[dragonsky]

Project will let Pasadena venue shine
The city's convention center expansion includes a restored ballroom and designs that showcase the 1932 Civic Auditorium.
By Nancy Wride, Times Staff Writer
February 21, 2007

The $121-million expansion of the Pasadena Convention Center will include new buildings but will also showcase one of the city's treasured landmarks: the 1932 Civic Auditorium.

The ornate Italian Renaissance building, which opened 75 years ago this month, is the centerpiece of the current expansion project. It is expected to be completed in the spring of 2009.

The expansion will add 55,000 square feet of exhibit space and include new entrances on each side of the auditorium that will better frame the building.

"These new … flanking buildings will lead the eye and draw your attention toward the Civic Auditorium," said Sue Mossman, executive director of Pasadena Heritage, which promotes historic preservation. "The current buildings are these bunker-like, very low-scale odd buildings. So getting rid of those is definitely a plus."

Some see another bonus in the plan.

The project calls for relocating the city's ice rink from the rear of the auditorium so the original ballroom that graced "the Civic" until 1976 can be restored, said Michael W. Ross, chief executive officer of the city organization that operates the site. During the big band era, dancers glided across the ballroom's wood floors.

"Saving it was a high priority for us and a low priority" for others at the start, Mossman said of the old ballroom, "but it has ended up being a high priority for everybody now, so that's cause for celebration."

Over the years, the Civic has served as the city's cultural anchor.

The 3,000-seat theater, whose walls and ceiling are adorned with hand-painted murals of mythological Greek figures, has played host to concerts, Broadway musicals and numerous Hollywood awards shows. Live radio broadcasts of ballroom dances in the 1940s made Pasadena a household name across the country.

On Tuesday, TV host Don Cornelius met with Richard Barr, general manager of the auditorium, about the March 10 taping of the "Soul Train" awards show.

From the beginning, the building has been a source of great pride.

On its grand opening on Feb. 15, 1932, The Times noted the devastating economic period in which the Civic was dedicated.

"This city scored a hit on old man depression's jaw tonight when more than 3,000 residents celebrated the formal opening of Pasadena's new $1.3 million Civic Auditorium," the newspaper story stated.

The article goes on to say that "the completion of the auditorium culminates a twenty-year fight on the part of local organizations to obtain an adequate convention headquarters."

The city's need for more convention space is what drove the current expansion project, Ross said.

As Pasadena competes with cities such as San Jose, Sacramento and Long Beach for more lucrative conventions, he said, it must have larger and more modern exhibition and meeting spaces. A Sheraton hotel is on the site.

In addition to two new exhibit halls, the expansion project will include a new 25,000-square-foot ballroom and the restored 17,000-square-foot ballroom. A new parking garage also is planned.

The city hopes the project will generate an additional $24 million annually for local merchants.

"It will allow Pasadena to grow stronger as a destination both for work and for tourism," Mayor Bill Bogaard said.

Preservationists are pleased with how things turned out. Early expansion plans were far too modern, Mossman said, and Pasadena Heritage strongly objected.

The current project will better spotlight the Civic, she said.

"There is very little Italian Renaissance architecture in Pasadena from that time, which is one of the reasons [the auditorium] is so exceptional," Mossman noted. "So keeping that a showcase is what makes sense for the whole project, makes it worthwhile."

[LosAngelesBeauty]

^ I love Pasadena! I'm also very excited about the new Pasadena Playhouse expansion that Frank Gehry is designing PRO BONO!

[dragonsky]

From chop suey to Chiu Chow
By Charles Perry, Times Staff Writer
February 21, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-02/28021020.jpg

AT Mission 261, in the century-old building that once served as San Gabriel's first city hall, waiters in suave gray suits are taking orders for steamed chicken breast rolled around bamboo pith and custard-filled dumplings shaped like tiny rabbits — a very au courant sort of dim sum in Hong Kong.

Now that a quarter of a million people of Chinese ancestry live in this area, our local Chinese food scene is buzzing with energy. From Monterey Park and the Alhambra-San Gabriel-Rosemead corridor to Rowland Heights and beyond, suburban Chinese neighborhoods are home to a lively, ever-changing crop of restaurants and talented chefs.

FOR THE RECORD:
Restaurant history: An article in Wednesday's Food section on the history of Chinese restaurants in Los Angeles said that after the original Chinatown was torn down, the New Chinatown shopping district opened in 1939 in a formerly Mexican American neighborhood. In fact, it was built in Los Angeles' Little Italy. —


"Trends among Chinese restaurants often mirror with what is going on in Taipei, Hong Kong and, to a lesser extent, mainland Chinese cities," observes Carl Chu, author of "Chinese Food Finder: Los Angeles and the San Gabriel Valley." A recent wave of overseas-owned restaurants, including hand-pulled noodle shops, sweet shops and seafood houses, he says, "illustrates a focal shift from the mom-and-pop eateries of yesteryear."

To say the least, it wasn't always like this.

And so it begins

OUR first Chinese restaurants, probably opened in the 1860s, when L.A. was a cow town of about 5,000 inhabitants, didn't have all the rare ingredients available now. There were no trained chefs, either — the cooks were just men who had come here to be gold miners or railroad workers and decided to open chow-chows (cook shacks marked with a traditional yellow banner).

L.A.'s original Chinatown had been a single block of cheap lodgings just south of the Plaza. In the 1870s, it started growing and spread eastward but in 1882, anti-Chinese zealots managed to get a national Chinese Exclusion Act passed. As a result, Chinatown's population stagnated at around 2,000 from 1890 to 1920.

The earliest restaurant known by name is Man Jen Low, simply because it survived down to 1987 (by then known as General Lee's Man Jen Low). In the 1950s, its menu gave the restaurant's founding date as 1890.

What sort of restaurants were they? Many were humble noodle shops, but Yong Chen, co-curator of the exhibition "Have You Eaten Yet? The Chinese Restaurant in America," which has appeared around the country in recent years, says they weren't all holes in the wall: "Some 19th century restaurants were very grand inside, with carving and traditional furniture. Others were just a booth extending into the street from the shop front.

"Very early menus show shark's fin and bird's nest, important luxury items for the Chinese and the Cantonese in particular. But they quickly found that Americans weren't interested."

Early on, in order to please non-Chinese customers, restaurant owners developed bland, often sweet versions of Chinese dishes. Somewhere along the line, some cook introduced an inoffensive stir-fry he called chop suey (from Cantonese tsa sui, meaning various pieces): meat, celery, onions and bean sprouts, well doused with soy sauce.

"Chop suey is in a way American," says Chen, "but it is also Chinese peasant food — a very simple dish, like a way of using leftovers." He points out that you can still find it on Chinese menus, because many Cantonese restaurants have continued to serve cautiously Americanized food to non-Chinese.

In the early 20th century, Los Angeles started "discovering" Chinese food. Newspapers published chop suey recipes, over the years working in Chinese ingredients such as bean sprouts, "suey" sauce and "Chinese potatoes" (water chestnuts). But outside Chinatown, such ingredients were hard to get, and one newspaper article suggested that readers talk their Chinese laundryman into selling some of his personal stash.

By 1904, L.A. already had its first Chinese food snobs — eager, smug and tragically less sophisticated than they hoped. A non-Chinese society woman was said to visit a chop suey joint where many of the customers were hookers and opium smokers. She would sweep in wearing a white opera cloak and a corsage and imperiously proclaim, "Pigs! All of you, pigs!" apparently miffed that the diners did not appreciate the gastronomic masterpieces they were eating. She genuinely loved the cook's chop suey, putting away two or three bowls a night. But after all, it was just chop suey, not at all a dish for connoisseurs.

As another sign that Chinese food was joining the mainstream, Chinese American restaurants started opening in the downtown business district around 1905. The menus were literally Chinese American — you could get steak or roast chicken there as well as chop suey. But Chinese dishes must have been an attraction, because that year a downtown French restaurant started advertising that it had chop suey.

Chinese immigrants and their descendants had dominated vegetable farming in Los Angeles since the 1870s. In 1909, because of ill treatment by the old produce market, Chinese growers transferred their business to the new City Market at 9th and San Pedro streets downtown. A neighborhood known as Market Chinatown grew up along San Pedro across from the market. Merlin Lo, whose family has run the Hong Kong Noodle Co. on 9th Place since 1913, believes there had previously been two Chinese restaurants at its address.

During the 1920s, there was a general craze for ethnic food, and more Chinese restaurants opened than any other kind. For the novice, their menus offered set dinners with, say, egg drop soup, chow mein, a meat dish such as pork stir-fried with snow peas, rounded out with fried shrimp, rice and egg foo yung.

If you felt adventurous, there would be grander dishes such as almond duck, sweet-sour pork and soy sauce chicken; fish was rarely served. Many places offered a mix-and-match scheme: Pick one item from column A, one from column B and one from column C, all for a single price. Though the food was still Americanized, the dining public was tolerating novel ingredients such as yard-long beans and "white mustard" (bok choy).

In the 1930s, Hollywood started patronizing the top Chinatown restaurants, and you might see Peter Lorre, Sidney Greenstreet, Walt Disney or the Marx Brothers showing off their chopstick skills there. In gossip columns and movie magazines, Tuey Far Low was mentioned alongside showbiz hangouts such as the Brown Derby, Sardi's and the Coconut Grove. (One attraction was that it stayed open till 5 a.m.)

Celebrities also flocked to Man Jen Low and the Dragon's Den. Mae West's favorite was Man Fook Low in Market Chinatown, one of the first places to feature the dumplings we now know as dim sum.

These were all grand places — Tuey Far Low resembled a pagoda — but serious Chinese food lovers also sought out humbler eateries. A 1937 story about an unnamed restaurant (probably Yee Hung Guey) recorded that "day after day and night after night, people who could afford to eat in luxurious and lovely places drive down into one of the dingiest parts of town, stand in line in a queue which stretches around the corner, slowly shuffle their way in through the kitchen and finally, after half an hour of standing in line, rejoice at being allowed to take their places on stools at oilcloth covered tables."

These were the last years of L.A.'s original Chinatown, because the owner of the land had sold it to the railroads for building Union Station. Some Chinese merchants and residents relocated in Market Chinatown, but more moved into the formerly Mexican neighborhood on upper Broadway and Hill streets where the ethnic mall known as New Chinatown opened in 1939.

In the '50s and '60s, Cantonese food saw a revival under a new name — "Polynesian" cuisine. Top-rank Polynesian restaurants such as Trader Vic's and the Luau, both in Beverly Hills, sometimes offered Peking duck alongside the usual sweet-and-sour pork, lobster Cantonese, fried rice and pupu platter. (And the rum drinks and hula music, of course.)

Setting the standard

OTHER elegant presentations of Cantonese food were appearing outside China- town. In 1954, when Panorama City was a raw new suburb, Korean American actor Phil Ahn opened Moongate, serving upscale Cantonese food in a serene setting dominated by its circular entrance gate. Arthur Wong's Far East Terrace drew customers from nearby Universal Studio in North Hollywood.

But New Chinatown still flourished as a dining destination. "General Lee's was cutting-edge in those days," recalls Eugene Moy, vice president of programs for the Chinese Historical Society of Southern California. "It had Rudi Gernreich design sharp waiters' jackets for it." Gernreich's fashions epitomized the jazzy, swinging California style of the '60s.

Around 1963, Angelenos started hearing rumors about something called Mandarin cuisine. The Shanghai Inn, a tiny place on Hollywood Boulevard around Western, made a big splash, starting your meal with sizzling rice soup and ending it with deep-fried snapper, and it was known for its Peking duck too. Hollywood flocked there. The next year, Peking Mandarin Cuisine opened in Inglewood, and we had a trend on our hands.

Food writers in L.A.'s newspapers and magazines of the era could tell Mandarin food was not Cantonese, but they couldn't put their fingers on the difference. It was said to involve more meat and spices and pay more attention to color, but it largely seemed to be about that sizzling rice. It was a category that glossed over the differences between all non-Cantonese styles of cooking, just as "Northern Italian" would later lump together a number of regional cuisines in the 1970s.

Some time in the mid-1960s, actor Cary Grant came into Madame Wu's Garden in Santa Monica, raving about a chicken salad he'd had at another restaurant. Sylvia Wu, the daughter of a wealthy and politically connected family in China who had opened a grand (and non-Americanized) Cantonese restaurant in 1961 and immediately become a favorite of Hollywood society, adapted a Cantonese banquet dish of shredded chicken with almonds, fried noodles and won ton chips as Chinese chicken salad, and her recipe soon conquered the world.

When President Nixon returned from his celebrated 1972 trip to China and remarked on how good the food was there, one result was the decade's explosion of interest in authentic Chinese cuisine. Another, due to his trade liberalization policy, was the availability of ingredients such as wood ear mushrooms and golden needles (day lily buds) — which, in themselves, made possible a craze for moo shu pork.

Foodies demanded to know what Chinese regional food was really like, and the "Mandarin" category was unpacked into the now familiar Sichuan (Szechwan), Shanghai, Beijing, Hunan and other schools. Sichuan, popularized in 1974 by Cathay de Grande in Hollywood, struck a particular chord around here; the word became a virtual synonym for "spicy." Kung pao chicken ruled the roost.

In the early '80s, taking advantage of liberalized immigration policies, a great influx of Taiwanese turned Monterey Park into the nation's first suburban Chinatown. Here were practically the first American Chinese restaurants that did not inherit the tradition of serving Americanized food. They served honest, savory Taiwanese cooking; the iconic dish was pan-fried clams in garlic black bean sauce.

Around the same time, several big seafood restaurants opened back in downtown's Chinatown, above all the famous Mon Kee, which drew the sort of adventurous diners who also ate at the period's French-influenced nouvelle cuisine restaurants such as Ma Maison. Overnight Angelenos became acquainted with shrimp in pepper salt. Menus went on with page after page of sea cucumber and crab dishes.

In the later '80s, prosperous Hong Kong immigrants created the explosion of Chinese restaurants along Valley Boulevard in Alhambra, San Gabriel and Rosemead. Here you could find Chinese Islamic cuisine and Shanghai restaurants and cookery of the Chiu Chow people, who had sojourned for centuries in Vietnam and Thailand. At one of the new restaurants, the former chef of Chinese premier Chou En-lai would cook you as fancy a dinner as you were willing to pay for (a high-end meal included a lot of vegetables marvelously carved into dragon and phoenix shapes). When the Empress Pavilion opened in downtown's New Chinatown, the victory of sophisticated Hong Kong-influenced cuisine seemed complete.

Buzzing with energy, that's our Chinese food scene today. When a new restaurant opens, flocks of people rush to check it out. Serious eaters follow chefs from restaurant to restaurant, the way foodies followed nouvelle cuisine chefs in the 1970s. There's an enthusiasm for all the ancient riches of Chinese cuisine — and the latest developments from Hong Kong.

"Sometimes, if you grew up here," says Moy, "you feel nostalgic for those old dishes like chop suey and egg foo yung.

"But then you order them, and you realize the food is so much better now."

[dragonsky]

Proposed L.A. Coliseum Olympic Enhancements Combine Historic Integrity and Modern Offerings

Temporary Structure to Add Suites and Olympic Flair for 2016 Games;
Elements Preserve Landmark’s Historic Appeal

Los Angeles, Calif. – February 22, 2007 – As part of its bid to host the 2016 Olympic Games, the Southern California Committee for the Olympic Games (SCCOG) today unveiled the architectural plan for a temporary addition including amenities such as luxury suites to the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum without altering the structure of the venue listed on the National Register of Historic Landmarks. The Coliseum is among the most revered and recognized sports monuments in the world and is the only facility to host two Olympic Games Opening and Closing Ceremonies, two Super Bowls (including the first) a World Series and a host of significant entertainment, political and religious events.

“The Coliseum has been the site of incredible events for more than 80 years, but it never shines brighter than during the Olympic Games,” said Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. “In 2016, the newly designed Coliseum will glow spectacularly.”

http://www.sccog.org/webapp/servlet/images/stories/2016/coliseumrendering2.jpg

[dragonsky]

February 28, 2007
A makeshift idea for the Olympics
Chicago and L.A. have the same notion for the 2016 Summer Games: temporary stadiums.

By Christopher Hawthorne, Times Staff Writer

For decades, cities have seen Olympic bids as among the most effective ways to jump-start civic ambition. Barcelona used the run-up to the 1992 Summer Games as an occasion to reinvent its waterfront, among other expensive improvements. And Beijing is remaking itself at a breakneck pace as it gets ready for the Olympics next year.

But as Chicago and Los Angeles jockey for the right to hold the 2016 Summer Games, a different vision of what the Olympics mean for cities is emerging. It is decidedly modest. This pair of American cities, so different in so many ways, seem to agree that the best way to win the Olympics — and to pay for them — is to design a sort of pack-and-go games. Put aside any notions of an Olympics that might spur interest, here or in Chicago, in new subway lines or massive architectural icons. A central goal in both bids is to avoid the white elephants that have plagued Sydney and other host cities.

ADVERTISEMENT
Nowhere is the shift more obvious than in the stadium designs that lie at the heart of the Chicago and Los Angeles plans. Both cities have proposed an architectural big-top approach, with facilities that can be assembled and disassembled in a matter of months.

In Chicago, it's an attractive temporary stadium in Washington Park designed by the Shanghai-based American architect Ben Wood and the local firm Goettsch Partners; it would hold 80,000 for the Olympics and then be transformed into an open-air amphitheater seating just 5,000. Even that disappearing act isn't complete enough for some Chicagoans. They think even the amphitheater, which would carve a hole in the middle of a meadow designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, is too much to leave behind.

Decision due next month

In Los Angeles, meanwhile, Olympic boosters last week unveiled their own spin on the temporary stadium idea: a proposal to add a superstructure to the Coliseum that could be removed after the athletes have left town. Designed by local architect David Jay Flood and budgeted at $112 million, the stadium addition would essentially float above the existing stadium's neoclassical bowl. A series of steel-frame towers would rise along its periphery and hold 204 luxury boxes; vinyl fabric stretched between the towers and decorated with the Olympic rings and other designs would provide shade.

The U.S. Olympic Committee members are visiting Southern California this week and will meet with Flood on Thursday. They will choose between L.A. and Chicago next month, and the U.S. nominee will then go up against a group of world cities that could include the global heavyweights Rio de Janeiro, Tokyo and Rome.

In part, the portable stadium designs can be explained by a funding loophole: According to International Olympic Committee guidelines, cities draw directly from Olympic operating funds to pay for temporary structures, while money for permanent buildings has to be raised separately. And in L.A. there is also the fact that the Coliseum, as a historic landmark, can't be permanently altered.

The preservation story line adds an intriguing twist to any architectural comparison of the stadium plans. Wood is best known in this country for his 2003 renovation to Soldier Field, longtime home of the Chicago Bears, which involved lowering a futuristic steel-and-glass addition right onto the classical seating bowl. The design has its champions — it is certainly among the boldest attempts in an American city to combine neoclassical and digitally derived architectural forms — but has proved deeply controversial in Chicago.

And apparently in Washington, D.C., as well: Just before leaving office last month, Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton decided to strip Soldier Field of its status as a national historic landmark.

Wood is taking an altogether different tack this time, producing a stadium that might as well be stamped, like a carton of milk, with an expiration date.

Flood, for his part, made sure that the L.A. Conservancy, the leading preservation group in town, had signed off on his Coliseum proposal before it was released to the public. In both cases the idea is to produce a stadium that appears to hover weightlessly over the existing city rather than squashing it.

There is a lot to recommend this approach. It avoids the political and financial pitfalls that go along with building a new stadium from scratch — the very pitfalls that doomed San Francisco's 2016 bid when negotiations involving the city, the 49ers football team and Olympic planners fell apart last year. And temporary stadiums are certainly more environmentally friendly than permanent ones, particularly when the materials that make them up can be easily dismantled and reused.

Flood's proposal even includes a nod to the Coliseum's most important tenant, the USC football team. His design is so modest that work on the stadium wouldn't have to begin until January 2016, just six or seven months before the opening ceremonies and after USC's 2015 home football schedule is safely complete.

There is also a whole emerging category of temporary-chic architecture that the two cities might tap into. The Japanese architect Shigeru Ban has proved lately that reconfigurable structures built with cardboard tubes and plastic soda crates can be as beautiful as anything made of steel and glass. So-called pop-up stores by retailers including Camper, Commes des Garcons and Target have turned their short life spans into a marketing angle, making a virtue of the fact that they're fleeting.

Unfortunately, the slapdash Coliseum renderings Flood released last week had none of those temporary projects' charismatic appeal. After hosting the games in 1932 and 1984, we hardly seem desperate, as a city and a region, to win the same right again — and Flood's renderings have emerged as the perfect visual symbol of our general lack of interest. It didn't help that the scheme was unveiled during Oscar week, when all local eyes were trained on the intersection of Hollywood and Highland; there was more ink spilled on whether Ellen DeGeneres would wear sneakers onstage than whether we had a shot for 2016.

In Chicago, on the other hand, where winter has yet to break and dreams of any midsummer celebration have an intrinsic appeal, Olympic fever is rampant. Wood's sleek renderings of his temporary stadium scheme reflect the passionate hopes of a city that is sports-obsessed and has never played host to an Olympics. The elegant design begins with a steel frame covered with taut fabric roof. Slots in the exterior suggest an abstracted version of a classical colonnade. From above — as seen from, say, a blimp hovering in the sky to provide dramatic shots for broadcast — the asymmetrical stadium would suggest a giant letter C, for Chicago.

If Flood's design spells out anything it is e-n-n-u-i. It is baffling that in the middle of what is essentially a marketing battle between two cities we would send his renderings into the media maw. We live in an era when architectural image can be as important as the finished product. And even if the Olympics are no longer seen as a fail-safe way to catalyze large-scale civic projects, the games are at heart about publicizing a vision of one city to viewers around the world.

The view from above

That's why Athens, the 2004 summer host, spent a good chunk of its Olympic budget hiring the Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava to add a stunning, bone-white roof to an existing stadium: Its organizers understood, as Chicago clearly does, that the way the building looked from above, on worldwide television, was just as important as how it appeared to fans in the seats.

Of course, the wisdom of building icons that do little for a city once the Olympics are gone is debatable — and, in general, the pragmatism apparent in both American bids makes sense. But the process of selling a city to national and then international Olympic gatekeepers is almost by definition one ruled by visual conjecture: To succeed means creating an effective collage of how your city might look a decade or so in the future.

