, 04:24 AM

City Council panel approves motion on Century Plaza historic designation
6:50 PM | August 4, 2009

Los Angeles City Councilmen Paul Koretz and Ed Reyes have voted to approve Koretz's motion that the council propose historic designation for the Century Plaza hotel in Century City. The hotel's owner has revealed plans to tear down the curved structure and replace it with two high-rise towers and public open space.

The vote by the two councilmen, who make up two-thirds of the council's Planning and Land Use Management Committee, is the first step in a months-long process that Koretz hopes will result in the hotel's designation as a city historic-cultural monument. The two directed the city's planning staff to compile a list of the hotel's significant features and present it to the full council.

Ken Bernstein, director of the city's Office of Historic Resources, said his staff would be preparing that inventory and a recommendation that the hotel, designed by Minoru Yamasaki and opened in 1966, be designated. The National Trust for Historic Preservation included the property on this year's list of America's 11 most endangered historic places.

The hotel is owned by Next Century Associates, a partnership between Los Angeles-based real estate investor Michael Rosenfeld and the D.E. Shaw Group. Koretz wants Rosenfeld to participate in workshops with the Office of Historic Resources, the Los Angeles Conservancy and others to consider redevelopment alternatives that would allow for preservation of the hotel.

--Martha Groves

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/08/plum-panel-approves-motion-on-century-plaza-historic-designation.html

dragonsky

10-30-2009, 01:32 AM

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-10/50117229.jpg

Disney plans to build major production facility near Santa Clarita
Bucking a trend toward 'runaway production,' the company proposes creating a 56-acre complex that would include soundstages and other facilities for film and TV projects.
By Dawn C. Chmielewski and Richard Verrier
The Los Angeles Times
October 29, 2009

The Walt Disney Co. said Wednesday that it would build a 56-acre production facility in northern Los Angeles County, casting a ray of light on an otherwise gloomy film economy that has hemorrhaged thousands of jobs in the last decade.

The Burbank company said the proposed Disney/ABC Studios at the Ranch would occupy a corner of the Golden Oak Ranch, a sprawling 890-acre parcel off California 14 that has been the setting of such classic films as "Old Yeller." Plans call for 12 soundstages, production offices, a commissary and other facilities that could be used for film, television, commercial and new media projects.

Disney's new complex would add a much-needed boost to Los Angeles' entertainment economy, which has been reeling from a production slowdown caused by the recession and a continuing exodus of film and TV jobs to Canada and states such as New Mexico, Louisiana and New York that offer generous film tax breaks and credits. Disney-owned ABC moved its own sitcom "Ugly Betty" from Los Angeles to New York last year, which helped spur the state Legislature to implement its own film tax credit program earlier this year to curb so-called runaway production.

Still, as Disney's announcement attests, the bulk of television production remains in Los Angeles. The project, if approved, would not only create an estimated 2,854 production and entertainment jobs, but bolster the struggling local economy by adding more than 3,000 construction jobs and injecting $522 million in construction-related spending and $533 million in annual economic activity thereafter, according to the company.

The project is one of the largest expansions of production space by a major studio in recent years. NBC Universal announced an ambitious plan in 2006 that would add 308,000 square feet of production facilities -- including new and relocated outdoor sets -- as part of a $3-billion makeover of its Universal City property.

Disney filed applications Wednesday with Los Angeles County planning officials in the first step of a lengthy approval process. The new complex is not expected to open before 2013. County officials anticipate little opposition from the community, which has already become a television production hub in recent years. A half-dozen television shows, including HBO's "Big Love" and CBS' "NCIS," are based in nearby Santa Clarita.

Local officials and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger were quick to praise the plan Wednesday.

"The proposed expansion will be a significant economic boost for the Santa Clarita Valley and northern Los Angeles County," said Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who represents the area."Although the county must review and analyze Disney's application, I am encouraged that one of the world's largest and most successful entertainment companies is making this commitment."

The ranch has been used as an outdoor filming location since the late 1950s, when Walt Disney selected it as the setting for "The Adventures of Spin and Marty" segments of "The Mickey Mouse Club." Its mountain ranges and meadows have provided the backdrop for movies such as "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest," "The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement" and television shows including "Beverly Hills, 90210" and "Boston Legal."

Disney's decision to invest in new production facilities comes as soundstages and other service providers around Los Angeles have struggled or expanded elsewhere. Earlier this year, Culver Studios lost its major tenant when the game show "Deal or No Deal" moved to Connecticut to take advantage of that state's tax credit. Sony Pictures Imageworks, one of Hollywood's leading visual effects companies, moved a part of its operations from Culver City to New Mexico to take advantage of film industry inducements.

