LOS ANGELES | Countywide Project Rundown Megathread

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by ChrisLA

Burbank is closer to those of us in the east valley, but I find downtown Burbank not that exciting as downtown Glendale and rather go a little farther. My wife prefer Burbank but most of the time I get my way and convince her to see it my way. I’m hoping in my lifetime the northern section of Van Nuys Blvd come back to life, it definitely has the bones and I can see it being something like an Old Town Pasadena.

Downtown Burbank never appealed to me; too many corporate chain places IMO. It'd be different if there were some unique draws there, but for example, if I want to go to Yard House, I could just go to the one in Pasadena.

On that note, though, there are a couple of restaurants my partner and I go to occasionally that are in Burbank, but they are not in its downtown.

Regarding seeing movies at the AMC in Burbank, a long time ago, a co-worker of mine told me he saw Beck in the audience at the AMC in Burbank (and I'm a huge Beck fan). I thought it was funny for Beck to go see a movie there, but I think at the time, Beck lived in Silverlake or Los Feliz... so I guess a lot of people who love in those neigborhoods see films in Burbank?

[craigs]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Los Angeles is not the typical tourist city; it's a very choose-your-own-adventure kind of place. LA is more about experiences, vs. going through a checklist of landmarks to see when you get here... though I guess it does have some well-known neighborhoods and suburbs. And that's the thing; again, LA is more about experiences.

Decades ago, in my teens, I had a Canadian penpal from Edmonton. We kept in touch into our early 20s. Anyway, when we were both 20, he decided to come to LA for a week. He had a blast. His thing, though, was studio tours; he was really into film and TV history. He stayed at a hotel in Santa Monica and took the bus everywhere (this was back in 1990). He did studio tours at Paramount, the Burbank Studios, and Universal. I met up with him a few times and we hung out, and I remember him being disappointed that he couldn't buy a beer (drinking age in Canada is 18). We even saw a movie together, "Hunt for Red October" at an old single-screen movie theater in Santa Monica, I forgot what it was called, but it no longer exists. And what I liked about the theater was that it was old and slightly run-down, it hadn't been "restored," so it felt more "authentic" and historic to me. And he thought it was great seeing a movie in an old theater in an area traditionally known as a movie-making town, haha!

Flash-forward to the late 2010s, and my partner and I took our Dutch friend around LA. He had a blast too; his thing was museums and architecture, and he's not into pop culture. He really enjoyed the Hollyhock House. We also made it a point to take him to restaurants we really like; we figured a lot of the places we like to eat at don't exist in Utrecht, hehe. The one "touristy" thing we did was take him to the Griffith Observatory, which he liked. We also took him to Micky's in WeHo, and we had a "fun" time there too, haha! He actually asked one of the go-go boys if they did private shows.

Nowadays, watching Youtube vlogs, it's "interesting" and disappointing to see what people say about LA when visiting, or what they wanna see when they get here. It's either about old reality shows from the first 2 decades of this century (Germans wanting to visit tattoo parlors they saw on some tattoo show I never heard of), or stupid shit like first-time LA visitors going to Erewhon, In-N-Out, and/or Pink's. If a supermarket and fast-food places are all you wanna see, no wonder they're disappointed... I guess it says something about what kind of people they are too.

My cousin and her hubs were here for a wedding, and had a full day to just see the sights. They didn't consult me on any of it, so they ended up doing the most touristy things--Santa Monica Pier, Griffith, the Walk of Fame. They liked the pier and the views from Griffith, but they didn't mention the Walk at all, so I suspect it was not a great experience. Understandably.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by craigs

While downtown Los Angeles is languishing, Burbank is booming. Its secret formula, the city says, is embracing businesses, helping the homeless and keeping streets clean, to make downtown a go-to destination for more shoppers, diners and commuters. . . . .

thenationalherald, Pedro Marroquin via Unsplash

By Nick Patsaouras: Downtown LA ranked one of the deadest downtowns in the world. Out of 75 global cities, LA ranked 20th lowest worldwide and 11th lowest among 34 U.S, cities for downtown vibrancy. At the same time, downtown office vacancy rates have climbed to nearly 35 percent, among the highest in the nation…

Most disturbing is the fact that City Hall’s own decision to hand much of downtown’s management to a Business Improvement District (BID) was a key factor for this misfortune…. But CCA has ignored the decay of downtown. For example, it lobbied for the expansion of the Convention Center despite warning from the City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo…

City Hall must reclaim responsibility for neighborhood revitalization and return it to municipal and genuinely community-based institutions.

^ not sure what that writer wants LA city govt to do when he also implies the dtla bid, presumably run by dt's main stakeholders, isn't doing enough either. Lots of ppl working in LA city hall may live in the valley, the OC, the SGV, south bay, west LA. IOW, they'll feel even less invested or interested in dt than its own stakeholders are.

LA's major problem is also that too many residents live in their cars driving down clogged freeways. however, street congestion is an issue throughout the world. But it's worse in LA, partly because the city lacks the mass public transit system of a Paris or Mexico City.

Jammed fwys in LA also seem worse because they cut through areas where sidewalks aren't nearly as busy as they are in cities similar to Tokyo, London or Manhattan.