Perhaps the USOC committee that's in town this week will look past the renderings and recognize that in terms of infrastructure and existing facilities our bid has a number of advantages. But if they don't, and if they hand the 2016 nomination to Chicago on a silver platter, we can hardly claim to be surprised.

[dragonsky]

Watery Disputes

Controversy and Complaints Follow New L.A. River Plan

by Evan George

Last month, the City Council rolled out an ambitious plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River from Canoga Park to Downtown. The massive report capped an 18-month campaign of unprecedented community outreach.
An image from the recently released L.A. River plan. A coalition of Latino groups claims many of its suggestions have been ignored. Rendering by Bureau of Engineering

Now, less than two weeks before the draft plan enters its final stage, the most vocal and well-organized coalition involved in that process is up in arms, claiming its input has been marginalized.

Though city leaders and others strongly defend the document, some acknowledge that improvements to the final plan are necessary.

Leaders of the Alianza de los Pueblo del Rio, a loose coalition of Latino organizations, last week said the plan focuses too much on beautifying the concrete channel's riverside property and not enough on the mostly poor, park-starved communities that surround it.

"The plan as it stands now could be called the L.A. River Gentrification Master Plan," said Robert Garcia, executive director of the nonprofit City Project, which provides legal and research aid to the Alianza. "It's utterly incomprehensible why they would have ignored all of our input, not cited any of our work, not cited any of our maps and our statistics on children's health and the lack of parks."

Leaders of the Alianza scrambled last week to put together a rebuke of the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan before public comment on the draft ends March 27.
*

The group finds itself in a strange position: once heralded by city leaders for generating excitement and feedback about the master plan and now on the offensive for more input.

The report, which Garcia said will be released this week and presented formally to the Council's Ad Hoc River Committee, assails city officials for paying lip service to issues like public health and gang prevention in urban communities without offering detailed solutions.

"One of our biggest concerns is that it utterly disregards human health and the need for places for physical activity in parks and schools to improve health," Garcia said.

The plan identifies 239 improvement projects along a 32-mile stretch of the river. They include everything from pocket parks to creating more than 4,600 housing units near Chinatown. Implementing all of them would cost more than $2 billion.

However, only two of the 87 proposed park projects include any sports fields or facilities.

Councilman Ed Reyes, who chairs the Ad Hoc River Committee, defended the plan even as he praised the Alianza's success in garnering feedback. He acknowledged the need for more active parks, but said those uses must be balanced with other concerns, like flood control.

"Where possible I will advocate for the active space," he said.

Additionally, Reyes said, two obvious sites for heavy recreation use - the new Los Angeles State Historic Park at the former Cornfield and the Rio de Los Angeles State Park at Taylor Yard - are overseen by the state Parks Department, not the city.

"What it speaks to is the need to have the state redefine its definition of parks," Reyes said, "especially in the urban centers, and that's a cultural shift for the state."

Making Waves

The complaints don't stop at more soccer fields.

Last week officials with the William C. Velasquez Institute, a nonprofit Latino policy center and member of the Alianza, criticized the plan's environmental impact report for using demographics that, they say, grossly underestimate the impact on Latinos.

The study looked only at neighborhoods within a half mile of the river, while Latino leaders say the city should consider the overwhelmingly Latino neighborhoods within one to three miles that would be affected.

City officials have said they will include broader statistics but not redo any of the analysis.

The master plan has also been attacked for failing to include specific measures to help spur local jobs and build more affordable housing.

Alianza leaders said they have been championing these issues to city officials for 18 months at more than 50 meetings. By organizing families to participate in the city-sponsored workshops, and even spearheading their own well-attended meetings, the Alianza became the overwhelming voice, said Reyes and others.

Reyes added that the Alianza's input will inform future details. "The implementation arms... the governing structure itself, I believe, is where you're going to see those details emerge," Reyes said.

Garcia is skeptical.

"If that's their approach than why are they so specific as to everything else, such as pocket parks, paseos, promenades, linear parks and ecological restoration?" he asked.

While Alianza chafes at the plan, other groups who participated - as well as some that didn't - applaud the initial results.

Russell Brown, president of the Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council, said his group is impressed by the overall concept, though they disagree with some of the details.

Brown called the plan "an interesting first step," and said many of the DLANC members were "surprised it was this far along," because they had been less involved in the process. The Friends of the Los Angeles River, a longtime activist group, has also signaled its approval.

James Rojas, a planner for MTA who runs Spring Street's Gallery 727 (where a current exhibit allows visitors to make their own models of the river plan) takes issue with the complaints of those who are upset with the master plan.

"Some of the funnier critiques I've heard is that it's not going to solve gang violence. That's not the river's problem, or a design problem, that's a much larger social problem," Rojas said. "It's not going to solve world hunger."

[DJM19]

^I dont really see what they are complaining about. The plan seems pretty solid to me. This is a park revitalization, its a shot in the arm, but a magic cure to everything they deem wrong with their neighborhood. Good parks generate activity, which generates buildings, which generate jobs and housing.

[dragonsky]

Commission Gives Westfield Go Ahead

By Traci Kratzer

Glazer said because the EIR previously completed by Westfield is seven years old they should be required to complete a new EIR.

“We all know what this is about,” Glazer said. “Westfield doesn’t want to spend the money or the time to provide details on how much they want to build.”

Stephanie Eyestone-Jones, a principle with PCR Corporation, said she completed the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for the addendum of the expansion and assured the commissioners that the report was “reviewed twice under CEQA guidelines.”

One of the biggest concerns for residents with both the Westfield expansion and the Caruso/Santa Anita racetrack project is traffic. Pat Gibson, a traffic and parking analyst, said that the traffic mitigation measures related to the proposed expansion have been studied and no significant impacts were found.

The city staff report did include a list of mitigation measures that remain outstanding and stated that each of the measures are under the jurisdiction of either Caltrans or Los Angeles County.

Resident Mary Doughtery said she had hoped to be supportive of the project but urged the commission to reject the addendum until “Westfield makes a cooperative and collaborative effort to control traffic impacts.”

“Westfield has good traffic, everyone else has bad traffic,” Doughtery said. “I can’t subscribe to that.”

Discussion on the expansion will go before the city council for a public hearing on April 3.

The architectural design review for the 100,800 square foot second expansion of the Westfield Santa Anita Mall received unanimous approval from the Planning Commission Tuesday night.

The commissioners also accepted the addendum to Westfield’s certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) from 2000.

“We are consistently improving and investing in the community,” said Ken Wong, President of U.S. Operations for Westfield. “Our plan for the future is to approach that in a phased and logical manner.”

Wong said the expansion, which has been named “The Promenade,” will consist of five blocks of retail buildings in the southwest quadrant of the property south of Nordstrom and west of Macy’s. Wong said “The Promenade” will generate $540,000 annually to the city.

In a ten page letter to the members of the planning commission, Patricia Glazer, lawyer for both The Turf Club and Santa Anita Companies Inc., said that the addendum to the project is “flawed” and “inconsistent” with the City’s General Plan for several reasons. Included in those reasons was what she called the “shifting and understated size of the project.” She said the project appears to have grown in scope by approximately 200,000 to 400,000 sq. ft. She added that the certified 2000 EIR looked at a project with a floor area ratio (FAR) of .44, and the expansion as it is today looks to be over the allowed .50 FAR.

However, according to city staff reports, Westfield’s original request for an additional 600,000 sq. ft. of Gross Leasable Area (GLA) as analyzed in the 2000 EIR, shows that the expansion is below the allowable FAR of .50.

[dragonsky]

Mall wars take aim at Arcadia City Hall
By Kenneth Todd Ruiz Staff Writer

ARCADIA - The latest salvo in this city's mall wars is aimed directly at City Hall.

Opponents of the proposed Caruso Affiliated development near the Santa Anita Park race track have filed a complaint accusing the City Council of breaking open-meeting laws.

An attorney for Arcadia First! asked the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office to investigate whether negotiations between the city and Caruso violated the Brown Act because they were held outside of public view.

Arcadia First! receives funding from Westfield, which aggressively opposes construction of the 800,000-square-foot shopping complex adjacent to the mall it owns.

City Attorney Stephen Deitsch said Wednesday the discussions were "lawful and appropriate."

The Brown Act provides limited reasons for public bodies to meet in private, so the public is privy to their decision-making process.

The specific matters discussed - which Deitsch said he could not elaborate upon - likely related to a long-negotiated development agreement between Caruso and the city.

Hypothetically, Deitsch said, if such deliberations included the purchase, lease or exchange of real estate, "then it would be lawful and appropriate to discuss the price and terms of payment in closed session."

Sung Tse, spokeswoman for Arcadia First!, challenged the council at a recent meeting to conduct its business in the open.

According to published agendas, City Council members met privately with city staff, track owner Magna Entertainment Corp. and Caruso Affiliated to discuss "price and terms of payment" for the "southerly parking area" of the track.

"I understand they are allowed closed sessions," she said of the council, but questioned why the Caruso firm was allowed to participate when it doesn't own that land. "What does he have to do with these closed sessions?"

Councilman Bob Harbicht said Wednesday he could not go into the specifics of negotiations, but added that the reason for holding a closed session would be clear once a draft of the development agreement is made public.

"It's one of those things that's hard to defend yourself because the only way to defend yourself is to disclose what was said in closed session," he said. "And then it's no longer a closed session."

A draft of the agreement could be made public as early as next week, according to Assistant City Manager Don Penman.

Two weeks later, on March 19, Caruso's proposal goes before the Planning Commission. If the City Council subsequently approves the plan, Westfield is expected to initiate a ballot initiative to let voters second-guess the council's decision.

Meanwhile, the next phase of Westfield's expansion plans were approved by the Planning Commission on Tuesday night, despite urging by Caruso that a new environmental impact report be prepared.

City staff concluded that the Promenade expansion, which would add 100,000 square feet of open-air commercial space and a two-level parking structure, was covered by a previous impact study.

But a Tuesday report to the Planning Commission refuted the mall owner's published claims last fall that its ballot measure to limit signs would "apply to all of Arcadia's businesses - including Westfield Santa Anita."

"Despite what this campaign literature stated, the measure clearly applied only to the Racetrack property and not other properties," the report said.

Voters narrowly passed Measure N in November.

[dragonsky]

City Council denies meeting allegations
By Kenneth Todd Ruiz Staff Writer

ARCADIA - Members of the City Council never met in private with a developer and property owner, city officials said Thursday.

Refuting allegations made by opponents of Caruso Affiliated's The Shops at Santa Anita, Councilman Bob Harbicht said the council did meet in closed sessions, but only with city staff to discuss land located in the parking lot of Santa Anita Park.

"The council has never met privately with Magna or Caruso," Harbicht said. "The only people in the closed sessions were council, city staff and the city attorney."

Council agendas published by the city list Caruso and racetrack owner Magna Entertainment Corp. among "Negotiating Parties" in regard to what is described as the "southerly parking area of Santa Anita Race Track."

The meetings, held in December and January, are believed to relate to a development agreement under negotiation between Caruso and the city in tandem with the

developer's proposal to build an 800,000-square-foot outdoor mall on property owned by Magna Entertainment Corp.

Westfield has been highly critical of - and has organized community resistance to - the project, which is proposed for a site adjacent to the Westfield mall on Baldwin Avenue.

The closed-session meetings prompted the spokeswoman of Arcadia First!, a Westfield- funded community group, to ask why Caruso and Magna representatives were involved.

Julie Wong, Caruso spokeswoman, said there's a simple explanation - they weren't.

"We never had anybody participate in these closed-session meetings," she said. "This is another example of Westfield misleading Arcadia residents with false accusations."

The council acted within the law by not including outsiders in the meetings, said Terry Francke, counsel for Californians Aware, an open-government advocacy group.

But the discussion could not have strayed from the specific price and terms of the land deal in question, Francke added, or extend to any other terms of the development agreement.

"When it says price or terms of payment, that's exactly what it means," he said, referring to the description published on the council agenda.

Douglas Carstens, a lawyer representing Arcadia First!, filed a complaint with the District Attorney's Office. The complaint is under review.

[dragonsky]

The Shops at Santa Anita
http://www.shopsatsantaanita.com/

[dragonsky]

Tuesday, February 20, 2007
CALIFORNIA’S THREE MAJOR HORSE RACING ORGANIZATIONS ANNOUNCE SUPPORT FOR THE SHOPS AT SANTA ANITA
California Horse Racing Board Chair also announces endorsement for outdoor retail center at Santa Anita Park

Arcadia – California’s three major horse racing organizations today announced their support for The Shops at Santa Anita, the outdoor, upscale shopping and dining center proposed by Caruso Affiliated. The Shops at Santa Anita is being proposed in partnership with the owners of Santa Anita Park and would be constructed on the parking lot south of the grandstand.

The Thoroughbred Owners of California, California Thoroughbred Breeders Association, and the California Thoroughbred Trainers say they are supporting The Shops at Santa Anita because they believe it will help ensure the long-term viability of Santa Anita Park and the sport of horse racing in California.

“In our view, this plan is precisely the type of project that can bring new energy to Santa Anita Park, and that can improve its long-term viability as one of California’s – if not the nation’s – premier racetracks,” wrote Thoroughbred Owners of California President Drew J. Couto, whose organization is certified by the California Horse Racing Board to represent Thoroughbred horse owners. “This is critical both to the industry and, we understand, to the City of Arcadia, which has always been very supportive of our industry.”

“We believe that this project, to be built adjacent to Santa Anita Park, would greatly enhance the race track as well as provide further economic benefit to the industry. We commend both you and the ownership of Santa Anita Park for undertaking such an important development, which would help ensure the long-term viability of live racing at the historic venue,” wrote California Thoroughbred Breeders Association Executive Vice President and General Manager Doug Burge, whose organization has represented California breeders and thoroughbred farms for more than 60 years.

“Ensuring the long-term viability of Santa Anita Park is critical, and we believe your project will do that,” wrote California Thoroughbred Trainers Executive Director and General Counsel Edward I. Halpern, whose organization represents hundreds of thoroughbred trainers throughout the state. “The project, in our view, will architecturally complement the racetrack and has taken into account to the greatest extent possible the operational needs of the horsemen.”

California Horse Racing Board Chair Richard Shapiro also joined the organizations in supporting the project saying that he looks forward to its “swift approval and development.”

“I believe strongly that [The Shops at Santa Anita’s] development would be a great benefit to the long-term viability of Santa Anita Park and to California’s horse racing industry. I appreciate the steps you have taken to address all parties’ concerns including the design of the project, which will be a complement to the beauty and tradition of Santa Anita Park,” wrote Shapiro.

“Caruso Affiliated has been working closely with our partners at Santa Anita Park to ensure that The Shops at Santa Anita will enhance the viability of the track and horse racing by introducing new generations of families to the sport of kings,” said Rick Caruso, Founder and CEO of Caruso Affiliated. “We are proud that California’s leaders in horse racing are supporting The Shops at Santa Anita.”

“Santa Anita Park is proud to be part of California’s horse racing heritage and we are grateful for the support we have received from horse racing organizations. We want to ensure that the racetrack is a strong business for many years. Our partnership with Caruso Affiliated is an important part of our long-term plans,” said George Haines, Vice President and General Manager of Santa Anita Park.

The Shops at Santa Anita is supported by Arcadia organizations including the Arcadia Firefighters Association, the Acadia Police Officers Association, the Arcadia Chamber of Commerce, the Rancho Santa Anita Residents’ Association, and the Arcadia Unified School District.

The Shops at Santa Anita will provide new upscale shops, unique outdoor restaurants, lushly landscaped park-like settings and promenades where Arcadians can come to walk around, relax, and enjoy each other’s company. At the request of Arcadia residents, the project will include a community performing arts center where school and community organizations can hold performances. The center would be built and maintained at no cost to taxpayers. Also at the request of Arcadians, The Shops at Santa Anita no longer includes housing of any kind.

[dragonsky]

Silver Streak transit service set to launch
By Nisha Gutierrez Staff Writer

. Video: 3/8: Silver Streak buses

EL MONTE - Foothill Transit is launching what officials are touting as a cutting-edge bus service expected to give commuters a quicker and smoother ride into downtown Los Angeles and other major station stops.

Transit officials unveiled the new Silver Streak Thursday at the El Monte Bus Station and said it will hit the streets March 18.

"This is a commuter's dream," said Wilfred Briesemeister, Foothill Transit executive board president. "These are not the buses of yesteryear."

The 60-foot tandem buses will be equipped with free Wi-Fi service to allow riders to do work, surf the Internet or check e-mails. The agency's Smart Bus Equipment, which includes an automatic vehicle location system, will provide automatic stop announcements, automatic passenger counters, on-board security cameras and station stop bus arrival displays.

Briesemeister said the 30-bus fleet also features comfortable seating, capacity for up to 58 riders and provides people with an opportunity be more productive and relaxed on their commute.

Felicia Friesema, Foothill Transit spokeswoman, said the new service will cost $6.5 million per year to maintain operation and will be paid for through state and local funding sources.

"The idea was to create a high-capacity people mover to alleviate some of the crowding we were seeing on Line 480, which is our most popular line, and meet the greatest needs, which is why it is stopping at major station stops," Friesema said.

Friesema said the Silver Streak will give riders a quicker commute time by eliminating some local stops that Line 480 makes and by spending only about 5 percent of its total trip on surface streets. Instead, it will travel primarily on the San Bernardino (10) Freeway and HOV lanes.

In addition to Los Angeles, the Silver Streak also will take customers to major station stops in Montclair, Pomona, West Covina and El Monte.

When the Silver Streak begins service, Friesema said Line 480, which stretches from Montclair to Los Angeles, will no longer travel into downtown Los Angeles.

John Fasana, a board member and Duarte City Councilman, said the Silver Streak will help improve transportation in the San Gabriel and Pomona valleys.

"This is important for our valleys because it's going to get people out of their cars and onto public transit and give them a quick ride to work, which will help ease congestion on the freeways," Fasana said. "If you think about the cost of parking downtown and sitting in traffic, this is really a great savings."

Officials said the Silver Streak will provide daily service running every 10-12 minutes, 24 hours a day.

The Silver Streak bus fare will cost riders $2 each way and 31-day passes will be $80. Seniors, people with disabilities and Medicare cardholders can ride for $1.

To help promote the new service Foothill Transit is offering free rides on the Silver Streak from March 18 to April 1.

Foothill Transit now operates 35 fixed-route local, express and rail-feeder lines, covers 327 square miles, and serves 15 million customers each year.

[dragonsky]

Hopes high for low-profile mall
A developer seeks to give Santa Monica Place an open-air redesign. It drops high-rise plans.
By Martha Groves, Times Staff Writer
March 5, 2007

A long-awaited remodeling of aging Santa Monica Place could begin as soon as a year from now if the city approves a design by Macerich Co., the mall's owner, to peel off the roof and open the center to ocean breezes and the Third Street Promenade.

Macerich executives say they expect to meet today with city officials, and then on Tuesday submit plans detailing how they would update the shopping center, which opened in 1980 and was an early project of architect Frank O. Gehry.

The "adaptive reuse" plan marks a significant scaling down of a 2004 proposal by Macerich that called for tearing down the flagging mall and replacing it with a 10-acre complex of high-rise condos, shops and offices.

Many community members protested the prospect of such a grandiose project, saying it would ruin the city's generally low-rise ambience and exacerbate traffic congestion. Chastened, Macerich last June scrapped those plans and began diligently seeking community input to ensure that its replacement design would meet with approval.

"What we're trying to accomplish is to convert this suburban shopping center … to fit more with the urban fabric of the city," said Robert D. Aptaker, vice president of real estate for Macerich, based in Santa Monica.

A city official said previews of the proposal indicated that Macerich had tried to satisfy community desires. "It looks like they spent a lot of time listening to the community," said Andy Agle, director of housing and economic development. "It looks to be more in line with some of the feedback we've heard."

Victor Fresco, co-chairman of the Santa Monica Coalition for a Livable City, agreed. He said he was pleased that the new plan would slightly decrease, rather than dramatically increase, the center's size.

"An addition would have had huge negative impacts on traffic and parking," Fresco said. Already, he added, "downtown has become almost impossible to navigate."

The remodeled center, only 47% of which is leased, now has 570,000 square feet.

Aptaker cautioned that the design for the center, which Macerich bought in 1999, was still evolving. But he listed a number of elements that he said were integral to the new concept. In addition to stripping away the roof, the company plans to create public walkways, large gathering places and a third-floor dining deck with ocean views. Other amenities would include a children's play area, a public art installation and a gallery for exhibiting artists' work.

Aptaker said Macerich expected the renovated mall to "be a partner with the Third Street Promenade" but with more distinctive, upscale retailers for a "more mature customer." He said many retailers had expressed enthusiasm about being in Santa Monica, but he said the company had not yet signed any new leases.

Once construction gets underway, Aptaker said, all shops except for Macy's department store would close. The two parking levels, with just under 2,000 spaces, would remain open. If construction begins in early 2008, as Macerich hopes, the mall would reopen in fall 2009.

"It won't feel like a mall anymore," Aptaker said. "We want it to feel like part of the community."

Agle said the city would analyze the project according to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act.

Because the revamped mall would be smaller, he said he doubted that Macerich would have to complete an environmental report.

The approval process, he said, could be completed by late summer.

[dragonsky]

March 9, 2007
Billionaire's buying has the town talking
Oracle CEO Larry Ellison's purchases may help remake a piece of Malibu. So far he's submitted plans for two new restaurants.

By Martha Groves, Times Staff Writer

For years now, software magnate Larry Ellison has been on a spending spree in Malibu that has caused even his fellow billionaires' tongues to wag.

By some accounts, he has shelled out as much as $200 million for more than a dozen properties, including five adjacent residential parcels on Carbon Beach, two nearby restaurants, the Casa Malibu Inn and a vacant gas station or two that he apparently intends to use for customer parking.

Carbon Beach, which runs east from the Malibu Pier for about 1 1/2 miles, is also known as Billionaires Beach thanks to its lineup of denizens including philanthropist Eli Broad, former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, television financier Haim Saban, producer Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen, the music magnate who famously battled the state over public beach access.

So far, Ellison, 62, has submitted plans to the city of Malibu for two new restaurants, including one expected to feature ultra-high-end Japanese cuisine. That would be in keeping with his affinity for the finer things in life and for all things Japanese.