"There's a lot of available soundstages in L.A. at the moment," said Tim Mahoney, executive vice president of Hollywood Center Studios. "We're fighting runaway production. This is probably the lowest occupancy that all the stage complexes have faced in a long time."

Indeed, much of Hollywood is retrenching in the face of declining DVD sales, reduced revenue from television advertising and uneven results at the box office. The uncertainty has prompted executive shake-ups, including at the Walt Disney Studios, and the prospect that at least one major studio -- NBC Universal -- will be spun off from its corporate parent.

Despite the downturn, Disney is experiencing a shortage of space to produce shows for ABC and cable outlets Disney Channel and ABC Family, as well as programming it creates for other networks. Richard Ballering, executive director of production for ABC Studios, says the network can have as many as 16 to 23 television productions underway during the height of pilot season.

With only seven soundstages on the Walt Disney Studio lot, production ends up scattered throughout the region, he said.

For example, the studio currently films its hit ABC show "Desperate Housewives" at the Universal Studios, and the comedies "Cougar Town" and "Scrubs" at the Culver Studios. Meanwhile, Hollywood Center Studios houses five Disney Channel and Disney XD shows, including "The Suite Life on Deck" and "Wizards of Waverly Place," while "Hannah Montana" is staged at Tribune Studios on Sunset Boulevard.

In addition to the sheer number of television shows produced, Ballering said, audiences are demanding more varied settings for prime-time dramas such as "Brothers & Sisters," which now occupies four of Disney's seven soundstages.

Expanding its own facilities would enable Disney to avoid paying others for studio space while relying less on expensive location shoots.

The Disney/ABC Studios at the Ranch project would more than double soundstage space with the addition of 216,000 square feet. "As a content company, we need to look to the future and plan for continued growth," Ballering said. "The Ranch provides a phenomenal and unique opportunity to leverage the advantages of co-locating indoor and outdoor production and creating a new cost-efficient model for our productions."

Beyond providing additional space, Disney's decision would allow the studio to potentially take advantage of the state's new film tax credits. The program offers a tax credit of up to 25% for television series that relocate to California, new television series produced for basic cable, movies of the week and feature films that cost less than $75 million.

Paul Audley, president of FilmL.A., said the proposed facility signals Disney's commitment to keeping production local. He said California's new film and TV production incentive also must have factored into the decision. "It's a good signal to the state of California that they need not only to continue, but to expand, their incentives," Audley said.

202_Cyclist

11-13-2009, 05:20 PM

This habitat-destroying project should absolutely be stopped. This project would be entirely auto-dependent and would ruin one of the few remaining undeveloped sections of Southern California. Kern Co. planners should focus instead on planning for compact growth in Bakersfield with the arrival of high speed rail.

Groups sue to block Tejon Ranch development

LA Times
11/13/09

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tejon-ranch13-2009nov13,0,1032538.story

They say the development of a 5,000-acre resort community in the Tehachapi Mountains would endanger the California condor, degrade air quality and add traffic to Interstate 5.

A coalition of environmentalists, Native Americans and local residents filed a lawsuit Thursday aimed at halting the development of a 5,000-acre resort community on the Tejon Ranch in the Tehachapi Mountains.

The suit, filed in Kern County Superior Court, argues that the Tejon Mountain Village project threatens the endangered California condor and would negatively affect villages and sacred Chumash sites.

The project, which was unanimously approved last month by Kern County supervisors, also would degrade air quality and add traffic to the overburdened Grapevine pass on Interstate 5, the lawsuit alleges.

"This project is anything but green. It's an environmental catastrophe," said Adam Keats, a spokesman for the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs. "You could not put a housing development in a worse place."

David Crowder, government and community relations director for Tejon Mountain Village LLC, expressed disappointment.

Last year, Tejon Ranch Co. agreed to preserve 90% of its 270,000-acre property, where the Tejon Mountain Village would be the smaller of two massive developments. The village project would include 3,450 homes, golf courses, hotels, and a commerce center

In exchange, a coalition of environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, Audubon California and Natural Resources Defense Council, agreed not to challenge the projects slated for the remaining 10% of the Tejon land.

Crowder said in a written statement that this agreement "was a much better outcome for conservation than could have been achieved through litigation."

"The county planning staff and the supervisors were unanimously satisfied that our plan for Tejon Mountain Village has set new standards for conservation and sustainable development," Crowder said.

"We feel that the record will show that the county made a well-reasoned decision and that the courts will find in our favor."

The Tejon Ranch property is about 30 miles north of Santa Clarita.