The Oracle Corp. chief executive — who, according to Forbes magazine, is worth nearly $20 billion — spent 10 years and a reported $200 million re-creating a Japanese village on his 23-acre estate in Woodside, south of San Francisco. And Rising Sun was the name he chose for his 454-foot yacht, said to be the world's longest privately owned boat.

Jefferson Wagner, owner of Zuma Jay surf shop on Pacific Coast Highway, speculates that Ellison wants to "control this end of town" because of his restaurant plans.

"He's buying what he needs to create his little world," said Wagner, whose store is across the street from some of Ellison's commercial parcels. "I'm not knockin' it. It's an upgrade as far as local merchants are concerned."

Ellison's representatives did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Meanwhile, Geffen is renovating the nearby Malibu Beach Inn, which is taking online room reservations for June.

"Geffen will raise the bar on what has been a dated hotel but a great location," said Tony Dorn, a longtime Malibu resident and commercial real estate broker.

Geffen and Ellison are changing what has been, commercially speaking, a rather forlorn stretch of the highway, an odd state of affairs considering the immense collective wealth of the locals.

Dorn said Geffen and Ellison were drawn to the properties because there are so few commercial parcels on the beach side of PCH. "The Malibu commercial environment is so tight, and there are no [new] permits available right now," Dorn said. "That's what makes it attractive to these people."

Residents and real estate agents say houses on Carbon Beach, even the few remaining "shacks," would start at $20 million. Courteney Cox and David Arquette recently put their four-bedroom, five-bathroom showcase house, with 80 feet of frontage, on the market for $33.5 million.

Ellison's buying binge started in 2003, when he paid $65 million for five adjacent residential properties on Carbon Beach. Next, a couple of restaurants at the beach's western end near the pier caught his eye. According to local scuttlebutt, in early 2004 he paid nearly $30 million for the Pier View Cafe and Cantina and the Windsail. Both have been shuttered since. City officials say Ellison recently bought the Casa Malibu Inn, a beachfront getaway that opened in 1949 and is near the restaurants. In addition, he reportedly purchased a $20-million home in a gated hillside community just west of Malibu Pier.

The situation is once again turning a spotlight on Malibu's rich and famous and their hunger for land. One resident who socializes with Carbon Beach's well-heeled residents and asked to remain anonymous said of them: "They're sort of in this club. They walk on the beach and schmooze. What they all talked about was how to get more property on Carbon Beach. They're asking each other if they'll sell their place for any amount of money."

Since Ellison began popping into town to conduct business and relax, Malibu residents have engaged in the game of Larry-spotting. Wagner ran into him at the local Ralphs and jokingly asked, "On that real estate thing, have you left anything for me?" He said Ellison replied, "I hear your building's for sale." Wagner promptly found a partner, who helped him buy the building that houses his surf shop for $4.2 million. "I could just see the glint in his eye," Wagner said of Ellison.

Last week, the City Council, on a first reading, narrowly approved a zoning change that would allow Ellison to proceed with plans for a commercial enterprise on one of his restaurant sites. That change, known as a local coastal program amendment, faces a second vote by the council and then would need to be approved by the California Coastal Commission. The other restaurant has already been approved by the city planning commission.

Mayor Ken Kearsley, who voted against the amendment, said he fears that the restaurants will cause a traffic backup on the highway. He also said Ellison should honor a development agreement between the city and the previous owner, who had promised to donate $400,000 to local schools and include a community room in his proposed beach club and spa.

"At this point, he hasn't brought anything to the table," Kearsley said of Ellison, adding that, for the billionaire, $400,000 would be "couch change."

For a time, rumor had it that Ellison would try to lure Nobu, a celebrity hangout in the Malibu Country Mart, to Carbon Beach. Whether it's that or another upscale eatery, some business owners are cheering him on.

"Put the restaurant back, whatever it is," Wagner said. "I'll never be able to afford to go there, but at least sushi will smell better than the septic."

[dragonsky]

Silver Streak buses start Montclair-L.A. run
Foothill Transit wants Caltrans to restrict access to carpool lanes during peak hours so its new freeway flyers can make good time.
By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
March 19, 2007

As traffic congestion through the Pomona and San Gabriel valleys worsens, the promise of a quicker commute — and amenities such as free wireless Internet service — should lure some solo motorists onto the new Silver Streak rapid buses.

But the success of the new service from Montclair to downtown Los Angeles, which started Sunday, rests on whether the 60-foot buses will be able to bypass traffic by racing down the San Bernardino Freeway carpool lanes.

Like the rest of the freeway, the high-occupancy vehicle lanes are getting crowded, whether from more carpools or solo drivers in hybrid vehicles using the dedicated lanes.

"There are just too many cars," said Doran Barnes, executive director of Foothill Transit, the public agency that runs the Silver Streak bus service.

So Barnes and other local transit officials are asking the California Department of Transportation to restrict access to the carpool lanes for at least two more hours each workday.

Vehicles — except hybrids — with fewer than three people are already banned during peak traffic hours, weekdays from 5 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 7 p.m.

Even with those restrictions, it now takes a bus two hours at rush hour to travel the same Montclair-to-downtown route that took 94 minutes a decade ago. Travel times have increased seven to 10 minutes in the last 18 months, transit officials said.

The Silver Streak is expected to reduce travel times to as little as about 90 minutes by stopping only at major transit hubs.

Buses have barreled past cars on the 10 Freeway east of downtown Los Angeles in their own dedicated lanes, known as the El Monte Busway, for most of three decades. But although the lanes were built for buses only, political pressures soon converted them into carpool lanes as well. That change came with a hitch, however: Vehicles had to carry at least three people, rather than the two that is standard for other such lanes.

After a failed experiment to open the lanes to vehicles with two or more people, a compromise was struck a few years ago, allowing such vehicles back in but only during off-peak hours. The busway is still one of the state's few sets of carpool lanes requiring three or more people per vehicle, if only during peak hours.

But transit officials say that compromise is no longer working. Like the buildup of residential developments along the bus route, rush-hour traffic on the San Bernardino Freeway is sprawling.

"Even with three in the carpool lane, we are seeing challenges," said Barnes, whose agency moves 15,000 commuters a day along the busway.

To keep its buses running on time, Foothill Transit wants to extend the morning restrictions to 10 a.m. and begin the afternoon peak period an hour earlier at 3 p.m.

"We need to get aggressive about trying to protect the integrity of the busway," said John Fasana, a Duarte city councilman who sits on the boards of Foothill Transit and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Caltrans officials say they are studying the idea. They are also working to secure funds to complete the stretch of carpool lanes between the 605 Freeway and the San Bernardino County line.

Fasana knows that plush new buses and free Internet service won't persuade motorists to give up their car keys unless they can get to work a little faster and on time. And that's where the Silver Streak comes in: It should take as little as 91 minutes to travel the 40 miles from the Montclair TransCenter to its last stop at Grand Avenue and Olympic Boulevard in downtown L.A.

Buses will operate around the clock and are scheduled to run every 12 minutes in peak time. The other stops are in Pomona, West Covina and El Monte, and at Cal State L.A., County-USC Medical Center and Union Station.

Besides providing Internet connections, the new buses are equipped with GPS and security cameras. An automated system will announce station stops and display bus arrival times.

The fare is $2, with discounts for eligible seniors, people with disabilities and Medicare cardholders. But until April 1, passengers can ride free.

[dragonsky]

Proposed Mall Near Santa Anita Racetrack Draws Fire
Created: Monday, 19 Mar 2007, 1:10 AM PDT

ARCADIA -- Those for and against a proposed high-end shopping center at a mostly unused parking lot at the Santa Anita racetrack in the San Gabriel Valley will be able to express their opinions at public hearings that begin Monday.

Developer Rick Caruso, who turned the parking lot at Farmers Market into The Grove, has set his sights on the unsightly asphalt next to the historic park. The planning commission in Arcadia will let residents comment on the plans tomorrow night at a public hearing that is expected to draw hundreds of people.

The adjacent cities of Pasadena and San Marino have weighed in with concerns about traffic, housing and other worries.

"Air pollution from additional traffic, the congestion from traffic, and blocking the view of our mountains and of the historical landmark (racetrack) would change forever the way of life in suburban Arcadia," said Jeff Schenkel, a spokesman for Arcadia First, a group opposing the plan.

As envisioned by Caruso, and his firm, Caruso Affiliated, The Shops at Santa Anita would be built next to the historic horse track, which was a major location for the hit movie "Seabiscuit." A letter from the firm to Arcadia residents promises to "build on the rich heritage of the track and provide upscale shops, unique outdoor restaurants, and lushly landscaped park-like settings and promenades."

The firm has sweetened the pot for Arcadia residents with promises of a community performing arts center and 25,000 square feet of office space for the Arcadia School District headquarters.

But opponents said they worry about a 98,000-square-foot off-track betting parlor that would be built in the mall, using the track's racing license. In addition, Schenkel said the center would snarl traffic at 20 nearby intersections, as the project would be 61 percent larger than The Grove in the Fairfax District of Los Angeles.

The Westfield Group, owner of a large shopping center next to the racetrack, has already said it opposes the project. Caruso spent millions in Glendale battling a different company over a Caruso project called The Americana that eventually was approved by Glendale voters.

San Marino city planners have told Arcadia they worry about mall-related traffic on already-congested Huntington Drive, and Pasadena officials said they are worried about snarls at Colorado Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue during peak hours.

Pasadena officials have also asked Arcadia to include affordable housing in the plan. The housing was part of the mall's original plans, but dropped after Arcadia residents objected.

[dragonsky]

Arcadia planning panel approves proposed mall
The action is a setback for the Westfield Santa Anita shopping center, whose owner opposes the project by developer Rick Caruso.
By Tony Barboza, Times Staff Writer
March 23, 2007

Arcadia this week came one step closer to approving an 830,000-square-foot outdoor shopping center near the Santa Anita racetrack, the latest round in a bitter fight between two prominent mall companies.

For more than two years the normally sleepy San Gabriel Valley city has been embroiled in a battle between developer Rick Caruso, who is known for his signature open-air shopping villages such as The Grove, and the existing Westfield Santa Anita Mall, a traditional indoor mall that opposes a new neighbor.

The Arcadia Planning Commission on Wednesday voted unanimously to recommend approval of The Shops at Santa Anita, the new mall, to the City Council.

The proposal is expected to be approved by the council next month, city staff said.

But the proposal probably will hit some bumps after that: Opponents plan a ballot referendum against the mall later this year.

They say that not enough demand exists for new commercial space and cite concerns about traffic, pollution and crime.

"It just doesn't make sense to have another mall next to an existing mall in a community of 25,000 homes," said Sung Tse, a member of the executive board of Arcadia First!, a group funded by Westfield that opposes the development.

The 4,000-member nonprofit has inundated residents with full-page ads in local newspapers and has mailed letters, postcards and DVDs to residents several times a week as the City Council moves closer to reaching a decision, Tse said.

Caruso Affiliated has countered with its own newspaper ads.

Rick Caruso said the new development would boost business at the existing mall and racetrack.

He said Westfield's opposition to his development was anti-competitive, based on fear of lower leases.

"Westfield is scared of it because they're living in a past world where all these indoor malls had these little fiefdoms," he said.

Westfield officials could not be reached for comment late Thursday.

Wednesday's Planning Commission meeting was the second of the week on the issue.

After 750 residents showed up to raise impassioned pleas on both sides at a city Planning Commission meeting Monday — prompting supervision by police and the fire marshal, Assistant City Manager Don Penman said — a second meeting was convened Wednesday.

The conflict echoes Caruso's fight to build the Americana at Brand project in Glendale.

That project is under construction next to the Glendale Galleria.

[dragonsky]

History, density are uneasy neighbors in Pasadena
Residents say a pair of developments planned near Old Town threaten the district's character. City officials say they favor smart growth.
By Tony Barboza, Times Staff Writer
March 23, 2007

Before Disney Hall and Segerstrom Hall, Ambassador Auditorium in Pasadena was renowned as one of the premier concert halls in Southern California.

Now it is at the center of tensions over the development of one of Old Town Pasadena's last relatively open spaces.

The 1,262-seat glass-and-concrete structure, surrounded by an elegant reflecting pool, opened in 1974 and is now owned by Harvest Rock Church, a nondenominational Christian congregation that draws about 1,000 worshipers each Sunday.

The auditorium is the cultural heart of the former Ambassador College campus, a 48-acre parcel that was owned by the Worldwide Church of God until 2004, when it began selling off the land in chunks to Harvest Rock, a school and two developers.

One of those developers, Pasadena-based Dorn Platz, plans to build more than 300 condos and apartments on 20 acres of the property. The bulk of Ambassador West, as the project is called, would be a six-story senior housing complex next to the auditorium. The plan has church officials feeling boxed in. Although they do not oppose the project, they say it will dwarf their worship space, which doubles as a concert venue for the California Philharmonic and other area orchestras.

"Why does it have to be so big?" asked Doug Huse, director of operations for the church. "It's too huge. It's too massive. It overpowers the neighborhood."

The project is one of two major housing complexes slated for the campus, where lush gardens with fountains and manicured lawns are dotted with well-kept period-revival mansions that used to be part of "Millionaires' Row" along Orange Grove Boulevard. Together, they will bring more than 1,000 new dwellings to Pasadena, a city of 141,000 that for decades has been described as built out.

"There are certainly no other 20-acre parcels sitting around," Mayor Bill Bogaard said.

The Pasadena City Council is expected to approve the new project, which has the support of historic preservationists and the West Pasadena Residents' Assn., on April 2.

In September, the City Council approved the development of an "urban village" of 820 residences and 22,000 square feet of commercial space, called Westgate, at the eastern end of the campus. It will be the largest housing development in the city's history and is expected to break ground this fall.

Those projects will complement Old Town's commercial space, placing consumers within walking distance of Colorado Boulevard's shops and restaurants, and giving them less reason to drive, said Mike Winter, a senior vice president of Sares-Regis, the developer of Westgate.

But some are concerned that the housing will further increase the density of the already traffic-congested downtown and change the character of a historic area. Pasadena has in recent years embraced smart growth — building high-density condos and apartments near commercial areas and transit lines. The city's downtown development boom has taken place alongside criticism that its growth model is unrealistic and that the new condos and lofts detract from the city's stately past.

Chris Sutton, a land-use attorney who grew up in the neighborhood and has represented anti-development residents, called the promises of high-density growth "inconsistent" and "hypocritical."

"Wealthier people see their city becoming more congested and overbuilt, and poorer people see the city becoming too expensive to live in," he said.

Sutton also doubts that new residents will abandon their cars in favor of the nearby Gold Line. "The people who can afford that level of payment and rent are going to buy two Mercedes-Benz and drive to downtown L.A.," he said.

"The community has known for years that the property was going to be developed," said Greg Galletly, president of Dorn Platz. "The plan that we've brought forward fit within the community's expectations."

A General Plan allowing higher-density, mixed-use development, adopted in the mid-1990s, was the harbinger of the move toward smart growth in Pasadena, Bogaard said. The intention, he said, was "to reduce dependence on the automobile. The hope is that our downtown will be vital and exciting."

Since then, there has been a surge of mixed-use, high-density development centered around the city's Old Town district along Colorado Boulevard. Among the projects is Del Mar Transit Village, a now-completed housing complex built around a Gold Line station a few blocks east of Ambassador West.

Critics say the city has gone overboard.

Sue Mossman, executive director of Pasadena Heritage, a historical preservation group, said she supports the Ambassador West plan because no historic buildings will be demolished but remains concerned about the effect it will have on the city's character.

"The lesson is that we are victims of our own success," she said. "Forty years ago, you couldn't get people to build new housing in Pasadena. Now that the community is recognized as a beautiful, economically vibrant and historic place to live, suddenly its popularity has risen astronomically. The development pressure here is tremendous."

Galletly defended Ambassador West as a modest development. Seniors, who will occupy most of the new condos, drive less and have less of an impact on traffic and noise, he said.

He also said the plan leaves 72% of the open space on the former campus intact and preserves historic mansions built near the turn of the 20th century that sit on the property.

Preservationists and neighborhood groups were satisfied with the latest development plans, which are far less ambitious than previous proposals that called for as many as 2,000 units.

Fred Zepeda, president of the West Pasadena Residents' Assn., said the effect will be minimal. "I don't know how it gets much better than this while still having development."

[dragonsky]

L.A.'s Olympic bid gets AEG aid
March 27, 2007

The people who brought Staples Center and the Home Depot Center to Southern California, Anschutz Entertainment Group, gave the people who are trying to get the Olympic Games back in Los Angeles in 2016 some extra ammunition Monday.

Rod O'Connor, general manager of the Home Depot Center, announced at a news conference that, were Los Angeles to get the bid for the 2016 Games, his company would expand his facility with a 125-acre project that would include a training facility and hotel/conference center.

The price on that project was put at $50 million to $60 million and the combination training center and hotel was seen as an enhanced attraction to athletes from afar with an on-site place to stay.

The Home Depot Center in Carson is a hotbed of Olympic-sport training, with facilities for soccer, tennis, track and field and velodrome cycling.

The timing of the announcement appeared to be for maximum impact on United States Olympic Committee decision-makers, who will decide April 14 on whether Los Angeles or Chicago is put forth as the U.S. candidate city in the international race for the 2016 Olympic bid.

If the 2016 bid doesn't go to Los Angeles, O'Connor said AEG would "revisit our options."

[luckyeight]

tomorrow 6:30 p.m. at Bunker Hill West Towers

800 W. 1st Street

possible actions on 20 or so projects throughout downtown.

Anyone here knows what's a CUB application about?

:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

[luckyeight]

alright I got it

conditional use beverage permit....
quite a bit of applications being submitted
for approval in around south park

hearing also around Hope Street development, L.A. River,
L.A. Central project, etc.....

:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

[dragonsky]

Mar. 28, 2007
L.A. Olympics bidders hope LV glitz increases odds to land 2016 games
By BENJAMIN SPILLMAN

Backers of Los Angeles' bid for the 2016 Olympic Games are betting on Las Vegas to add glitz -- and about 200,000 hotel rooms -- to their proposal.

Leaders of the Southern California Committee for the Olympic Games visited Sin City on Tuesday to detail just how Las Vegas fits into their pitch for the 2016 summer games.

The California organizers are using the final weeks before April 14, the day the U.S. Olympic Committee is set to select an American contestant for the upcoming event, to polish their bid as much as possible.

They hope including Las Vegas as a venue for preliminary soccer events will add a bit of shine that distinguishes Los Angeles from Chicago, the other American hopeful.

"Southern Nevada will absolutely be central to what we are doing," said Barry Sanders, chairman of the Southern California Olympics committee.

According to organizers, Las Vegas would be one of three cities outside Los Angeles -- San Francisco and San Diego are the others -- that would host preliminary soccer events.

If Los Angeles is chosen over Chicago in April, it would be America's nominee to compete with cities such as Madrid, Spain; Prague, Czech Republic; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Rome; Tokyo and New Delhi.

The International Olympic Committee's final decision on the 2016 games is expected in 2009.

The Las Vegas matches would be at Sam Boyd Stadium, site of University of Nevada, Las Vegas home football games, which could add about 7,500 temporary seats to its 30,000-seat configuration for the events.

Although the schedule for the games isn't complete, organizers estimate Las Vegas would host eight to 12 men's and women's matches before and during the Los Angeles event, which would be from July 22 to Aug. 7, 2016.

The games would be organized through Los Angeles, with support from the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority for events in Southern Nevada.

The Los Angeles bid doesn't call for any public financing.

But the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, which is supported by hotel room taxes, would likely spend money marketing Nevada events, said Rossi Ralenkotter, president of the authority.

Ralenkotter said he didn't know how much the organization would spend on marketing.

"It is too soon to speculate on that," he said.

The soccer matches would attract from 250,000 to 500,000 fans to Las Vegas, organizers said.

The higher number would represent more than three times the number of people who attended the recent NASCAR races at the Las Vegas Speedway.

The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority estimates that by 2016 Southern Nevada's hotel inventory will be about 200,000 rooms, up from about 130,000 today.

Visitation in 2016 is projected to be around 55 million people annually, up from about 39 million in 2006.

About 10 million of those visitors will be from outside the United States, which would fit nicely with the international appeal of the Olympic Games, organizers said.

"The world will want to come here if it is going to the Olympic Games," Sanders said of Las Vegas. "The world will want to come to the Olympic Games because it wants to come here."

If the world does come to Las Vegas in late July and early August of 2016, it will likely be very hot and oppressively humid.

The timing of the games coincides with the annual monsoon season, a shift in weather patterns that brings humidity and thunderstorms to the desert in addition to the typically scorching heat.

Brian Fuis, spokesman for the National Weather Service Forecast Office in Las Vegas, said high temperatures around the dates of the summer Olympics are about 105 degrees and low temperatures are about 80 degrees.

"The temperature comes down, but the humidity comes up," said Fuis. "It is still going to feel hot, but more oppressive."

[dragonsky]

Swap of North Hollywood parkland is sought
A firm would build on green space and create a new park and condos nearby. It's called the only such deal in recent memory.
By Sharon Bernstein, Times Staff Writer
March 28, 2007

As part of the city's move toward a denser urban environment, officials are lending support to an unusual land-swap plan that would allow a developer to build on a five-acre park in North Hollywood.

Under the proposal, the developer, J.H. Snyder Co., would replace part of Valley Plaza Park with a parking structure for a new mega-development rivaling The Grove shopping center in square footage. In exchange, the company said it would build a new park a few blocks away, adjacent to a 700-unit condominium and apartment complex that Snyder also plans to build.

The parkland swap, approved in concept by the city's Community Redevelopment Agency, is the only such transfer in recent memory, according to a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks.

It has sparked concern among some local residents, who worry that the developer ultimately will not build a new park as promised.

They point out that city officials talked for years about creating a park just south of City Hall, then decided to build the new Los Angeles Police Department headquarters there.

"I want a thorough airing of how a private developer can acquire public parkland," said Ronald Bitzer, a local resident who serves on the advisory board at Valley Plaza Park. "I don't trust J.H. Snyder to proceed with caution when it comes to tampering with dedicated parkland."

The land swap is a small part of a much larger development project to be built on the site of Valley Plaza shopping center on Laurel Canyon Boulevard, south of Victory Boulevard. The 1955 shopping center, one of the San Fernando Valley's first, has been decaying for years, and has been scheduled for redevelopment since it was damaged in the 1994 Northridge earthquake.

Snyder's project would involve tearing down the center and replacing it with nearly 800,000 square feet of retail, commercial and entertainment businesses, including a Macy's department store and a multiplex movie theater. It would be designed by Massachusetts-based Elkus Manfredi Architects, the firm that designed The Grove.

Immediately to the southeast at Laurel Plaza, the site of a former May Co. building that now is a Macy's store, Snyder hopes to build condominiums, apartments and the new park.

The redevelopment agency, which is helping to build the commercial portion of the project, hopes the renewed Valley Plaza will be a catalyst for development along a stretch of Laurel Canyon that, though once prosperous, has been blighted for decades.

Los Angeles Councilwoman Wendy Greuel sees the commercial project and the nearby residential one as part of the city's push toward so-called smart growth, in which people live in condos and houses that are near shops, offices and entertainment and are along transit lines.

Laurel Canyon, a major north-south street in the Valley, is served by buses that connect to the popular Orange Line busway and such destinations as Ventura Boulevard.

The city needs to look at developing "places where people can get public transportation and where they can walk across the street to go to a grocery store, walk across the street and go to a Macy's or a coffee shop," Greuel said.

Citing neighborhood concerns that the project might be too big, Greuel said that she supported the plan in concept, but that she would continue to review it as the proposal advanced.

Cliff Goldstein, Snyder's project manager for the two developments, said the company's goal was to develop Valley Plaza as a gathering place or town center for the eastern part of the San Fernando Valley.

He was scheduled to present the company's proposed design for the two sites to a nearby homeowners group Tuesday night. It would include a plan for an open-air courtyard in the center "the size of a football field," Goldstein said, with parking for Macy's and other stores in a separate structure on the site of the former park.

Goldstein said it was not yet clear when the company would build the new park, because the logistics of relocating it to the Laurel Plaza property are complicated.

On one hand, he said, the company needs to build on the side of the existing park as part of its overall development of the site. But Macy's does not plan to move out of its property across the street until the new store in Valley Plaza is ready to open, which could make it difficult to build the park early in the process.

He said the company plans to make the new park much nicer than the existing one, which is essentially a five-acre strip of trees and grass next to the 170 Freeway. The existing park was once part of the larger Valley Plaza Park and recreation center. But the wedge-shaped parcel was cut off after the freeway was built through the center of the bigger park acreage.

Under the current proposal, the new five-acre park would include trees and walking paths and possibly a water feature, Goldstein said.

He said the company would not renege on its promise to build the park.

"That has never been an option and that is not an option," Goldstein said.

But Suzanne Stinson, who lives about a block from the proposed residential part of the development, said it is just not right to pave over an existing park — even if new development is desirable at Valley Plaza.

The community recently planted dozens of trees on the site of the old park, and there are many tall, mature trees.

"Although it's not used that much, it is a park; it's an existing green belt," Stinson said. "If it's been dedicated as park, it shouldn't be sold to the highest bidder and then have some crappy little park put somewhere to replace it."

The old park also has a parking lot, Stinson said, but the new one would have only a few spaces. Without a play area for children or other amenities, the new park would not serve the community well, she said.

Stinson said she had "great trepidation" about the development. Like other residents, she worries that despite the developer's promise of a high-end development on par with The Grove, the neighborhood will wind up with a collection of big-box stores.

Already, she and others said, Costco Wholesale Corp. has expressed interest in the development, indicating to some in the neighborhood that instead of a pedestrian-friendly shopping area, Snyder will build a behemoth, suburban-style mall.

"We just don't want something rammed down our throats," Stinson said.

[dragonsky]

Inland areas called key to state's future
The vast, fast-growing regions need a strong economy and solutions to environmental problems, study says.
By Gary Polakovic, Times Staff Writer
March 28, 2007

California's vast inland valleys, from Redding to Riverside, remain the fastest growing regions in the state but already face serious economic and environmental challenges that could determine the state's future, according to a study released Tuesday.

Developing an economy that can sustain this rapid population growth with well-paying jobs is the challenge facing these communities and will determine whether California will continue to prosper, according to the report by the Brookings Institution.

Although often maligned as poor, ugly and polluted, the inland area, spanning 75,000 square miles, is the key to California's future. One in three Californians calls it home. Four of the nation's 10 fastest-growing cities — Riverside, Bakersfield, Sacramento and San Bernardino — are there.

High-priced real estate forced many families to flee coastal urban areas and pursue their dreams inland during the past decade. Inland California "represents not so much a break with the California dream, but its new homeland, the state of opportunity for a new generation," the study said.

Sustaining the dream without ruining the environment or agriculture will determine if California remains competitive and a beacon for opportunity in the 21st century, experts say. The San Joaquin Valley already rivals Los Angeles for some of the smoggiest air in the country.

"When you get that many people and that much economic power inland, you better take a look at it and understand it because that's where the future of the state is," said John Husing, president of Redlands-based Economics & Politics Inc., an economic research firm unconnected with the study.

The report paints a portrait of a region at the crossroads. People move inland largely to find affordable housing in the Inland Empire, Central Valley and Sierra foothills.

The population in those regions has increased 14% between 2000 and 2005, four times the rate of the rest of the state, the study said.

But the inland region's rapid growth brings serious challenges.

More than half the new arrivals are Latino, and many new residents are poor and significantly less educated than in the Los Angeles region or the Bay Area.

They need good jobs, but employers aren't likely to relocate until there's a capable, high-skilled workforce in place. Many companies are more likely to relocate to Reno, Las Vegas or Phoenix than to inland California, the study said.

"When we think of the future of California, most people think about what happens in Silicon Valley or Hollywood. But for most Californians, the issue is what happens in the middle-class areas," said Joel Kotkin, an author of the study. "Will they be the new vital centers for California's middle class or will they become crabgrass slums with high unemployment and poor living conditions?"

The study recommends three approaches to help transform inland boomtowns into more livable and economically sustainable cities:

• Create more amenities that appeal to families, skilled labor and industries, including more open space and parks, better entertainment and retail centers and improved infrastructure.

• Create upward mobility for residents by offering more work-force training and better schools.

• Build on optimism to create political consensus for leadership and positive change. The study notes that, despite the region's maligned reputation, 75% of Central Valley adults rated their community as good or excellent — providing a basis for political will.

"It's up to them whether the area continues to perform to the low expectations as viewed by many commentators or begins to forge a future that will preserve the middle-class 'California dream' for at least another generation," the study said.

William Frey of the Brookings Institution and Kotkin, experts in demographics and urban development, wrote the 20-page paper.

The Brookings Institution is a Washington, D.C.-based think tank.

[dragonsky]

Finally, Venice gets its solar streetlight
By Steve Hymon, Times Staff Writer
April 2, 2007

About four years ago, members of the Presidents Row Neighborhood Assn. of Venice decided they wanted more streetlights.

Like many places in Los Angeles, their neighborhood had never been fully rigged for lights. That was annoying on several fronts, particularly to those who walked their dogs at night or grew weary of waiting for lost pizza deliverers.

Residents also wanted to be progressive and asked that the streetlights be solar-powered, and, back in 2005, then-Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski agreed to help fund a test program with one….



And how did that work out?

After overcoming the usual bureaucratic hurdles, the city's first solar streetlight blinked on a few weeks ago and has been going strong since, lighting a small patch of Victoria Avenue.

Residents have even given their new light a name: Plexus, as in the muscle.

The set up is pretty simple. A small solar panel sits atop the pole with a small battery tucked underneath it. The panel collects the rays, the battery stores the energy and at dusk — ta-da! — the light comes on.

--

Why did it take so long for the city to install a single solar streetlight?

City rules.

Even though members of the neighborhood association did research and had selected a solar light, the city then had to do its own research. Many moons passed.

The city installed two other solar streetlights — another in Venice, the other in the San Fernando Valley. As a result, three of about 250,000 streetlights in Los Angeles are now powered by the sun.

--

Is this the wave of the future?

Some Venetians hope so. Plexus may not be quite as bright as a conventional streetlight, but it does an admirable job.

"We love it. We don't need to land aircraft on our street. We just need to walk our dogs and have guests be able to find their cars," said Lindsey Folsom, a member of the neighborhood association.

The big hope, Folsom says, is that the city uses more solar lights in the future to save electricity and a few bucks. The average streetlight in L.A. consumes about as much electricity as a TV set, and it currently costs residents about $17 million a year to keep the streetlights on.

Sol Inc. of Palm City, Fla., manufactured the light being used on Victoria Avenue. J.R. Finkle, a sales associate with the firm, said the light in Venice costs $3,500 to $4,000 — more than most streetlights — but the devices usually pay for themselves in five to seven years because the sun's rays don't come with a price tag.

--

And the big picture here?

You may have heard the phrase "global warming" in the news lately. Assuming it is really happening, one big cause is believed to be the burning of fossil fuels.

About 76% of the electricity used in Los Angeles comes from burning fossil fuels — 47% of that is coal and 29% natural gas. Coal, in particular, is a big greenhouse gas producer.

To simplify its strategy, the city wants to reduce significantly its use of fossil fuels before we either: A) run out of fossil fuels, or B) the Earth's polar ice caps melt and the sea rises, sweeping Venice and Plexus to a watery grave.

At this juncture, the Department of Water and Power says that 8% of its power is from such renewable and clean sources as hydroelectricity.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is pushing to have 20% of the city's electricity come from clean sources by 2010 — something the agency hopes to accomplish by purchasing clean energy on the open market and by building new facilities.

--

So why does the DWP leave the lights on at its building at night?

DWP spokesman Joe Ramallo couldn't wait to answer that one — seriously.

Among his answers: Most of the lights are programmed to be turned off between 7 p.m. and 6 a.m. However, some remain on for around-the-clock operations and maintenance. City building codes also dictate that some security lights stay on.

Ramallo then launched into a soliloquy over the building's super-efficient fluorescent lights. And, leaving no bases uncovered, he also said the agency will be installing low-flow toilets in the building.

A skeptical observer may suggest that it waited for many homeowners to get them first.

[dragonsky]

City seeks parking report before approving mall
By Kenneth Todd Ruiz Staff Writer

ARCADIA - City Council members want Westfield to show them the parking.

After strongly criticizing the mall owner, council members late Tuesday night attached one more condition before it would approve construction of a proposed expansion dubbed The Promenade.

"When they opened the first phase of their expansion, the biggest complaint we heard was about their parking," Councilman Bob Harbicht said Wednesday, referring to the mall's first phase of expansion, which opened in 2004.

By the end of the meeting, Westfield agreed to submit specific plans for accommodating the loss of parking during the project's construction, which based on its estimate for the city is between 600 and 800 spaces.

Although city staff recommended approval of the project, which the council will likely confer after approving the parking plan, traffic anxiety and pent-up frustrations over Westfield's battle with developer Caruso Affiliated made for a tense exchange at Tuesday's meeting.

Westfield spokeswoman Katey Dickey said the company would comply with the request and was looking forward to coming back before the council.

Westfield America President Ken Wong was traveling and couldn't be reached for comment Wednesday, one day after taking his lumps from the council with a smile.

"After we finally got done with all the questions, I scolded Westfield Corp. for the fact they've been a terrible corporate citizen and are trying everything they can to tear this community apart," Harbicht said.

Notwithstanding that, Harbicht said he told Wong, "I love your proposal and I think it will be great for the city."

The 100,000-square-foot expansion will add premium retailers in an outdoor setting above two levels of parking.

[dragonsky]

New York Times
Friday, April 6, 2007
Square Feet; A Glimpse of a More Vertical Los Angeles
By TERRY PRISTIN
Published: March 21, 2007

Long before ''the new urbanism'' became a tired phrase, Playa Vista, the last remaining large tract of undeveloped land on this city's traffic-choked West Side, was envisioned as a place where people could live, work, shop and play without leaving their neighborhood.

Now a community of 4,500 people, Playa Vista is situated between Westchester Bluffs and Marina del Rey, about a mile from the Pacific Ocean. It is dotted with small parks and made up of blocks of four-story buildings, mainly condominiums, in styles that include Spanish, Art Deco and contemporary, and will eventually contain nearly 6,000 units of housing.

With about 32 units to an acre, according to Steve Soboroff, the president of Playa Vista, it is one of the densest residential communities in Southern California and a harbinger, some say, of Los Angeles's vertical future.

Though Playa Vista encourages its residents to travel around their new neighborhood in electric carts, it has yet to free them from their cars. Commercial development has been confined so far to a smattering of retail storefronts and a glassy complex at the intersection of Jefferson and Lincoln Boulevards that has been leased since 2003 by Electronic Arts, the video game manufacturer.

But a new stage in the community's evolution is about to arrive. Two major developers are planning large Silicon Valley-style projects that they hope to lease to the type of new-media companies that have been flocking to the West Side.

In February, Tishman Speyer, the company that owns Rockefeller Center, and its financial partner, Walton Street Capital, acquired a 64-acre site near Jefferson and Centinela Avenue, on the eastern edge of Playa Vista, for $200 million. It is the same site where DreamWorks, the movie company, once intended to build a studio that would have been Playa Vista's showpiece. But those plans were shelved in 1999. A couple of years later, the office market went into decline.

The timing is right for Tishman Speyer to begin developing a 1.1-million-square-foot campus of low-slung buildings, said John R. Miller, a senior managing director.

''It's only recently that this made economic sense,'' Mr. Miller said. The complex will surround a nine-acre park with ball fields and tennis courts to be developed by Playa Vista.

Symantec, the Internet security technology company, is building a campus on nine acres near Playa Vista in Fox Hills, and Yahoo took 256,000 square feet of space at the former Colorado Center in Santa Monica in 2005.

Though the vacancy rate on the West Side is less than 6 percent, new construction has been hindered by a scarcity of land and strong public resistance to development. Only 65,000 square feet of new space was added to the market in 2006, according to the CoStar Group, a real estate research company in Bethesda, Md.

Playa Vista sits on land once owned by Howard Hughes, the eccentric aviation pioneer and filmmaker. The Tishman site includes 16 structures that were built from 1941 to 1953 for the Hughes Aircraft Corporation, including the hangar where Mr. Hughes created the flying boat known as the Spruce Goose. Because of their role in the development of the aerospace industry in Southern California, most of these buildings are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and must be preserved.

Mr. Miller acknowledged that it would have been easier to start with ''a clean slate.'' But he said his company was toying with the possibility of modernizing the Spruce Goose hangar, which has been used as a soundstage in recent years for movies, including ''Titanic'' and ''World Trade Center.''

Near Tishman Speyer's site, another national developer, the Lincoln Property Company of Dallas, has begun driving piles into the ground for the first phase of Horizon at Playa Vista, which will consist of two five-story buildings totaling about a million square feet of office space, also for prospective new-media tenants.

Playa Vista has ''a lot of things that are un-L.A. in a good way,'' said David S. Binswanger, an executive vice president at Lincoln. ''We looked at the Playa culture and we looked at the culture of the tenants, and we decided they matched awfully well.''

Another selling point, he said, was the Village at Playa Vista, the new town center that Rick J. Caruso, the developer of the Grove, the popular open-air retail-and-entertainment center near the Farmers Market on Third Street and Fairfax Avenue, plans to build on an 11-acre site near the office complexes.

Mr. Caruso said the new center would have a ''beachier'' atmosphere than the Grove and would be smaller and more locally focused, with an upscale supermarket, 175 luxury rental apartments and a movie theater. Construction has been delayed by a long-running environmental lawsuit concerning the cleanup of gases emitted at the former industrial site.

In 1978 a previous owner, the Summa Corporation, a company managed by the Hughes heirs, announced plans to develop Playa Vista, prompting one of the most protracted development battles in the history of Los Angeles. Opponents said the project would destroy the fragile Ballona Wetlands to the east of Lincoln Boulevard and would have devastating consequences involving traffic and air pollution.

In the intervening years, the project has been vastly reduced in scale from the huge commercial development that Summa intended to build, and more than 600 acres of land have been preserved as open space.

In 1989, a new owner, Maguire Thomas, brought in a group of architects from the fledgling New Urbanist movement, including Andre's Duany and Stefanos Polyzoides, to design a mixed-use village inspired by pedestrian-friendly places like Santa Barbara. ''Playa Vista was the beginning, of the recognition that planning standards from the post-World War II era were wrong and counterproductive,'' said Nelson C. Rising, who managed the project for Maguire Thomas.

But litigation tied up the project for years, and Maguire Thomas lost control of it in 1997. The current owners, Playa Capital, a group led by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, hired a management team from Orange County with a more suburban orientation than Mr. Rising, said Ruth Galanter, a former City Council member who was elected because of her opposition to Summa's plans for Playa Vista. Land was sold to 15 separate builders and the design standards were sacrificed, she said.

Many design and planning specialists fault Playa Vista for its narrow sidewalks, the uniform height of its buildings and architecture they regard as uninspired. ''It's such a comedown from what Maguire Thomas initially proposed,'' said Richard S. Weinstein, a professor of architecture and urban planning at the University of California, Los Angeles. ''It's one of the biggest pieces of undeveloped land of any city in the U.S., and you build exactly what you would produce on any corner lot.''

But Mr. Soboroff, a former president of the City Parks Commission, who joined Playa Vista in 2001 after the project was under way, dismissed such complaints as the grumbling of purists. ''This is not a purebred, this is a Prius,'' he said. ''If we were doing pure, we'd still be an airport.''

And Ms. Galanter, who was instrumental in forging a plan to save much of the wetlands from development, said there was still much to admire in Playa Vista, including a new fresh-water marsh, a first-rate water management system and housing discounts for police officers, firefighters, nurses and teachers.

''Playa Vista fell short of what it could have been,'' Ms. Galanter said. But, she said, it was ''a lot better than any other development of the same size that I know of, certainly in Southern California.''

[dragonsky]

State park to open near L.A. River
Rio de Los Angeles State Park is a symbol of the revitalization of a once crime-plagued neighborhood.
By Steve Hymon, Times Staff Writer
April 16, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-04/29081843.jpg

Just a few decades ago, the Taylor Yards was a two-mile-long expanse of railroad tracks where trains were coupled together to connect Los Angeles industry to the rest of the nation.

Today, most of those tracks and grimy rail yards are gone, and something else has risen in their place: a 40-acre state park that is intended to revive the working-class neighborhood of Cypress Park in northeast Los Angeles and be part of the "emerald necklace" of parks the city envisions one day lining a rejuvenated Los Angeles River.

The Rio de Los Angeles State Park opens Friday, complete with soccer fields, baseball diamonds, a playground and a new community center — not to mention vast expanses of grass and a field strewn with wildflowers.

"This park is a symbol; it's almost like a fresh start," said Gus Lizarde, president of the Greater Cypress Park Neighborhood Council and a longtime business owner in the community. "It brought us together because it was such a long fight to get it."

A little more than a decade ago, Cypress Park was in the news for all the wrong reasons. In 1995, 3-year-old Stephanie Kuhen was killed after her family's car was struck by a hail of bullets fired by gang members. The shooting also became a symbol for the long decline of Cypress Park.

Union Pacific phased out most of the rail yards in the 1970s and '80s and began moving those operations to the Inland Empire. Soon the city began pushing a plan to create new jobs and amenities by allowing nearly all of the area to be developed as warehouses, commercial sites and a multiplex theater. The proposal spurred a lawsuit by a coalition of community groups who argued that the city should have required a proper environmental review of the project.

In July 2001, a judge agreed with the groups.

"There would not be a park here if not for the community," said Melanie Winter, a Los Angeles River activist who helped bring the suit against the city. "The residents are the reason that there is something to celebrate."

The court ruling opened the door for the state to purchase the land from funds generated by a $2.1-billion parks and water bond measure approved in 2000. The money enabled the state to purchase 40 acres for the new park, a 17-acre parcel along the river that hasn't been developed and to acquire the Cornfield — another abandoned rail yard next to Chinatown — for the Los Angeles State Historic Park, which is being designed. But there was a problem: Nearly all of the state parks in California are intended to protect landscapes and ecosystems. The community wanted something different: playing fields. Over the years Cypress Park business owner Raul Macias, a Mexican immigrant, had organized a nonprofit youth soccer league with hundreds of players who desperately needed a place to play.

The matter was resolved when legislators devised a way for the city to lease the land and build much-needed playing fields. In addition to the five soccer fields — including one with a synthetic surface — and two baseball diamonds, the new park features an expansive children's playground and walking paths through an area of natural-appearing grasslands.

City parks General Manager Jon Mukri called it "the greenest park from an environmental standpoint we've designed," from the waterless urinals in the community center now under construction, to the park's permeable parking lots, intended to absorb storm runoff.

Ruth Coleman, chief of the state parks system, said that she views the local park as a return to an earlier time.

"Really, this is a new vision for state parks to create large-scale places of beauty and nature in the city because the cities are so park poor," Coleman said. "It's kind of going back to the vision Frederick Law Olmsted had for Central Park" in New York. "These parks can become community centers if they're done right."

One question that remains is whether the city or state will be able to acquire a key parcel, owned by Union Pacific, that separates the new park from the Los Angeles River.

"We are still assessing any impacts to the environment that may have taken place over the years in the areas where rail cars and locomotives were serviced and repaired," wrote Mark Davis, a Union Pacific spokesman, in an e-mail. "This property may be retained for railroad uses."

River activists covet the property because it is a site where the river channel could potentially be widened to create more riparian habitat. The feasibility of reworking that stretch of the river is under study by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Even if the land were acquired, there would be challenges. Union Pacific and Metrolink commuters use tracks that form a barrier between the new state park and the parcel along the river. That corridor also is being considered for a proposed high-speed rail system tying Los Angeles to Northern California.

City Councilman Ed Reyes, whose district includes Taylor Yards, is still hopeful that something can be done to make the tracks less of an obstacle. Reyes grew up three blocks from the new park and came to be a supporter of it after initially working on building proposals for the site as a deputy to former Councilman Mike Hernandez.

Reyes said he appreciates Cypress Park's railroad legacy and the jobs it provided, but he has come to believe there's a greater need now for open space for today's youth. Like many others, he also grew up hearing the clang of railroad cars being coupled together day and night and was a little shocked to see the yards gone.

"I went down there after they had finished the cleanup of the site and had taken the tracks out," Reyes recalled, "and it just blew me away because we're actually living in a beautiful valley here. I never appreciated it before."

http://www.latimes.com/media/thumbnails/mapimage/2007-04/29099220.gif

[dragonsky]

Arcadia City Council OKs Plan For Shopping Center
Council Objects To Plan For Off-Track Betting Facility

POSTED: 6:36 pm PDT April 17, 2007

ARCADIA, Calif. -- After a marathon debate that spanned two meetings and included comments from dozens of residents, the Arcadia City Council unanimously approved plans Tuesday for a high-end shopping center at a mostly unused parking lot at Santa Anita racetrack.

The council objected to plans for a 98,000-square-foot off-track betting facility in the development, and deleted it from the project.

That deletion was a minor victory for opponents of the development, who descended on the Arcadia City Council during two meetings to voice their distaste for the project. Many members of the opposition group Arcadia First! spoke to the council during a marathon meeting last Wednesday that stretched into the early hours of Thursday morning.

Jeff Schenkel, spokesman for Arcadia First!, said the group's executive committee would meet as soon as possible to discuss options -- including a possible referendum or litigation.

"It's still unknown, but it's up to them," Schenkel said.

The Shops at Santa Anita will be built by developer Rick Caruso, best known for turning the parking lot at Farmers Market into The Grove. This time his development would fill a rarely used parking lot next to the race track that served as a major location for the hit movie "Seabiscuit."

Caruso has repeatedly denied opponents' allegations that the project would generate more traffic than the area can handle or turn into a full-blown casino center.

"Nobody can come up here and say that Santa Anita intends to or has the right to expand gaming," Caruso told the council. "They don't intend to. We're not going to. And I've been on record saying -- and I will not support it. And I will come out against it because that's not what we're intending to do."

A letter from Caruso's firm to Arcadia residents promised to "build on the rich heritage of the track and provide upscale shops, unique outdoor restaurants, and lushly landscaped park-like settings and promenades."

The firm sweetened the pot for Arcadia residents with promises of a community performing arts center and 25,000 square feet of office space for the Arcadia School District headquarters.

The adjacent cities of Pasadena and San Marino have weighed in on the issue with concerns about traffic, housing and other worries.

Opponents argued that the center will snarl traffic at 20 nearby intersections, as the project would be 61 percent larger than The Grove in the Fairfax District of Los Angeles.

The Westfield Group, owner of a large shopping center next to the racetrack, has already said it opposes the project.

San Marino city planners have told Arcadia they worry about mall-related traffic on already-congested Huntington Drive, and Pasadena officials said they are worried about snarls at Colorado Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue during peak hours.

[dragonsky]

From the Los Angeles Times
January 30, 2006
A Vision for Keeping Flower Fields Forever


As housing plans move ahead in northern L.A. County, students push to create a preserve for the wild blossoms that cover Gorman Hills in spring.

By Gary Polakovic, Times Staff Writer

The hills on Los Angeles County's northern frontier are barren now, but spring will soon coax a brilliant display of orange, purple and yellow wildflowers across miles of the Grapevine region of Interstate 5.

The annual floral show is one that few sites in Southern California can match.


But some worry that development pressures threaten the flower fields in the Gorman Hills, the same landscape that inspired environmental artist Christo to mimic the spring bloom in his famous "Umbrellas" project in October 1991.

Developers hope to construct one of the largest planned communities in Los Angeles County history, with 23,000 homes on a portion of the vast expanse of neighboring Tejon Ranch. A Tustin-based builder is also seeking permits for 191 homes on the northern edge of the wildflower site.

Eager to stay ahead of the building boom, a Los Angeles city planning official and a group of his UCLA Extension students advocate establishing a vast, new Gorman wildflower preserve that would stretch several miles east of Interstate 5 and north of California 138.

Planner Mike O'Brien said he has always admired the spring bloom on travels to Northern California. He sees the preserve as an antidote to urban sprawl creeping up the Tehachapi Mountains, connecting the Los Angeles Basin to the San Joaquin Valley.

"Whole new communities are being built in the middle of nowhere," he said. "That's urban sprawl. Do we really want everything built from San Clemente to Bakersfield?"

Among the proposed development projects is Centennial, a "new town" of 70,000 people that would be built on Tejon Ranch, which straddles Los Angeles and Kern counties. Other plans call for building hundreds of more homes near the top of Tejon Summit near Lebec.

"This entire area is really about to be changed forever because of development," said Patric Hedlund, managing editor of the Mountain Enterprise newspaper in Frazier Park. "It represents economic opportunity, but people came here to enjoy places like the wildflower lands."

Potential advocates for a preserve include the California Native Plant Society and the state parks department, and more are expected, O'Brien said. Residents in the mountain communities are just learning about the proposal from local newspaper articles and town hall meetings.

But there are many obstacles to creating a wildflower preserve. Cost is chief among them.

No one knows just how much money would be needed to establish a preserve, but the price tag would probably be millions of dollars. Most of the money would go toward purchasing developable properties.

The UCLA students are counting on organizations such as the Nature Conservancy, the Trust for Public Land and the Sierra Club to step forward and work with local officials to raise money for the project. The Gorman Hills are a checkerboard of parcels owned by 22 parties, not all of whom may want to relinquish their parcels.

Matthew Shaffer, spokesman for the Trust for Public Land, a nonprofit group that promotes open space, said the trust has championed student projects before, most notably in Atlanta, where a term paper by a Georgia Tech student became the blueprint for a network of parks, trails and commuter rail lines.

"It's a familiar proposition to take a vision worked on by students and make it happen," Shaffer said of the UCLA proposal. "It sounds like something we might want to consider."

The UCLA students spent the fall quarter preparing their report, which is a roadmap for carving out 2,800 acres of flower-dappled hills at the junction of I-5 and California 138 southeast of Gorman. They advocate building trails, interpretive signs and a visitor center.

"For generations, this spring display has drawn lovers of wildflowers, particularly devotees of the state flower — the California poppy," the students' report states. "Conventional wisdom holds that man's hand has weighed so heavily on the land that little remains of California's original state. Yet … Gorman Post Road is considered one of the best wildflower sites in Southern California."

In winter, the Gorman Hills are tawny heaps of nothingness, dotted with power poles, barbed-wire fences and juniper bushes. But the hills looming over Gorman Post Road, a country lane astride a slit in the San Andreas fault, explode in color when spring conditions are right.

Motorists park their cars and step into a dreamscape of poppies, lupine, owl's clover, goldfields and desert suncups that spill over slopes and into canyons.

June Furman, 72, has lived on Gorman Post Road for decades. She said she has to shoo away tourists who cross her 13-acre ranch to see the wildflowers in springtime. She worries that more houses in the area would spoil the land.

"I'd rather see wildflowers than houses," she said.

Builders are carefully studying the Gorman wildflower preserve proposal. Jeff Haspell, project manager for Rox Consulting, said the Tustin company wants to build homes on 10% to 15% of the land identified for the preserve. But he said the two projects would not conflict.

"This is going to be easy to work out," Haspell said. "There's lots of room to work and be flexible. I don't see a problem that won't allow both to work together."

Barry Zoeller, spokesman for Tejon Ranch, which seeks to develop 5% of its substantial land holdings in the Tehachapis, said he also doesn't see a problem with establishing a preserve. "We see the value in it," he said. "It's consistent with what Tejon Ranch is."

Plans to develop houses or the wildflower preserve in the Grapevine have lately engrossed the mountain communities' residents, who realize, after 50 years of sitting on the sidelines as growth swept over Southern California, that change is coming to their hills.

Said local newspaper editor Hedlund of the proposed flower preserve: "People are beginning to talk for the first time about what ecotourism opportunities there might be. The preserve could be a real jewel in the center of that.

"It's like we're at this trembling moment, to invent new understandings of what is economically viable, and yet there's this race against time."

http://www.feralflowers.com/gorman.htm

http://www.feralflowers.com/framed/Frame7-4.jpg
http://www.feralflowers.com/framed/Frame7-11.jpg

[dragonsky]

Battling the monster on the hill
Publishing tycoon Duane Hagadone's Palm Desert neighbors consider his dream castle a $30-million offense against nature.
By Valerie Reitman, Times Staff Writer
April 20, 2007

http://a1022.g.akamai.net/f/1022/8158/5m/images.latimes.com/media/thumbnails/mapimage/2007-04/29189630.gif

NEAR the 18th hole of the Bighorn golf course in Palm Desert, publishing tycoon Duane Hagadone laid out his vision for a dream home to his architect. It would be set high on the bald mountain rising near the green yet be so inconspicuous that he'd have to point it out even to golf buddies.

Hagadone wanted "a residence that blends into the mountain, that is very subtle, not a pinnacle seen from all angles," his assistants explained to Palm Desert officials as they sought the go-ahead for the subsequent design.

The $30-million-plus home would feature a copper roof composed of "angles and curves" that mimicked the ridge of the mountain, while its rock walls would be molded from those on the hillside.

The spectacular architectural plans and model so dazzled city officials that they granted Hagadone an exemption from a preservation ordinance that caps hillside homes at 4,000 square feet. Hagadone wanted his castle to be eight times that size — 32,016 square feet.

Before that vote in 2004, one City Council member envisioned write-ups "in every architectural magazine around the world"; another said he'd already inquired about using this "jewel in our crown" as a venue for fundraising events for the local theater. "We'll all be bragging about it," a third council member said.

Instead, the home has brought a load of grief for this city now that it is just about complete. Visible from miles away and set on a prominent ridgeline, its frame resembles a wayward space station parked amid the picturesque foothills.

Hagadone and his representatives declined interview requests. But upset residents have flooded the city with e-mails, branding the house "an unsightly scar on the hill," "a blight," "a monstrosity," "a pimple" and an "abortion" of city planning.

"We had an untouched ridgeline, untouched," lamented resident Larry Sutter.

Residents complained that their views of the Santa Rosa Mountains, which enfold the city like a clamshell, had been ruined. The bare, unlit peaks are lovely at dusk, silhouetted against the desert's twilight hues, and residents particularly dreaded how the house would look lighted up at night.

The outrage crescendoed last summer when city officials discovered that Hagadone had graded 64,000 square feet — double what the city had approved — to add unauthorized gardens, a sports court, koi pond and sidewalks.

Some residents demanded that Hagadone rip out unauthorized additions.

"The natural beauty of the desert and the mountains should be there for everyone … not just the few super rich," wrote James C. Owens. "Have the guts to tell Mr. Hagadone NO! NO! NO!"

WHEN it comes to golf and water — and most everything else — Hagadone, 74, lives large.

Take Lady Lola, the 205-foot yacht Hagadone had custom-built with what he called the world's only floating 18-hole golf course — so he could play while cruising around the world with the boat's namesake, wife Lola. Golf tees sprouted from the deck for Hagadone and friends to hack toward 18 buoys his crews anchored at various distances. A supply vessel followed behind toting other toys: a helicopter and landing pad, several speed boats (for crew members to retrieve the floating golf balls), sailboats, kayaks and a three-man submarine.

"We're a very active family. We love water sports," Hagadone told Showboats International yachting magazine in 2004. "No yacht really gives you the opportunity to carry a full complement of toys."

His extensive holdings in his Idaho hometown, Coeur d'Alene, which include restaurants, condominiums and a golf resort, have led some critics to dub the town "Coeur Duane." Hagadone raised hackles there a few years ago by proposing to replace two blocks of its busiest downtown street with a $20-million garden honoring his parents, but he dropped the controversial idea.

Hagadone wasn't always rich, according to his biography on the Horatio Alger Assn. of Distinguished Americans website. He dropped out of college to sell advertising for the eight-page daily Coeur d'Alene Press, where his father had risen to publisher. After his father died at age 49, Hagadone became publisher, and later owner, of the Press and 18 colorfully named dailies and weeklies in Idaho and Montana such as the Hungry Horse and Whitefish Pilot.

For more than 30 years, Hagadone — like thousands of other snowbirds — has traded frigid winters for the Coachella Valley's sun and more than 100 golf courses. His most recent base was in Indian Wells at the Vintage, a country club development that once made news for reprimanding one of its best-known homeowners, Bill Gates, for teeing off in a T-shirt rather than the requisite collar or turtleneck.

In 2004, Hagadone sold his boats for a reported $90 million and bought a plot at the Bighorn club.

The original design comprised five wings interspersed with interior streams and built-in aquariums. It featured his-and-her lap pools, an infinity-edge pool and several patios and terraces. Natural light would flood in from more than 110 glass windows and doors — some as large as 80 square feet, arced like half-moons, or opening at the touch of a button to let the outdoors in.

On the lower, entrance level: a huge garage for cars and golf carts, servants quarters, an elevator and a food preparation kitchen that appears big enough for Emeril, the audience and the band.

As the frame of Hagadone's home rose, residents of nearby gated communities and trailer parks dubbed Hagadone's home "the flying saucer" and "Neverland Ranch." Blinding glare from the desert sun glanced off the rounded, floor-to-ceiling glass windows of Hagadone's office, a round building in front of the main home.

It is "like a lighthouse with one major difference — there is no public benefit from its location," Jane and Paul Mueller, who live nearby, wrote to city officials.

Only a handful of residents expressed support for the project. One, Bighorn resident Edward Burger, e-mailed city officials that it would be Palm Desert's equivalent of the iconic home of Bob Hope, built three decades ago in nearby Palm Springs on a far less prominent peak. "I'm proud to have it in my community."

Bighorn rivals the Vintage and a few other clubs as the desert's toniest residential golf development. "Ultimately," the club's literature boasts, "it isn't the club you carry, but the one where you belong."

So many members drive $170,000-plus Bentley Continental GTs that it has its own Bentley Club. Bighorn also has an exclusive Starbucks, thanks to the chain's former chief executive — and Bighorn homeowner — Orin Smith. Other residents include producer Jerry Weintraub and "Entertainment Tonight" host Mary Hart.

A few miles from El Paseo, the desert's Rodeo Drive, Bighorn straddles Highway 74, the mountain route to Idyllwild and San Diego. A path under the highway allows golf carts to easily cruise between their homes and two world-class 18-hole courses, huge spa and boardroom-for-rent. Anteing up the $350,000 initiation fee, $25,000 annual charges, and $1,000 yearly "golf cart charge" gets a couple entry into those facilities and the Pour House restaurant.

Late last summer, Palm Desert associate city planner Tony Bagato discovered in an inspection that initial construction blueprints understated the home's square-footage by nearly 13,000 square feet: It was actually 44,870 square feet. But Hagadone had built beyond even that, grading land for a koi pond, a sports court and gardens not approved by the city. Now, the home was 64,000, twice what had been approved.

Hagadone's representatives called it a mistake and blamed their initial engineers — since replaced — for miscalculating the size. They submitted permit applications to cover the additions.

On Oct. 26, the day of the council showdown over the mansion, Hagadone got up at 4:30 a.m. to fly from Idaho. First stop: Ironwood, the gated community of more than 1,500 residents that lies in the shadow of his mansion, among his most vociferous opponents. He was met by four representatives from Ironwood in golf carts.

Hagadone "wasn't lawyered up," resident Larry Sutter recalled later, but came alone. He rode shotgun with Sutter, as the mini golf-cart parade cruised by modest two-bedroom condos and through the backyards of the million-dollar-plus estates that now look directly up at the colossal home. They pointed out how the infinity pool's straight edge wildly contrasted with the ridgeline's natural terrain.

They repaired to the fitness center to talk more. Hagadone said he would get his "rock guy" to soften the impact, Sutter recalled. Hagadone "certainly had opinions," Sutter said, but was "open and engaging and willing to take these steps, and we appreciate that."

HOURS later, the council hearing began, and members were quick to express frustration about their limited options.

"The first time I approved this, I didn't think I was approving anything that could be seen over the ridgeline," said Councilman Richard S. Kelly. "What's my guarantee?" he asked, in regard to approving the additional square footage, "because I thought I had a guarantee once before." Once something was built, he said, he couldn't imagine the council demanding the applicant tear it down.

If Hagadone ignored the limits on his original permits, why should the city trust him to abide by the permits he wanted for the sports court and other extra additions? Kelly asked Hagadone.

Councilwoman Jean M. Benson questioned why Hagadone should be granted anything else, considering "all that stuff he's done illegally already."

"We take some poor guy that doesn't have a nickel and make him tear down a house and rebuild it because he did it without a permit," she said. Hagadone's representatives "stood up there and blatantly lied to us."

City Atty. David Irwin said the original permits contained no provisions specifying that the house wouldn't be visible. With or without the new permits, Irwin said, "we have very limited ability to impose conditions on the original permit that was issued." If they granted new permits, however, they could attach conditions that he must modify what had already been built.

Hagadone then addressed the council, telling members that "we are very proud of the home" and hadn't broken any promises.

"I certainly have not ever proposed or commented that the building would not be seen at all," Hagadone said.

He said he had "worked hard" to make the property as "environmentally positive-looking as I possibly could," investing $360,000 in modifications, "all to become a better neighbor," and getting up before dawn that morning to address the concerns of Ironwood residents.

Hagadone urged the council to approve the sports court and other additions immediately, saying he now had large crews working to finish the house within a few months. He promised to work with a special aesthetics committee appointed by the council if they gave the go-ahead.

"When you're my age, you don't want to miss another winter in the desert," he said.

Jim Ferguson, the mayor, sided with Hagadone. "You seem like an honorable guy," Ferguson told the publisher. "You've worked well with us, and you didn't do anything that we didn't tell you you couldn't do."

With Benson dissenting, contending they were being "blackmailed," the council voted 3 to 1 to issue the additional permits.

Some residents now say the home is much less offensive with the total $700,000 that Hagadone says he has spent trying to make it less noticeable, including improvements to the home's rock walls and changes to the "Batman's ears," as some referred to the stonework around the office. Others think the faux rocks make it look worse.

Gloria Petitto, 80, whose home was built in 1956, said she remembered when Bing Crosby, Randolph Scott and other celebrities lived just down the street and "everybody was family, whether you were a ditch digger, a teacher or an entertainer."

Instead of the "majesty" of "God's nature" she could see from every room, she sees the Hagadone mansion.

They have "no consideration, no care for anybody else; they just want to be high up and look down," Petitto said. "I'll tell you," she said, that's "what money does for you."

Last week, the City Council approved an ordinance to prohibit building on or across ridgelines for new lots. In addition, residents living within 4,000 feet of any proposed hillside homes must be informed while city officials consider approval. But it appears that exceptions could still be made, just as was done in Hagadone's case.

Since selling his Vintage Club residence for about $5 million two weeks ago, Hagadone has begun moving into his dream castle. The lights have kicked on for the first time on the mountain, pouring from all the glass walls. The sight fills Ironwood resident Waldo H. Shank with fury "to look up on that ridge all lit up like a carnival each night and know that it was all accomplished by their pushing and shoving and ignoring all the rules."

http://a1022.g.akamai.net/f/1022/8158/5m/images.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-04/29193568.jpg
http://a1022.g.akamai.net/f/1022/8158/5m/images.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-04/29193475.jpg
http://a1022.g.akamai.net/f/1022/8158/5m/images.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-04/29193569.jpg

[LAMetroGuy]

Powerhouses
By DANIEL MILLER - 5/7/2007
Los Angeles Business Journal Staff

http://www.labusinessjournal.com/images/articles/050707_labj_cvr.jpg
A rendering of the 42-story condo tower to be built in Century City.

Los Angeles has long been known as a city where the ultra rich purchase expansive homes on the beach or a gated compound in the hills.


But the mega wealthy will soon have a new kind of place to live – over-the-top urban penthouses.


Top-floor condominiums costing up to $9 million or so have been around for decades in Los Angeles, mostly on the Wilshire Corridor in Westwood. But the latest wave of development is promising a slew of penthouses with staggering views and staggering price tags that are double or triple the prices of old units.


About 30 ultra high-end penthouses are expected to come on the market in the next three years, according to local real estate industry figures. Priced at up to $25 million with talk of $28 million, these units will crown new high-rise buildings in Beverly Hills, Century City and Westwood.


“These penthouses are like rare gems,” said Steve Fifield, president and founder of Fifield Cos., which is building Club View, a high-end condo tower just east of the Los Angeles Country Club. “They are like large De Beers diamonds; they sell at a factor that is different from regular real estate.”


For all that extra money, buyers will get huge units in new, tall buildings, several of which command views of the ocean, downtown and the mountains.


Some of the typical features include five-star hotel-style services, cathedral ceilings, floor-to-ceiling windows, marble staircases and multiple terraces. In addition, some of the buildings are being designed by world famous architects.


Aside from the general run-up in real estate prices over the last several years, multiple factors are at play in creating a market for the penthouses, as well as the less expensive but still multi-million dollar units located on lower floors.


To begin with, improved amenities and cultural options have made urban living in Los Angeles more appealing to prospective buyers – as worsening traffic has made it less attractive to live in suburban locales.


There’s also the buoyant stock market and L.A.’s reinvigorated, tech industry, which have created a new class of millionaires. Many of them are older baby boomers whose children have left home and for whom a penthouse, rather than a house, is attractive. And as Los Angeles has matured, it is attracting more international buyers accustomed to vertical, urban living and who have no problem paying big sums for a condo.


“In the 1980s, it was a tough time. The mentality was, who would ever give up their suburban home and give up their big house and big yard?” said Bill Schwarz, chairman of Wilshire Realty Co., who has brokered the sales of several penthouses. “Now people are more than willing to go vertical.”


Present perfect

Currently, most of Los Angeles’ high-end penthouses are situated on the Wilshire Corridor, from the western border of Beverly Hills to Westwood proper. Over the years, several have traded in the $6 million to $9 million range. Many of these buildings include 24-hour valet service and full security teams. Marquee units can be found on the corridor in the Remington, the Californian, and the Wilshire House.


It is difficult to say what the record price is for a Los Angeles penthouse because the buyers can work to keep their purchase prices hidden. But Stephen Shapiro, chairman of Westside Estate Agency Inc., a high end residential brokerage, says his firm sold two penthouse units in the Remington condo tower in 2003 to the same buyer for a total of $14 million. The buyer combined the units for a total of 15,000 square feet of space.


Still, the new class of buildings is something else.


For example, the Century, a development by Related Cos. in Century City, is designed by acclaimed architect Robert A.M. Stern and includes almost four acres of “estate grounds.” Then there’s the Montage Hotel and condo development by the Athens Group. It is set in the heart of Beverly Hills and condo residents will have full access to the hotel’s amenities. And the Carlyle on the Wilshire Corridor by Woodridge Capital LLC will include private wine cellars.


So far, it appears the priciest unit to go on the market will be a 12,000-square-foot penthouse at the Century, a 42-story condo tower under construction at One Century Drive, site of now razed St. Regis hotel. Related has not released specific plans for the unit, but sources said it’s expected to be priced at $25 million, and be completed in the first quarter of 2010.


Related will not confirm the price, but David Wine, vice chairman of the New York City-based company, said there has been a sea change in recent years as Los Angeles has emerged as a gateway, international city.


“You have international people who need residences in L.A. in a way that they didn’t before,” Wine said. “We are very confident that our building will redefine peoples’ ideas of what condo living is about.”


Related, also the lead developer of the $2 billion Grand Avenue development in downtown Los Angeles, has experience building and selling ultra high-end penthouses. Penthouses in the company’s Time Warner Center in New York sold for $25 to $50 million, Wine said.


However, Los Angeles is still not New York, where the highest-end penthouses often fetch $4,000 per square foot. But things are changing in Los Angeles, with the current crop of units expected to easily top $2,000 per square foot, and in a few cases hit or exceed $4,000.


“By most standards around the world, we look pretty inexpensive,” said Schwarz of Wilshire Realty, comparing Los Angeles to London or Tokyo. “But it seems that all of a sudden we have been able to break through almost a glass ceiling in terms of the product that is desired by this market.”


Big plans

Indeed, Fifield’s 35-unit 1200 Club View tower in Westwood will include a penthouse that is said to be for sale in the $18 million range. At that price, the 8,328-square-foot penthouse would sell for $2,161 a foot.


But with the rush of multiple high-end projects expected to hit the market the company is actually considering raising prices. The top five floors of the 21-story building will be penthouses, with just one unit per floor. The condo tower is scheduled to open in fall 2009.


“Our market is primarily in their 50s and up; it is a wealthy crowd and they don’t want to cut corners. They want space. But they want services they can’t get in their 20,000-square-foot home, like valet service and full security,” Fifield said.


Also underway is the Carlyle, Woodridge Capital’s Wilshire Corridor project that is expected to be completed in mid-2009. According to Schwarz, whose company is marketing the project, the 23-story building will include a minimum of four penthouse units.


“It is acceptable now to live in a very, very, fine high-rise building. You will find that the upper end of our market is not only accepting it but pursuing it,” he said.


The penthouse units at the Montage Hotel in Beverly Hills are somewhat of a wild card – the building tops out at eight stories, making the project shorter than many of the buildings slated for Century City or Westwood. However, the project includes just 20 condo units that sit atop a first class hotel.


Slated to open October 2008, the development will include two 5,700-square-foot penthouse units on the top floor. Jay Newman, chief operating officer for developer Athens Group, said that his company has been receiving offers in the $4,000 per foot range for units in the building. He said the penthouses may sell for $5,000 a foot, or about $28.5 million.


“That is on par with what people are paying for condos in London or New York City,” said Newman, Athens Group’s project manager for the development. “It’s Beverly Hills, and it’s the only project in the (Golden Triangle) amenitized with a five-star luxury hotel.”


Another unique project is 9900 Wilshire Blvd., which made headlines last month when London developer Candy & Candy bought the property from New Pacific Realty Corp. for $500 million.


The project, which is still awaiting final approvals from Beverly Hills, is designed by Pritzker Prize-winning architect Richard Meier and is slated to include a few two-story penthouses. Those units could easily hit $15 million.


“The Beverly Hills corridor is becoming an international city,” said Harvey Englander, spokesman for Candy & Candy.


Despite the glamour of big-money penthouses, some in the business wonder whether all of the planned projects will actually be built. The late 1980s also saw numerous plans for posh Wilshire Corridor high-rises, some of which were not completed for years after the real estate market collapsed in the early 1990s.


“I think the jury is out,” said Shapiro, the broker. “At some point, the absorption will not be equivalent to the new amount of inventory. If you go back to when this happened last, there were a couple of arrested structures on Wilshire Boulevard that just sat there.”

[KeithLS]

But they want services they can’t get in their 20,000-square-foot home...

Thank God their needs are finally being met.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

I'm glad LA is finally fetching prices this high. It gives LA the kind of respect from the discriminating uber-rich that did not exist before.

[solongfullerton]

I'm glad LA is finally fetching prices this high. It gives LA the kind of respect from the discriminating uber-rich that did not exist before.

are you kidding me? I don't think anyone thinks LA is cheaps by any means. In fact, LA is one of the most expensive places to live in the world, even without the fancy westside highrises. i think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks otherwise.

[dragonsky]

City Council approves plan to revitalize the L.A. River
By Steve Hymon, Times Staff Writer
2:41 PM PDT, May 9, 2007

Embracing an ambitious and expensive vision, the Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday approved 12-0 a long-awaited blueprint for revitalizing the much-maligned Los Angeles River.

The plan -- which itself cost $3 million -- calls for spending as much as $2 billion over the next half century on more than 200 projects along the 31 miles of riverbed within Los Angeles' city limits.

It took five years to frame the details, but the roots of the proposed river restoration go back to a fledgling group of environmentalists who in the late 1980s began insisting that the river could be much more than a concrete-lined flood control channel.

"This is a great step," said Lewis MacAdams, founder of the activist group Friends of the Los Angeles River. "One of our first slogans was when the steelhead trout returns to the Los Angeles River, then our work is done, and to see an acknowledgment of steelhead in the plan -- well, I like that."

Echoing that thought was an ebullient councilman, Ed Reyes, who represents parts of northeast Los Angeles and is chairman of the council's river committee.

"This is now a real mandate that declares the river is a real river and we're going to give it life and support the way it supported us when Los Angeles was first started," Reyes said.

Among the proposed projects are dozens of new parks and pedestrian walkways and bridges. The plan also calls for some river-adjacent areas to be rezoned to allow for more housing to be built near the waterway and its parks.

At its most extreme, the plan proposes knocking down one of the concrete walls that contains the river to expand the channel and make it look more natural. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is studying that prospect.

"It's incredibly visionary and I think they've set the bar high," said Nancy Steele, executive director of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. "The key is going to be implementation."

Steele said that both the city and region have a rich history of putting together plans for rivers and then never following through. She noted that the river plan doesn't include upstream tributaries.

Hitting on that point, Councilman Richard Alarcon voted for the plan but threatened to withhold support unless studies are conducted to include parks along tributaries in his district. "In the Valley" the river "goes through all the rich communities," Alarcon said.

Alarcon represents the northeast San Fernando Valley, which is bisected by the Tujunga Wash.

The council also committed to begin creating a three-tiered management structure to oversee the restoration plan's implementation.

A joint powers authority between the city and county would manage projects within the river channel, a nonprofit appointed by elected officials would manage and construct parks along the river, and a philanthropic organization would help raise private funds.

Other thorny issues remain: finding money for projects -- state and federal help will likely be required -- and improving water quality. The city is in the early stages of a federally ordered cleanup of several pollutants in the waterway, including trash, bacteria and heavy metals.

[edluva]

only wannabes want for their city to be expensive, if only to be able to use their city in the same sentence as london etc. what a juvenile aspiration. good thing you're not our mayor.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

^ "Unfortunately," the last time I checked, money does make the world go round, which is why Manhattan is the center of the universe to some extent. Money talks and having high-valued real estate attracts the discriminating wealthy class and their MONEY. And last time I checked, cities ASPIRE to be like London and New York (centers of MONEY), so it is no surprise that many people do strive to have their city included amongst the world's alpha centers.

Having a few more uber-luxury condos could potentially attract the kind of upper-crust executives and tycoons that bring with them, sometimes, entire industries. Part of the reason why Downtown LA has not attracted more companies to move there has to do with the lack of "executive quality" housing available predominantly on the Westside where most of the CEOs live. Uber-luxury housing in Downtown LA could attract those top execs, which could bring with them entire companies to locate downtown.

But alas! I'm sorry you dissent from my aspirations for an LA that includes a niche for uber-luxury condos! But as negative as you are on a daily basis, I think I can say confidently that everyone here on this board is glad YOU'RE NOT OUR MAYOR! ;)

[edluva]

^you and a few other LA folk represent a subforum clown-gang the likes of which have not been seen since DoubleL and co. posted on these boards
And don't think i'm negative just because i consistently oppose the stupidity and ignorance rampant in much of the LA subforum. i'm only negative to those who make idiotic statements.

and it's idiotic to ascribe LA's lack of an urbanness to downtown's lack of "uber-lux", when it's plain to see that the fundamental problem is LA's built env't and pathetic mass trans network. and London/NY are financial centers because they are home to the largest bourses in the world - not because some yuppie such as yourself decided to declare their preferred ghetto ripe for another coffee bean and tea leaf. you should also already know by now that ceo's don't have the power to move company HQ's wherever they please, especially in LA where it's generally cost-prohibitive relative to suburbs. that you overlook such common sense illustrates your image-obsessed shallowness- the kind of shallowness San Franciscans and New Yorkers label LA with (and which I now grudglingly agree LA sometimes deserves). instead, you'll continue obsessing over the notion that presenting a pseudo-downtown so that a few like-minded suburbanites can overpay to live in a 5 sq mile bubble and pretend that they live in a real city equates to "having gotten there".

but hey man, if you want I'll sell you my mom's 1500sf shithole for 4million so that you can say you're a badass, and put LA and London in the same sentence. stay positive! :tup:

[LAMetroGuy]

well... it's always easier to say what you don't like... sort like saying shit smells bad and then thinking you're a smart person for having such a poignant opinion on the smell of shit.

Sometimes I wounder why people torture themselves to "stupidity and ignorance" and keep reading the postings of the subforum clown-gang? If pie in the sky postings isn't your thang, don't follow the bouncing ball to SSP.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

^you and a few other LA folk represent a subforum clown-gang the likes of which have not been seen since DoubleL and co. posted on these boards
And don't think i'm negative just because i consistently oppose the stupidity and ignorance rampant in much of the LA subforum. i'm only negative to those who make idiotic statements.

and it's idiotic to ascribe LA's lack of an urbanness to downtown's lack of "uber-lux", when it's plain to see that the fundamental problem is LA's built env't and pathetic mass trans network. and London/NY are financial centers because they are home to the largest bourses in the world - not because some yuppie such as yourself decided to declare their preferred ghetto ripe for another coffee bean and tea leaf. you should also already know by now that ceo's don't have the power to move company HQ's wherever they please, especially in LA where it's generally cost-prohibitive relative to suburbs. that you overlook such common sense illustrates your image-obsessed shallowness- the kind of shallowness San Franciscans and New Yorkers label LA with (and which I now grudglingly agree LA sometimes deserves). instead, you'll continue obsessing over the notion that presenting a pseudo-downtown so that a few like-minded suburbanites can overpay to live in a 5 sq mile bubble and pretend that they live in a real city equates to "having gotten there".

but hey man, if you want I'll sell you my mom's 1500sf shithole for 4million so that you can say you're a badass, and put LA and London in the same sentence. stay positive! :tup:


Last time I checked, I was an active and vocal proponent of expanding mass transit in LA. The build environment? Yeah sure we're car-oriented, and to you, we'll never transition into a more pedestrian-friendly environment. You might as well give up and move to New York City. And companies aren't merely stationed on the Westside by chance because it isn't "cost-prohibitive" like how you THINK. Downtown LA offers very competitive leasing rates compared to the Westside, but the lack of amenities and lack of luxury housing (yes, luxury, not pseudo-luxury) prevent Downtown LA from attracting more companies because top execs do have say where the company goes. But as we've seen in the few months, many law firms and other companies are finally starting to make the move downtown because they sense this will be a place where "things are gonna happen." - i.e, your favorite LA Live and Grand Ave Project.

Look, you're a pretty negative guy by default. I'm not sure what you're like in real life, but it's pretty annoying having to constantly read your bullshit diatribes (why I continue to read your posts is beyond me, perhaps I am stupid for that very reason). Go out and smell the "fresh" air and get some sunshine dude! ;) And change the way you look at things perhaps. Someone once said "If you love your city, your city will love you back."

[LosAngelesBeauty]

May 3, 2007 – Ryan Gierach


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/cityhalldusk.jpg
West Hollywood’s City Hall. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


He has been talking about it, hinting at its imminent arrival without bandying about figures and costs and scope, but Paul Arevalo has not been ready to announce his plans for his Make Over of the City of West Hollywood - until now.

West Hollywood’s City Manager plans no less than $125 million in expenditures over the next ten years to create over 650 parking spaces in three strategically located structures, a world-class library/community center, scores of thousands of sq ft of greenspace in our parks and a state of the art creative arts center featuring 200-seat retractable auditorium seating and a 99-seat black box theater.

Worried taxpayers take heart. “We can do this, all $125 million, without raising a single dime in new taxes,” Mr. Arevalo assured with justifiable pride in his fiscal stewardship of the town’s coffers.

Paul Arevalo told WeHoNews in an exclusive interview that the city had grown up and should act like it. “The city is maturing as an institution. In our adolescence we fought all forms of bureaucracy just to fight it. For example, we went to a paperless office at one point; we learned that going paperless meant going unaccountable, so we went back,” he said.


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/parkscene.jpg
It can only be said that the city’s parks are barely adequate. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


“West Hollywood, for all the attention it gets from around the world, for all its importance to people around the world, has no world-class civic facility to boast of,” he said. “For our 25th anniversary as a city we’ll celebrate by breaking ground on a series of public facilities improvements that will give us those world-class community facilities.”

His pride is justified by the results of his and his financial team’s deft touch on budget issues. According to the City’s web site, Moody’s Investors Service gives the City a credit rating of Aaa for the debt issued, and the City has never defaulted on any payments.

In addition, the City’s financial team racks up award after award, including, most recently, its 13th-straight National Distinguished Budget Presentation Award.

Mr. Arevalo says, “We are fortunate to live in an affluent community where people are willing to step up to the plate and pay for services the residents need. That means we can do all of these projects just from the revenue we expect to come in from our current tax structure and capital fundraising campaigns.”

The big news, which merchants, restaurants and residents alike will greet with huzzahs and halleluiahs, is parking, lots of it. The plans, taken together, call for the addition of over 650 new hard parking spaces (that number expand several times when valets “stack” cars at night, according to Oscar Delgado, the City’s head of Parking) in three locations – at West Hollywood Park abutting the new library, topped off by tennis courts (333 new spots), at the City Hall expansion lot (132 net spots) and at Plummer Park, where ingenious placement of the parking underground expands that lot from approximately 80 to 180 parking spots.


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/parking.jpg
A shot of the very successful Kings Road Parking lot in Mid Town WeHo. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


Because each of the lots will be accessible to the public, and at least one of the lots will be leased to valets at night, “the parking will begin to pay for itself almost immediately,” said Mr. Arevalo.

Oscar Delgado explained the approach being taken at the City Hall expansion lot. “At City Hall we’ll net 132 spaces by going up another floor of parking,” he said. “We’ll make it available to people in the neighborhood for overnight parking. It’ll be open to the public during the daytime; we’ll charge a nominal fee like we do at Kings Road.”

He also said that visitors to City Hall would be given validations for city hall business, making their parking there both easier and free. He also sung the praises of the design and its affects, or lack of them, on the immediate neighborhood. “The nice thing about it is the structure will be enclosed on three sides with the new one-stop community service center’s offices on the top floor, so it’ll be quiet,” he said.

As for how to develop a revenue stream from the extra 130 spaces, he said, “We toyed with the idea of putting valet parking there at night, but our meeting schedule goes into the night, it kind of precludes that. We might still do it, though,” he acceded.

Saying that “Planning events at Plummer Park has always been problematic because of a lack of parking,” Mr. Delgado segued the conversation over to Sam Baxter, head of facilities and maintenance for the city, who gave the presentation on Plummer Park, which included the most innovative solution to the city’s parking crunch – build it underneath the park.


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/plum.jpg
Plummer Park’s entrance. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


“We’re going subterranean, moving it underground,” he said showing the preliminary drawings. “We’re planning on building about 180 spaces [to replace the 80 there are now] in one level underground. It will extend underneath the park some ways, up to where Fiesta Hall stands.”

He explained that the park designers could “pick up about 30,000 sq ft of green space that way,” he said, “and although this plan will be expensive, we can’t buy 30,ooo sq ft of green space anywhere in the city for any price.”

According to the team, this parking will serve the surrounding neighborhood, commercial, entertainment facilities and the offices that are there now or are being built soon. To do this, he said, “We’re keeping the entrance on Santa Monica Boulevard [at the mouth of Martel].

As the plans exist now, the parking will extend to underneath Fiesta Hall, where there will be an elevator and car drop off; there will also be an elevator placed at the Community Center/Tiny Tots Building and Play area behind the Center.

The most excitement, though, seemed reserved for what the team is calling a “creative arts center” at a renovated Fiesta Hall that will include a state of the art flat floor room for public meeting use, a retractable seat auditorium for 200 and a 99-seat black box theater.


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/parksign.jpg
West Hollywood Park. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


City Manager Arevalo said, “We’ve heard the need for a performance facility from the community, and we’ve developed a way to do it inside Fiesta Hall. We’ll have a multi-use, state-of-the-art black box stage and a performance stage for over 200 when we’re done with it all.”

Sam Baxter chimed in with details. “At Fiesta Hall we’re creating a multi-purpose creative art center to give maximum flexibility of the open space inside the hall. We’ll take it down to the shell, leaving the outside intact.”

Inside, he promised, things will look much different than they do now. “We’ll build a space that serves as a flat floor public meeting space for assemblies where we can set up tables and chairs,” he said. “We’ll also build a 150-200 retractable fixed seat theater. Those seats will be auditorium-style seating like they use in theaters now, just that they will retract and can be stored away.

That opens the possibility of creating yet another valuable performing space – a black box theater. “Since they are retractable,” he said, “they give us the ability to add a 99-seat black box theater to it. Of course, there will be all new lighting, acoustics, sound, etc. for that. It’ll be up to the minute.”

The overall plan for Plummer Park, he went on to describe, “is to move the hardscape, all the buildings and the play areas, from the center of the park,” he said, “to its outskirts. That gains us greenspace. Just demolishing the halls in the center of the park will create 14,000 sq ft of greenspace.”


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/librarynow.jpg
The current West Hollywood Public Library. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


A valuable community resource, the Russian Language Library, will be moved out of its location there by the renovation, but Mr. Arevalo said, “We’ve been working with the Russian language library to find a place to relocate them; eventually, they’ll be in the library in the Russian Collection room.”

He stressed that the library was not a library alone, but that the structure would enhance facets of community life that cannot be easily discounted. He said, “The library will serve three main functions, as enhanced community meeting space and a respectable place to hold City Council meetings, of course as a library, but also as a holding for our West Hollywood History, Russian Language and LGBT collections. And the Friends of The Library will have office and retail space right at the front door,” he hastily added.

Turning attention to the City Hall project, Sam Baxter explained that there would be an 18,000 sq ft added to the parking rooftop in the form of a full community service center. “Call it a one stop shop for all your city needs,” he said. “Right now permits are on the second floor, so when you’re done up there you have to come downstairs to pay the cashier at the City Clerk. It takes a lot of ups and downs in our elevator to get anything done now.

“We’ll be placing all the ‘connected’ service counters in the front of the house so they will be in one place. You can get your parking needs, your permit needs, planning needs, everything you’ll need from the city, taken care of all in one place,” he said. “The support staff for those things will be in the ‘back of the house’ to come out and handle things.”

He said that expansion would relieve pressure inside the city hall offices now. “This will solve the space problems we have now in City Hall,” Mr. Baxter said. “With the community service center support staff leaving our current offices for the service center, we’ll be able to add essential conference rooms that we don’t have now and add some elbow room for the staff who are now in cubicles.”


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/liberry4.jpg
An artist’s conception of the planned library for West Hollywood. Photo by Ryan Gierach.


Paul Arevalo added, “It’ll be open on Friday lights [the every other Fri. that City Hall closes except for a few services], too, so for departments like planning and special events, film permits and the like, it will expand hours and access by the public.”

The question hanging over the revelations of these multiple municipal masterpieces, despite the assurances it will cost the residents or businesses nothing more than they already pay in taxes, remains ‘How to pay for it all?’

Paul Arevalo said, “We have set up a portfolio to do this that includes a Capital Fundraising campaign for the library. We’ll be aggressively seeking grants for the various projects like historic preservation money for the renovation and transformation of Fiesta Hall. State funding for the library is still a possibility down the road.”

But those funds only scratch the surface of a $150 million note. Still, he and his crack finance team have a solid enough sounding plan. “I’m going to council with a proposal to carve off all the Transient and Occupancy Tax (TOT) from the three new hotels [two in the Sunset Millenium development and the James Hotel] coming online on the Sunset Strip in the next couple years to pledge toward this.”

In case anyone might wonder if that would be enough, he offered, “We project nearly $6 million a year in TOT from the three new hotels being built on the Strip. That can be leveraged into $25-30 million in debt capacity.” That makes a healthy start.


http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archive/images/liberry2.jpg
Another view of the proposed West Hollywood Library. Photo by Ryan Gierach.

He pointed out that the library fundraising had not yet started, and could be expected to do well. The Capital Campaign for the library will net $10 million easily,” he said. Add to that the fact that the city is in prime financial condition, “West Hollywood has built itself a $50 million reserve, up from $4 million 17 years ago when I came aboard,” he said.

“We’ve got a unique economic formula incomparable to any jurisdiction in the country,” Mr. Arevalo said, “and it’s fun to make the most of it and be able to use it to build a better quality of life for the residents, especially without having to ask them to pay for it.

“Look at the constituencies that will be served by these improvements,” he said. “Our main focus is to create as much green space as we can. By transforming an acre and a half into five acres at West Hollywood Park and increasing green space in Plummer Park we benefit the entire city. And businesses will benefit from all the parking capacity we’re adding; it’ll mean more economic activity all around.”

The plan will be formally unveiled at its first commission hearing on May 9th at the Public Facilities Commission meeting taking place at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Community Conference Room, 8300 Santa Monica Boulevard.

Mr. Arevalo said, “Our first step is to set the plan before council for their approval and get the funding put into place. After that, groundbreaking could begin in 2009.”

He promised that the construction of the projects would not last long. “We’ll do it all at once; I’d rather have six months of pain than six years of agony,” he said. “And with construction costs going up daily we need to act fast and quickly to keep a lid on things.” :banana: :banana: :banana:

[DowntownCharlieBrown]

I was in DT Riverside today, and drove by the construction site of the proposed 10-story office building. Didn’t see any movement at the site, but there is a fence and a fairly deep hole has been dug.

Is this building still moving forward? :shrug:

[DowntownCharlieBrown]

The Getty Center at 10: Still aloof, yet totally L.A.


Robbin Goddard / Los Angeles Times

SPRAWLING SITE: Richard Meier's design for the Getty Center in Brentwood distributes more than 900,000 square feet of interior space among six separate buildings.

Design questions raised at the center's birth on a hilltop remain relevant as its relationship with the city evolves.
By Christopher Hawthorne, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
December 16, 2007

During much of the 1990s, as the Getty Center was rising on its Brentwood hilltop, a couple of stubborn questions dogged the hugely ambitious project: Would Richard Meier's design ever have anything meaningful to do with, or say about, the cityover which it loomed? Or would it exist as an expensive import, a vast collection of smooth enamel and rough travertine conjured up by a New York architect who looked west for commissions but east, to Europe and its Modernist past, for inspiration?

This weekend, as the $1.2-billion complex celebrates its 10th anniversary, those questions seem as relevant as ever.

In part that's because the answers keep changing. When Meier's design proposal was unveiled, the Getty was widely seen as an anomaly in Los Angeles, an effort to lend instant, old-fashioned respectability to an institution that craved it. Then, after it opened Dec. 16, 1997, the Getty surprised usby fitting in. And in the last couple of years it has begun to look like an anomaly all over again, though for a fresh set of reasons.

Looking back at the museum's changing reputation offers more than the chance to see how the relationships between a city and its most significant landmarks change over time. It also helps explain the various shifts -- many of them profound -- that have redefined the field of architecture, and the city of Los Angeles, over the last 10 years.

Architecture's leading figures have become global brand names, courted by commercial, governmental and cultural clients alike. L.A., for its part, has grown more vertical and noticeably denser -- and less white by the day. It takes most of its external cultural cues these days not from Europe or New York but from Latin America and Asia.

That's not to say we have given up entirely on the idea that some Old World glamour can save or redeem us. The biggest local museum commission since the Getty, the expansion and reconfiguration of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, went to Renzo Piano, 70, a talented and genteel architect who splits his time between Paris and Genoa, Italy. But the next music director of the L.A. Philharmonic, Gustavo Dudamel, is a 26-year-old from Venezuela. The new dean of the architecture department at USC is Qingyun Ma, a Shanghai architect who just turned 42. His counterpart at UCLA, 45-year-old Hitoshi Abe, arrived here in April from Sendai, Japan.

Though the Getty was a force for architectural and civic change, both as a model to follow and to react against, it was far from the only one. Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, among the most catalytic designs in architectural history, also opened in the fall of 1997 -- a triumph that helped get Gehry's stalled Walt Disney Concert Hall back on the track to completion.

Still, there is no question that the Getty Center permanently altered the way we think about new high-profile buildings here. The thumbnail version of its influence goes like this: The ways in which the complex successfully took advantage of L.A.'s climate, landscape and culture are worth copying; the ways in which it remained separate from the city, physically and symbolically, or tried to impose an inflexible approach to architecture better suited to Manhattan or Bauhaus-era Germany are worth avoiding.

Ultimately, however, exploring the question of the Getty's connection to Los Angeles raises another: In a global city as wildly diverse and prone to amnesia as this one, how do we define what fidelity to local context, to the spirit of a place, even means?



A curious choice

In 1984, Harold M. Williams, president of the Getty Trust, announced that the architect for its ambitious new headquarters, on 110 acres just west of the San Diego Freeway, would be Richard Meier, then 49. The choice was curious: To design a museum on a site detached and aloof from the quickly changing city below it, the Getty picked an architect whose work -- and whole professional persona, for that matter -- was often detached and aloof as well.

By sticking to an orthodox version of Modernism in an era of Disneyland eclecticism, Meier, throughout the 1970s and '80s, had at least won points for consistency and rigor. But his chiseled designs, seemingly allergic to color and humor in equal measure, appeared to exist in a vacuum, without any of the sense of social mission that had driven the European architects who inspired him. The purest examples of his work were exercises less in Modernism than in antisepticism.

A funny thing happened, though, after the complex opened: It seemed more relaxed and more comfortable in its spectacular setting than we might have guessed. Maybe it was all that travertine, which softened the edges of the architect's machine-like style. Maybe it was the way the center itself sprawled across its huge site. Or maybe Los Angeles culture seeped into the design because Meier -- and Michael Palladino, the architect who relocated here from New York in 1986 to run the project for Meier and never left -- spent so much time in the city as the project moved through more than a decade of gestation.

People got used to the idea, so alien at first, of leaving their cars at the bottom of the hill and taking a sleek tram to the museum at the top. Even Thierry Despont's galleries, lined with fabric panels in rich colors, didn't seem so fussy or aggressively handsome after a while.

The way Meier chose to break up the design, distributing more than 900,000 square feet of interior space among six separate buildings, some holding art and others a library and the Getty's various research arms, did reinforce the idea of the museum as campus -- corporate or collegiate, take your pick -- and as a rather sterile, self-contained world floating above the city. But it had the practical effect of creating a whole series of plazas between and around those distinct blocks of space, nearly every one providing a spot for a bench or a fountain or a remarkable view.

And if the central courtyard, with its 120-foot-long fountain edged by Mexican cypress trees, seemed like a quad -- a nostalgic reference not just to classical architecture but also to the idea of being sequestered in a safe, self-contained place of higher learning -- well, most of us enjoyed it all the more for that.

The design seemed reflective of Los Angeles architecture in another, almost paradoxical way. If the whole idea of L.A. art and architecture was to ignore the idea of fitting in, to reject slavish conformism, then wasn't the Getty a supreme example of precisely that attitude? Turning its back on the notion that it needed to match the spirit of Los Angeles in some prescribed way -- didn't that make it somehow truer to the city than a row of palm trees or a red-tile roof?

Perhaps more to the point, the Getty joined a long line of L.A. landmarks that sit at a dramatic remove from the city around them -- most notably Griffith Observatory and Dodger Stadium and houses by John Lautner, Pierre Koenig, Frank Lloyd Wright, Charles and Ray Eames, and many others.



Different mission

In recent years, the role the Getty Center plays in the city's imagination has shifted once more. It hardly ranks as L.A.'s final stand-alone icon: Gehry's Disney Hall, which opened in 2003, and Thom Mayne's 2004 Caltrans building -- to pick two examples downtown -- proudly continued that tradition.

But in the last three or four years, we have embarked on a kind of high-profile architecture here that requires very different skills from those Meier displayed at the Getty. Instead of building new landmarks from scratch, architects are being asked to extend, restore or otherwise re-imagine existing ones.

The list of such designs includes recent expansions of the Getty Villa (2005) and Griffith Observatory (2006), along with plans for a third building by Cesar Pelli at the Pacific Design Center and Gehry's work on the mixed-use project soon to rise across from Disney Hall. Call it infill with an L.A. twist.

Few L.A. architects have the luxury now of dropping a prominent building onto a wide-open plot of land, let alone a billion-dollar collection of buildings onto a virgin hilltop. And as those changes accelerate, the magisterial and isolated Getty, created whole, begins to appear anomalous all over again.

Of course, this tension between standing apart from the city and in the midst of it, between indigenous and imported culture, has always been a defining feature -- maybe the defining feature -- of L.A. culture. Reviewing "The Long Embrace," Judith Freedman's new book about Raymond Chandler, in the New York Review of Books, Pico Iyer notes that Chandler, who was brought up in England and moved here in his mid-20s, "got hold of L.A. partly by always remaining at a distance from it."

"The sound that Chandler made his own was a mix of incantatory lyrical poetry and the rude vernacular of people who mocked all that such poetry traditionally described," Iyer writes.

The way the Getty has settled into the Los Angeles landscape over the last decade is a product of the same dynamic. The best sense of where the city stands, 10 years on, is to be found not just in the detached, Olympian architecture of the Getty itself or in the restless, organic local culture it seems to oppose, but in the relationship -- thoroughly intertwined by now -- between the two.

christopher.hawthorne@la times.com

Hawthorne is The Times' architecture critic






And throwing this out for thought. Ten years ago, the thought of placing the museum downtown would have made Getty shudder in his grave. Today, maybe not. And wouldn’t it now give so much to downtown at a time when downtown has something to give back???

[edluva]

i wish west hollywood was the seat of LA's government.

[Vangelist]

Don't worry, the gays are still secretly controlling and governing all of us regardless. In fact..they're all over this board! Wow!

[WonderlandPark]

One Broadway Plaza, the building that was the center of an expensive and bitter campaign to get it built. The building that was to be, by far, the tallest building in Orange County at ~500ft. Well, it appears to be dead. There has been no site activity whatsoever for 18+ months now. The same half house still sits in the middle of the same fenced off lot. I went by there yesterday. The OC office market is still very strong. I don't know what happened in this case, but this thing appears to be going nowhere.

Even the press release on the website promises a Jan '07 start. The last news on this project was added in March '07.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

i wish west hollywood was the seat of LA's government.

Why

[jlrobe]

....... and put LA and London in the same sentence. stay positive! :tup:

I understand your point edluva, but I must point out that LA surpassed London's economy decades ago. London provides the liquid and cities such as LA provide the goods and services. Even if many are blue collar, GDP is GDP. London does achieves economic success in a sexier way, but you can't refute raw dollars!

LA doesn;t compare to London culturally, but LA is very much in the same sentence as London when it comes to GDP.

Now GDP/capita, income/capita, etc. is a different animal altogether.

[edluva]

I understand your point edluva, but I must point out that LA surpassed London's economy decades ago. London provides the liquid and cities such as LA provide the goods and services. Even if many are blue collar, GDP is GDP. London does achieves economic success in a sexier way, but you can't refute raw dollars!

LA doesn;t compare to London culturally, but LA is very much in the same sentence as London when it comes to GDP.

Now GDP/capita, income/capita, etc. is a different animal altogether.

i disagree. how can you compare the state of georgia with nyc and say that georgia's economy exerts its proportionate dollar-for-dollar influence over the global economy as nyc does based on both having similar gdp's? likewise with la vs london. i'm not concerned with "sexiness" here, i'm just sayin' an economy based on millions of local small-businesses exerts far less influence on global economics than one based on millions of financial managers - even if their combined incomes were equa (in which case la and ny are still not)

[jlrobe]

i disagree. how can you compare the state of georgia with nyc and say that georgia's economy exerts its proportionate dollar-for-dollar influence over the global economy as nyc does based on both having similar gdp's? likewise with la vs london. i'm not concerned with "sexiness" here, i'm just sayin' an economy based on millions of local small-businesses exerts far less influence on global economics than one based on millions of financial managers - even if their combined incomes were equa (in which case la and ny are still not)

Actually there is a global connectivity index that measures precisely what you are looking for. You are correct, LA falls from third in the world, to fifth, behind london.

That news isnt meant to upset you. It is what it is. LA looks ugly, but its massive ports, airport, international business sector, defense, technology, and media industries are more powerful than our 1 story buildings convey. It is very odd, but alas, very true.

[edluva]

Actually there is a global connectivity index that measures precisely what you are looking for. You are correct, LA falls from third in the world, to fifth, behind london.

That news isnt meant to upset you. It is what it is. LA looks ugly, but its massive ports, airport, international business sector, defense, technology, and media industries are more powerful than our 1 story buildings convey. It is very odd, but alas, very true.

i'm talking about economics, not a scholarly attempt at quantifying an abstract concept such as "global connectivity". I don't need pointyheaded intellectuals to tell me LA has an enormous cultural influence on the world.

by the way, tell me what exactly is this "international business sector"...people here love to throw around phrases without really deciding for themselves whether they're valid. I'm not doubting you perse, just being a healthy skeptic.

[jlrobe]

i'm talking about economics, not a scholarly attempt at quantifying an abstract concept such as "global connectivity". I don't need pointyheaded intellectuals to tell me LA has an enormous cultural influence on the world.

by the way, tell me what exactly is this "international business sector"...people here love to throw around phrases without really deciding for themselves whether they're valid. I'm not doubting you perse, just being a healthy skeptic.

Global connectivity is 70% economic based, at least according to the university who defined the metric in the first place. I might have to scrounge up my old magazines to cite it formally. One could easily do bayesian to infer that LA still won't drop that far if the metric were to be converted from global connectivity to a purely economic basis. To be honest, I really don't care that much.

Global financial centers are nice, but not the end all be all in the world's economy. There are several degrees of nodes. Of course Tokyo, Hong Kong, London, and NYC are big finance nodes. Eveyone knows that. LA is not a finance node. Everyone knows that as well. If you feel that finance nodes are the only game in town, then I guess London is more important. Actually, even though NYC and Tokyo have double/triple the GDP of London, they would actually be surpassed by London in terms IPOs and credit transactions per day. Same with Hong Kong as far as raw money switching hands. How do we truly measure which one is more important? Would you say London is more important than NYC because of trade volume, or would you weigh GDP? If you consider GDP, do you do it per capita, or total? If you do use GDP/capita, then would you say Coppenhagen is more important than Tokyo?

The same can be said about the fortune 500 stat. Does the number of F-500 companies make a city more economically significant? If so, then would Atlanta be one of the most dominant economic cities in the US? Many fortune 500 companies are BASED there due to taxes, but 70% of their GDP occurs elsewhere.

The truth is there is no real single measure. It could be global connectivity, GDP, GDP/capita, exports, imports, fortune 500 companies, etc. etc. In fact, tracking global dollars or global importance is a non-trivial task.

As for international business, look it up in the california department of finance or the LA business journal, or the department of commerce and tourism. They itemize everything in there. I read a lot, but I dont make a point to scan the pages and put them in a file if one day someone asks me for a citation, so I am sorry for the lack of references to support my claims. Needless to say, in all the reports I read, LA is always near the top of the list in terms of important economic centers, and importance overall. Every list has a different metric, and a different point to make, but every list tends to put LA 2nd or 3rd in the US and top 10 in the world. I am suprised you haven't noticed any of these lists. If EVERY list tends to hold LA favorably, are you implying that every list uses the wrong metric and that you have the TRUE metric that will prove LA is once and for all insignificant. Better yet, can you produce ANY list, where LA is not in the top 15 as far as overall global importance or economic output.

You can claim LA isnt economically important becasue
1) it doesnt have enough skyscrapers
2) it doesnt have enough fortune 500 companies
3) It doesnt have enough transit
4) it is too spread out for it to matter
5) it isnt important beyond its borders
6) Or any other excuse you have

But in the end, it doesnt matter how you try and spin it, LA is an economic power. List after list after list claims that. If you REALLY don't want to believe it, then maybe YOU should go out and prove everyone else wrong.

Now that being said, I dont CARE if LA is economically powerful. It doesnt make LA anymore livable in my opinion, and livability (and urbaness) is what we all care about the most.

Using LA's economic data to prove it is a better town than Chicago, holds no water. Claiming LA is wonderful and stating economic data is a fallacy.

Now, I think your MO is to prove LA is severly flawed and could benefit from some serious political reform and improved urban policies. Well, EVERYONE on this board agrees with you. Yes, many of us get happy about buildings, and state positive things about LA. We should! Just because I want LA to build 3 subways and rewrite all of their laws, doesn't mean I shouldnt be happy for every little bit of progress we make. Some people, whom you bash for being blindly optimistic, are actually BUSY going to policy meetings and doing their part to make LA a better place. They are optimistic, but also realize LA has a ways to go. To be honest, if I had to choose between someone who was overly optimistic and proud of his/her city (many on this forum) or someone who was a pessimistic "so called realist/healthy skeptic" that refused to lift a finger to improve their city, I would choose the former.

You have a wealth of knowledge, but to be honest, many times, you don't contribute much to a discussion. You use your knowledge to belittle people instead of enriching the discussion at hand, which you could easily do on many occasions. You and I are in agreement many times, but your ridiculous negative spin and apathy just taints everything. I would love to debate LA's economy with you, not because I am a booster, but because I think you could bring up interesting ideas that would make me think. However, In reality, this wouldn't be very fun at all because you would spend all of your energy trying to prove that LA sucks, instead of making for a lively discussion. So in the end, what's the point!?

[Westsidelife]

:cheers:

[Westsidelife]

Just one thing I'd like to say to you jlrobe...

LA's Fortune 500 companies are scattered throughout the metro area. Those companies choose to locate themselves in Burbank, El Segundo, and Beverly Hills not because of Burbank, El Segundo, and Beverly Hills. They wish to remain in close proximity to LA, all the while evading its corporate tax burdens. Looking at the MSA, or better yet the CSA, is a better indication of LA's corporate presence.

The top five CSAs in terms of number of Fortune 500 companies:

1) New York (53)
2) Chicago (30)
3) San Francisco (27)
4) Dallas (24)
5) Houston (23)

6) Los Angeles (22)

[Vangelist]

If edluva next starts arguing that the earth is flat, are we going to spend time trying to refute that one too? It's best to just humor his posts when they're so entertaining, especially as they come across so classically classist. ;) Right, LA is filled with so many ugly, unskilled Mexicali workers, instead of men in white collar suits. We're economically non-existent, our industries are insignificant and illegitimate. We should all get out of our cars as in the REM video for "Everybody Hurts" when we're stuck in rush-hour, and start hugging each other and crying, bemoaning our non-economic fate. If one idiosyncratic poster on an irrelevant message board repeats it ad nauseam, it must be true!

[edluva]

whatever. i'd like just one of you guys to make a compelling argument as to how exactly LA's economy influences the global economy in a way proportionate or reflective of its GDP, or in a way proportionate and reflective of your claims. That was the initial assertion that brought about this argumetn wasn't it?

you guys can character-assasinate all you like - but i've yet to hear you talk the talk. Not even you, vangelist. All you offer is sarcastic imitation and labelling. you've made absolutely no substantive remarks to date, and attempt to hide your dearth of ideas by pedantically citing a few esoteric cinematic references which probably reflect some intro-class you took at USC in hopes of impressing us to submission. there's a word for that. it's called sophism. and it's pretty easy to see through. btw, noone is bemoaning the economic fate of la but you. I'm only stating what's true. it's up to you to put an existential bent to it, and it's obvious to me how important economic might (or lack thereof) is to you. hopefully bricky can come in and bail you out again. ;)

jlrobe- i don't frame the idea la is economically less important for any one of those points you cite. i'm glad you read the LABJ and you're capable of citing someone else's statement. re: your statement about atlanta - yeah, I am saying exactly that. that a case can be made of atlanta's relative influence on global economics based on the decisions that ultimately go down in corporate boardrooms. I'm not saying we should base the above on F500's alone though. What I am saying is I'd give more credence to that than the agglomerated GMP of 18million people, because we could just as easily agglomerate the GDP of a similarly populated region, such as the dirty south. so until you discredit my criticism of this GMP metric earlier, I'll continue to make the point. Same goes for sakia sassen's methodology - it never was her aim to summarize the influence of a metro's economy...but rather it's connectivity. and even then, you forgot to account for political and legal parts of her assesment. it's not just econ and culture.

anyways, tell me how la influences the world financially, without mindlessly quoting some chamber of commerce paraphrenelia you obviously don't even put the effort towards understanding yourself. i can do that too, but it would be way too easy.

p.s. westsidelife :cheers:

[milquetoast]

Global financial centers are nice, but not the end all be all in the world's economy.
When billions of people all over the world jump-start their televisions tonight, they may come across a little L. A. based product of some sort. When the TEU's are loaded in Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Tokyo tonight, they probably will find their way past Angel's Gate. When California insists on curbing emissions and 16 other states ride those coat tails, do you consider that influential thinking? More than half the population of the country riding on a bid that has its origins where? Where are people influenced in their daily lives but more importantly, how are they influenced? How do they achieve the most effective shift in their paradigm? Would that be economically, culturally or spiritually? I would agree with jlrobe in his assertion that financial manipulations aren't the be all or end all of civilization. Let me put this out there in the form of groundskeeping. Financial decisions are like feeding, watering and aerating your lawn; needs to be done. The cultural analogy would be,- what to plant and where to plant it to its greatest effect concerning the parameters of your property and area's weather variables. The spiritual or religious analogy would be the trim and maintenance of the property, the trees and shrubs and flowers and the overall personality in form they attain from you over time. L. A.'s lawn isn't the largest, but its grounds are among the most diversified and unique in the world. The largest variety of faiths practiced in the world, and containing by far the most powerful cultural influence developed to date. Cities aren't just money machines, they are people adding to their lives as well as the lives around them. L. A. does alright. What's funny, jlrobe, is that I wouldn't have found your wicked post, unless I was searching for edluva's next beam of sunshine!:)

[milquetoast]

L. A.'s also the city that got New York to stop smoking, maybe that will spread to China? :)

[milquetoast]

LA looks ugly, but its massive ports, airport, international business sector, defense, technology, and media industries are more powerful than our 1 story buildings convey.

L. A.'s not that ugly, have you seen London? With your eyes?:)

[jlrobe]

L. A.'s not that ugly, have you seen London? With your eyes?:)

I love LA, but it is just a very ugly city. SF, circa 1990 was quite ugly. SoMa and the new mission bay areas were simply dilapidated old wharehouse buildings. They were hideous. Most of its neighorhoods, as many of them still are, were AGING and old. Upper market was full of trash everywhere. Many areas just 1-2 blocks outside of the Financial districts or union square were ghetto and just old and falling apart. Many areas of SF are still old and falling apart. Manhattan in 1990 was equally ugly and falling apart., and largely still is rather gritty. Many buildings in all of these major cities are simply in disrepair. The difference is London, SF, and Manhattan have this urban authenticity to them that mask the ugliness. They have a curious beauty. Its wierd.

If LA were simply falling apart, that would be one thing, but all the old junk yards, autorepair shops, tract homes, dead zones, empty streetscapes, antiseptic buildings, etc. just give it an ugliness that no other city has.

[jlrobe]

whatever. i'd like just one of you guys to make a compelling argument as to how exactly LA's economy influences the global economy in a way proportionate or reflective of its GDP, or in a way proportionate and reflective of your claims. That was the initial assertion that brought about this argumetn wasn't it?:


I am sorry that you missed my point(s). I might consider a more thorough answer if you first give me a one page argument on
a)why you think london is more important to the global economy than any other city in the world
b) How any city in the world aside from london, ny, hong kong, and tokyo effects the world economy
c) and what metric you use to connect GDP to global influence.

After that, I will model my answer based on your response. Aside from that, I could give you one hundred lists and you will give me one hundred excuses of why every list but yours is wrong.

Who knows. Maybe you know more than all the economists of the world.

[sopas ej]

I love LA, but it is just a very ugly city... If LA were simply falling apart, that would be one thing, but all the old junk yards, autorepair shops, tract homes, dead zones, empty streetscapes, antiseptic buildings, etc. just give it an ugliness that no other city has.

I guess you've never been to Phoenix... now THAT is a real shit hole. LA is way nicer than Phoenix.

I've heard bad things about Dallas and Houston, too.

LA is far from being the armpit of America.

[Westsidelife]

I love LA, but it is just a very ugly city. SF, circa 1990 was quite ugly. SoMa and the new mission bay areas were simply dilapidated old wharehouse buildings. They were hideous. Most of its neighorhoods, as many of them still are, were AGING and old. Upper market was full of trash everywhere. Many areas just 1-2 blocks outside of the Financial districts or union square were ghetto and just old and falling apart. Many areas of SF are still old and falling apart. Manhattan in 1990 was equally ugly and falling apart., and largely still is rather gritty. Many buildings in all of these major cities are simply in disrepair. The difference is London, SF, and Manhattan have this urban authenticity to them that mask the ugliness. They have a curious beauty. Its wierd.

If LA were simply falling apart, that would be one thing, but all the old junk yards, autorepair shops, tract homes, dead zones, empty streetscapes, antiseptic buildings, etc. just give it an ugliness that no other city has.

LA's beauty lies in its amazing scenery and geography of mountains, beaches, deserts, forests, islands, valleys, etc., all of which are concentrated in a single metro area. I thought that was pretty obvious.

[edluva]

^LA is beautiful if you venture to the fringes. but it's urban form ain't so pretty. then again not many cities are exactly pretty. maybe european ones, SF, NY, Seattle....

[edluva]

Who knows. Maybe you know more than all the economists of the world.

maybe you do too, and that's why you are capable of seeing the assertion that LA's economy influences the world's economy in all those economics papers you've obviously read. Because it's obvious that's what all those economists were asserting.

Look, you're the one making the point that LA is globally powerful economically, and that it influences the world. The burden thus lies with you to furnish a well presented argument - and if you can't supply one, then give me a reference to read, in which an economist makes that exact assertion. otherwise, you're full of boosterish nonsense.

[milquetoast]

Just try WTCALA-LB wtcanet.org:)

[LosAngelesBeauty]

jlrobe- based on the decisions that ultimately go down in corporate boardrooms.


The bulk of arguments here against edluva is straying away from the source of decision making power held by very few people in this world. The focus of his assertion is on these kinds of people, in the corporate boardrooms, making decisions that affect corporate structure from the top-down.

If I were you guys, which I'm not, I would focus on what kind of financial influence LA has pertaining to that kind of decision making power.

[jlrobe]

maybe you do too, and that's why you are capable of seeing the assertion that LA's economy influences the world's economy in all those economics papers you've obviously read. Because it's obvious that's what all those economists were asserting.

Look, you're the one making the point that LA is globally powerful economically, and that it influences the world. The burden thus lies with you to furnish a well presented argument - and if you can't supply one, then give me a reference to read, in which an economist makes that exact assertion. otherwise, you're full of boosterish nonsense.


sigh...

Well, as I predicted, you will likely be the anti-booster and defeat every piece of information since it doesnt support your thesis (that LA is an insignificant craphole), but here goes wasting my time.

Start here
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/BUSINESS/06/13/global.economy/ (this is FINANCE centric as you so ridiculously prefer) It probably doesnt weigh in exports of media, regional accounting, or global shipping, but it is a start. I "might" look around more, but I think it is a waste of my time to go dig out old articles just to have you come to the SAME conclusion.

As I stated (I might have erased it) LA is behind chicago on a few lists, especially finance-centric lists. I also stated that London is even superior to NYC when it comes to finance. Of course, Frankfurt is a hidden winner because it is the financial center of central Europe. etc. etc. etc. This list is nothing new to me. I have read 15 just like it. It happens to be the only one I can find now. Some, list LA higher, some lower, but as I alreaady stated, it is on EVERY top 20 list you can find, making it a consistent choice.


And, as for me being a booster, I am sure you think ANYONE who actually likes LA is a booster, because in YOUR mind, LA is worthless. thus if ANYONE disagrees with YOU, they must obviously be a booster.

I am not trying to be a booster. I am not trying to defend the honor of LA but arguing about this. I really could care less, and I dont now why I have spent so much time on this argument.

I am not trying to say LA is all powerful or LA is the greatest. I am merely calling you out on your BS that LA is worthless (economically or otherwise).

[jlrobe]

maybe you do too, and that's why you are capable of seeing the assertion that LA's economy influences the world's economy in all those economics papers you've obviously read. Because it's obvious that's what all those economists were asserting.

Look, you're the one making the point that LA is globally powerful economically, and that it influences the world. The burden thus lies with you to furnish a well presented argument - and if you can't supply one, then give me a reference to read, in which an economist makes that exact assertion. otherwise, you're full of boosterish nonsense.

these lists are not very good, but it is all i can find now.

http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/richest-cities-2005.html
http://www.citymayors.com/economics/richest_cities.html
http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2005/02cities_taylor.aspx (follow the link, download the document. It is long and detailed on some aspects, not great at others. As a researcher myself, I don't like really respect the report since the quality is low in many respects) anyhow here is a qoute

While New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles are the U.S. leaders in global connectivity, San Francisco, Miami, Atlanta, and Washington are also important nodes in the world city network.

at the same time you are right about connectivity. The US in general, is not very internationally connected. It controls the world economy based on consumption of imports and a few exports, but not DIRECTLY, as you suggest. As a result, LA effects the global economy directly and INDIRECTLY. I gave two references on how it effects the world economy directly. I have read more over the years, but that is all I could find in my short search. So, suffice it to say, LA effects the global economy directly, but it has a MASSIVE influence indirectly as well.

LA is a significant center for the state economy, which is very important to the health of the entire nation and thus the world. Of course, that is changing quickly. LA's ports a extremely vital to the world economy becuase it keeps Americans buying up the world's goods. LA is the last remaining major manufacturing center in the US which effects the US economy, but also exports. Defense technologies, and mass media are also heavily produced in LA and widely exported. So in those indirect cases, LA is a large factor to the global economy.

I couldnt find a GREAT article I read from the CA department of finance that broke down many of LA's industries, but I don't feel like wasting time looking for it.

Now that I have shown you a TINY fraction of all of the evidence i have seen over the years, I challenge you to find ONE document that lists the top 15 world centers WITHOUT LA on it. Better yet, don't, cause it DOESNT MATTER and is a waste of time. What matters is that we all vote, go to planning meetings, and make LA a more livable place. We all need to stop being boosters or haters, and start improving our city.

[edluva]

anyways, this is about connectivity, not economic influence. I talked about goods movement being rather passive w/ regards to the global economy. there's really no "control" over the world economy in that. and your postings above are just rankings of agglomerated GDPs. Brookings' study was basically a rehash of the 2005 GAWC ranking which undoubtedly ranked LA on its large legal and advertisement (cultural) services. I'm talking about finance...economics, so you've just referenced material I've already sort of cast into doubt with regards to your economics argument. and like I said earlier, the burden of proof is on you - you're the one claiming LA's got global economic might, not me. but yeah, whatever. I'm over it.

[bricky]

anyways, this is about connectivity, not economic influence. I talked about goods movement being rather passive w/ regards to the global economy. there's really no "control" over the world economy in that. and your postings above are just rankings of agglomerated GDPs. Brookings' study was basically a rehash of the 2005 GAWC ranking which undoubtedly ranked LA on its large legal and advertisement (cultural) services. I'm talking about finance...economics, so you've just referenced material I've already sort of cast into doubt with regards to your economics argument. and like I said earlier, the burden of proof is on you - you're the one claiming LA's got global economic might, not me. but yeah, whatever. I'm over it.

Gaa.... who cares about financial "power", unless you are one of the 1000 people in NY or London that actually matter for shit in the world of finance. One of the people who are not just cogs in a machine. Anyway, there is "power" and influence in areas other than finance. For instance, the Bay Area is immensely powerful in it's technological contributions to the world. I would argue that Silicon Valley has influenced lifestyles and given the world more of value than the entire global financial industry, over the past 30 years.

LA is certainly not a first-tier financial center. But it is a first-tier cultural center. Perhaps the world's most influential cultural center, as a matter of fact. Is that not important?

Do increasingly baroque financial instruments that only serve to skew wealth more towards the wealthy really "contribute" to anything, except speculation and income inequality?

There was a time when financial innovation actually helped economic productivity through improving the allocation of capital. But given current events, I don't think many would argue that this has been the case over the past decade. People on this forum really need to move past finance as the end-all and be-all of power and importance

[bricky]

and it's idiotic to ascribe LA's lack of an urbanness to downtown's lack of "uber-lux", when it's plain to see that the fundamental problem is LA's built env't and pathetic mass trans network. and London/NY are financial centers because they are home to the largest bourses in the world - not because some yuppie such as yourself decided to declare their preferred ghetto ripe for another coffee bean and tea leaf. you should also already know by now that ceo's don't have the power to move company HQ's wherever they please, especially in LA where it's generally cost-prohibitive relative to suburbs. that you overlook such common sense illustrates your image-obsessed shallowness- the kind of shallowness San Franciscans and New Yorkers label LA with (and which I now grudglingly agree LA sometimes deserves). instead, you'll continue obsessing over the notion that presenting a pseudo-downtown so that a few like-minded suburbanites can overpay to live in a 5 sq mile bubble and pretend that they live in a real city equates to "having gotten there".

umm... he's right. I'd even go a step further and say that whatever corporate disadvantages LA has have very little to do with even mass transit. Frankly, it was just bad luck. In the wave of buyouts and consolidations running from the 1980s through the 1990s, LA-based corporations just plain lost. Bought out left and right, until LA had very little significant corporate presence.

Look at Silicon Valley. As suburban, overpriced, and boring as any place in the world. But full of dynamism, new ideas, and corporate titans.

[edluva]

I never said LA wasn't culturally influential. In fact I made a back-handed reference to LA's cultural prowess a few postings back. I was merely refuting the claims of direct economic influence made by a few forumers, and their methodology (using agglomerated GDP as a pillar of one's argument)

[edluva]

L. A.'s also the city that got New York to stop smoking, maybe that will spread to China? :)

:cheers:

[Vangelist]

why are people who live in downtown los angeles "suburbanites" ? let's see all of edluva's biases come through

[edluva]

nice, vangelist. its that your best? maybe you'll respond directly towards me next time instead of disparaging me in third-person, when you actually have an idea. got another tangential cinematic reference for us or did you peak already?

[Vangelist]

why don't you simply just answer the question, without a lame attempt at "attacking" me (via a reference i made to los angeles' cultural role due to cinematic production about a month ago) ? i'm quoting your own words after all...

and stop acting as if you enjoy being the most reviled person on this forum...unless you do!

[Vangelist]

if you can't at the very least answer questions and engage in basic conversation - instead of mendaciously attempting to demonstrate your "intellectual superiority" by bashing various cities/posters/popular (if albeit booster-y) stances on this boostery-by-definition-site - then i don't know why you're even posting here. you're not contributing anything to the conversation except hurling choppy invective at individual posters (even your avatar's signature swipes at a regular) and regurgitating half-formed and unoriginal urban criticisms that none here are unaware of

but i'm not trying to get into a conversation about YOU; that's not that interesting, and everyone already knows of your notoriety and stopped humoring you ages ago, apparently. i suspect as i only restarted posting recently, i'm behind in all that and other posters have had it out with you here long before, stopping a while back due to fatigue (as that one poster in the Houston thread commented yesterday how he stopped posting at SSP years ago due to you, and yet here you remain). i suspect they all ignore you/your so-called "negative attitude" by default now. so no...i don't mean to get off-track here...you don't need to "defend yourself" and continue discussing whether or not you're validly or not criticizing los angeles/Houstonian suburban housing/USC...
...everyone is entitled to an opinion (however misinformed), and i'm curious why/ how you seemed to support one recently:

...i'm sincerely interested in hearing why you think residents of downtown los angeles (whether long-term or neophytes) are "suburbanites."

[edluva]

simple. because they live a suburban lifestyle.

btw, you could have asked this question with a one-liner. most of your effort was aimed at defaming me with personal attacks. i'm honored you're that obsessed w/ me.

next.

[milquetoast]

Hmmm, LA/LB working together to "green up". 300,000 to 600,000 new port related jobs by 2025. 500,000 port related jobs now. Port business expected to triple by 2020. Immense world influence. Trade in NY and London? Oh, that's right! You're talking about financial trade. You're talking about a whole 'nuther world. One that suits your path to enlightenment. The text that I just offerred here better conforms to the thread topic and at the same time gives you another paradigm to cry about. Let's see, I'll just put Hollywood on top of that and- Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner, Los Angeles matters. See, I was general in my assertion, gave you two examples that put relative shame to London and NY, and at the same time taught you how to be humble. Since the burden on proof has been lifted, we don't expect to hear from you again on this, do we? You are so over this, aren't you? :whip: bdee bdee bdee bthat's all folks! Daa da da da da daa da d da da da daaa, da da da da da daa daaa DAAA

[Westsidelife]

Edit.

[edluva]

spit it out westsidelife! you got something to say, say it ;)

[Westsidelife]

^ It wasn't directed toward you, or anyone else for that matter. I'm not one to take your bait. Cheers.

[Westsidelife]

:whip: on, milky. ;)

[edluva]

^i know, i've just been noticing you seem to post a lot of edits.

btw, milque has merely forwarded the same flawed argument about economic influence. i don't see how port business "influences" global economics. do crane-operators influence demand or supply? but i won't continue raining on your little parade of ignorance...

[Westsidelife]

^ Despite the implications of my previous post, I never co-signed with milk. Don't assume things.

[edluva]

i wasn't assuming anything. i was speaking to milque. don't assume things ;)

btw, i'm not trying to "bait" anybody. but if you think i do only because someone else said it and you have no mind of you own, then too bad i guess...

[citywatch]

If LA were simply falling apart, that would be one thing, but all the old junk yards, autorepair shops, tract homes, dead zones, empty streetscapes, antiseptic buildings, etc. just give it an ugliness that no other city has.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)

"L.A's physical form does not match its economy," said Tom Cody, a South Group principal who described much of the local terrain as "a sea of mediocrity."
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

[Westsidelife]

^ You're ridiculous.

[edluva]

i know a much more appropriate word than ridiculous. but i can't use it here.

i don't see what's so hard to understand about the fact that if we got rich people from the suburbs, westside, etc to move into the core and pump money into it, everything would start to look great again. we need money, and how do we get money concentrated in a city core? we make it easier for richer people to travel/set up shop there. sure we need to balance growth with ethics (eg not displacing poor folks), but c'mon, LA is fucking dirt poor. Because LA is so ubiquitously poor, virtually any sort of gentrification is going to result in "undesired" consequences such as displacement. If you're waiting for some social program to magically erase poverty in one generation so that we don't need to rely on gentrification, don't hold your breath.

[milquetoast]

Money is needed in the core, but I wouldn't say that L. A. is a dirt poor city. It's always described to me in media as rich. Take Paris, for example- one of the 'big' four. What's the unemployment rate there? I'll just bet that Paris is surrounded by areas that look just like the pic above- with one exception: The parked cars would be on fire :)

[milquetoast]

i don't see how port business "influences" global economics. do crane-operators influence demand or supply?

If they go on strike a lot of 'people' will lose money on both sides of the ocean.

[ChrisLA]

Money is needed in the core, but I wouldn't say that L. A. is a dirt poor city. It's always described to me in media as rich. Take Paris, for example- one of the 'big' four. What's the unemployment rate there? I'll just bet that Paris is surrounded by areas that look just like the pic above- with one exception: The parked cars would be on fire :)

Paris is flithy, and grimmy in many areas, plus you see a lot of ugly buildings in that city. In a sense it kind of reminded me of Los Angeles. It has a lot of glamour and rich, and yet you see a big gap between the two.

Its not that other big american cities don't have their poor. What I think is different with LA and cities like Paris is its often hyped up in the media, and many come to not expect this from city well known for its glamour, and wealth.

Los Angeles has its uglyness for sure, but its really not any worse (probably better compared to the biggest American cities) than the rest. I've seen a lot of cities, and being that I often go to the non tourist areas, LA uglyness can't even compare to some of the decay I've seen. For one thing most LA poor communities aren't desolent and or abandoned, but for the most part thirving. They may not have Jamba Juice, and Coffee Beans, but they are full of retail, and businesses they normally caters to the locals.

[edluva]

If they go on strike a lot of 'people' will lose money on both sides of the ocean.

so your theory depends on the extremely rare case where our port workers go on strike. i'm talking about the day-to-day, not some freak circumstance. your theory does not suggest some ability of LA's economy having a normative role in influencing the global economy. I'm sure if a freak occurence such as everybody in Seattle committing suicide were to occur, the global economy would hiccup, but that doesn't address my topic does it?

and don't rely on the media for your "facts" milque, and especially don't quote the media when you use facts either. as far as wealth is concerned, everybody knows LA is generally a poorer city, with its wealth distributed among rich suburbs and the westside, kinda like detroit, and that this city does not concentrate wealth in a central core the way most major cities do, and thus, also unlike most major cities, is poorest and least educated in its most urban parts.

and your comment on parked cars on fire would be more appropriate in a discussion comparing suburbs of respective cities. remember? we're talking about getting people into LA's shitty core, not whether Parisian or Angeleno suburbanites are more disgruntled.

[citywatch]

You're ridiculous.

The "you" in "you're" has to include all the ppl who've reacted in a way that results in standings like this (http://www.travelandleisure.com/afc/2007/category/7). And that includes ppl like Tom Cody.

I just notice---and ironically too----that Cody, or at least the company he works for, is based in the city that ranked on the top of the list at that link. I personally don't agree with the POV that led to those results, with Portland #1, LA on the bottom. So, yea, that IS ridiculous.

But just cuz I'm pointing out such ppl's opinions doesn't mean I approve of them. So remember: Don't shoot the messenger. Even more so since I----unlike a particular SSPer who shall go unnamed----do not get a kick out of saying it as it is. I don't get a buzz in slamming LA, & describing the city as hopeless, & saying that it's so bad that it can never get better. If I thought that way, or believed it wasn't any better today than it was 10 or 20 yrs ago, or definitely 50 yrs ago, I'd give up on it.



Los Angeles has its uglyness for sure, but its really not any worse (probably better compared to the biggest American cities) than the rest. I've seen a lot of cities, and being that I often go to the non tourist areas, LA uglyness can't even compare to some of the decay I've seen.I'm curious about what the parts of Paris that remind you of LA look like. I don't think LA is as fugly as some ppl make it out to be. But for any number of reasons, the city does cause alot of ppl to want to apologize for it. That includes even one of the most well known ppl identified with LA's history:

Sums up Buffie Chandler: "I don't say Los Angeles is the most beautiful place on earth, or even the most desirable. I love San Francisco, for instance. But I could never live there, because everything that needed doing has long since been done.

[citywatch]

I'll just bet that Paris is surrounded by areas that look just like the pic above- with one exception: The parked cars would be on fire
There's probably another exception too.

http://img.breitbart.com/images/2007/12/27/071227180428.ujtl2hiy/SGE.NTH83.271207175347.photo00.photo.jpg





I just came across the pic above today, attached to this news story:

Thousands without power as winds buffet Los Angeles
Dec 27 01:04 PM US/Eastern

Around 5,700 homes across Los Angeles were without power early Thursday as fierce winds gusted across the city, downing power lines and knocking over trees. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power officials said at one stage overnight more than 19,000 households were blacked out as winds packing gusts of up to 80 miles (130 kilometers) per hour wreaked havoc across a wide area.

National Weather Service forecasters said the winds were expected to subside later Thursday. The winds also fanned small wildfires near Griffith Park in Los Angeles but firefighters were able to extinguish the flames before they could spread.

[Minato Ku]

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

[sopas ej]

How about that other Paris suburb, Clichy sous Bois?

http://www.interet-general.info/IMG/France-Clichy-sous-Bois-1.jpg
From interet-general.info

[Minato Ku]

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.

There is 8 million inhabitants in Paris suburbs, most are in the middle class. Inner Paris has an higher poverty and unemployement rate than the suburbs.
Paris, inner city (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=440186)

The only exeption with an higher poverty rate and unemployement rate than the inner city is the Seine Saint Denis.
Inner suburbs of Paris are more urban and denser than most european, and american inner city.

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/4817/povertyrateparisoz2.jpg

http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/8910/povertyratelegenday6.jpg


1.Paris 75 :
2,153,600 inh
2.Haut de Seine 92 :
1,516,700 inh
3.Seine Saint Denis 93 :
1,459,000 inh
4.Val de Marne 94 :
1,278,900 inh
5.Essonne 91 :
1,187,800 inh
6.Yvelines 78 :
1,394,800 inh
7.Val d'Oise 95 :
1,148,000 inh
8.Seine et Marne 77 :
1,260,500 inh


Per exemple I live in inner suburbs (Montrouge, Haut de Seine) in one of safest place in Paris metro. The crime rate is even lower than the national average.

EDIT : In 2006 the GDP of Paris would around $730 billion for 11.5 million inhabitants.

[bricky]

^^ Go Paris

Seriously though, I might rag on LA sometimes, but tons of NYers (for instance) would love to live in LA and environs. For people with a bit of money, it offers a beautiful lifestyle. Perpetual Spring, beautiful scenery, visions of hillside houses with swimming pools overlooking a sea of lights, an open, sunny, palm-tree lined environment... a so-laid-back-it's-almost-comatose vibe... more than enough shopping, restaurants, bars, clubs, museums and cultural amenities, amazing diversity... and of course the Hollywood glamor which frankly does provide even NYers with enough cover to safely say that they don't live in the boonies (for NYers, a category which includes Chicago, Seattle, and really anywhere except The NE Corridor, California, and possibly Miami).

Since Paris got mentioned, I might relate that I once had some French friends who absolutely loved the idea of LA. The South of France with career possibilites, according to them.

[citywatch]

You are wrong. ;)
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.

[Echo Park]

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.

[bricky]

[/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]

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]

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]

[/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]

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]

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]

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]

citywatch go away. shoo. scram

[sopas ej]

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]

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]

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

[bricky]

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]

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]

^*gets the broom*

[WesTheAngelino]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

[/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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Santa Monica Place Redevelopment

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

[StethJeff]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[LAsam]

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...

[JDRCRASH]

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

[StethJeff]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[dragonsky]

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]

^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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.