It's odd being trapped on the jammed 4 major fwys around dtla, but dt itself isn't as busy & large sections of it may look like a ghost town. Same thing taking the 10 fwy to Santa monica & then seeing an area like today's 3rd St promenade, which has less foot traffic than before.

So where's everyone driving to? why don't more ppl live closer to where they're driving to or move closer to where they're driving from?

A city will automatically feel more tourist friendly when lots of ppl are out & about---walking, shopping & dining, & not hidden away like it's still Covid 2020. But I know there are contradictions too...


• Video Link


Calif state govt allows just about anything, but every time an attempt to end the 2:00 am curfew for restaurants & bars serving alcohol is brought before the legislature, it's defeated. The food & drink industry in LA needs to be as effective as the homeless lobby is.

[Illithid Dude]

To be fair, there are four great destinations on the Hollywood Walk of Fame - The Chinese Theater, The Egyptian Theater, Musso and Frank's, and Larry Edmund's Bookshop. All are absolutely worth going to.

Originally Posted by sopas ej

On that note, though, there are a couple of restaurants my partner and I go to occasionally that are in Burbank, but they are not in its downtown.

Regarding seeing movies at the AMC in Burbank, a long time ago, a co-worker of mine told me he saw Beck in the audience at the AMC in Burbank (and I'm a huge Beck fan). I thought it was funny for Beck to go see a movie there, but I think at the time, Beck lived in Silverlake or Los Feliz... so I guess a lot of people who love in those neigborhoods see films in Burbank?

Burbank will always get credit for having The Smokehouse, one of the great iconic old restaurants of Los Angeles.

I see Beck around at a minimum of one to two times a week. Just show up to La Poubelle between Thursday to Saturday night. There will be a 50% chance he'll be lounging there.

[ReDSPork02]

Cities like Burbank, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica take advantage of being adjacent to Los Angeles but dont want any of the big city regional issues.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by ReDSPork02

Cities like Burbank, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica take advantage of being adjacent to Los Angeles but dont want any of the big city regional issues.

They also tend to have a more streamlined governmental system which allows them to adapt and grow more easily. Having a higher income tax base doesn't hurt either.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

They also tend to have a more streamlined governmental system which allows them to adapt and grow more easily. Having a higher income tax base doesn't hurt either.

Individual cities can also add additional sales tax to fund whatever it is they want to fund (extended library hours, fire departments, etc.). Interestingly, the city of Los Angeles has not done this; its sales tax is the base/unincorporated LA County rate of 9.75%, as is Beverly Hills' sales tax.

Burbank's sales tax is 10.5%, and Santa Monica's is 10.75%.

[craigs]

Burbank is an interesting city. It has a municipal utility providing water and power, and is part of the authority (with Glendale and Pasadena) that controls Hollywood Burbank Airport, which itself has its own police and fire departments.

[craigs]

A cool pic in today's LA Times:

[citywatch]

Would be good if more of the old bldgs around south park....hope st...were just torn down....

https://youtu.be/8HfFIH7AjHA?si=TNv9_MlklyJ00OBq


^ the economy isn't strong enough to make owners of that acreage treat their land more like it's an oil field or gold mine.

if dtla were on the receiving end of all the ppl & businesses moving from nyc to the south, mainly Texas & Florida, that would help...

https://youtu.be/eRZ59L65KrI?si=xqx4YhW1khLgqzdw


LA is getting hit from both sides. Movie & TV production in nyc & nearby New jersey now totals more than $1.4 billion while in LA it's $1.3 billion.


https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/new-york-film-tv-spend-california-production-1236649240/

Investors & devlprs see national trends pointing away from, on one hand, the NY area but also, on the other hand, the LA area, & that makes converting vacant properties in areas like dtla more difficult. As it it, the unique background of an immigrant from India may be the main reason someone is ambitious enough to want to save the Oceanwide Plaza proj on Fig St.


• Video Link

^ as with Oceanwide, the main level of the Grand LA proj has always been set aside for retail. But today's economy in dtla makes that a tough sell. So the landlord is giving away a lot of space to a museum & other square footage to a college. I don't know if Trader Joe's could bring in more visitors to Grand LA's main floor....brick & mortar is a tough sell in today's era of online & more customers in LA located in the burbs or miles west or north of dtla.


Posted 6 months ago...

• Video Link

Mr. Ellison told Paramount executives that he was considering pulling the company out of California amid a lawsuit brought by state attorneys general.

[Illithid Dude]

Pretty sure that the Neil Denari designed hotel in West Hollywood on the corner of La Brea and Santa Monica has just broken ground. Lots of construction equipment there when I passed by the other day.

[Radio5]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Pretty sure that the Neil Denari designed hotel in West Hollywood on the corner of La Brea and Santa Monica has just broken ground. Lots of construction equipment there when I passed by the other day.

I think you're right. Their website says 2027 completion: https://denari.co/La-Brea-Hotel#:~:text=La%20Brea%20Hotel%20%2D%20NMDA%202023

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by Radio5

I think you're right. Their website says 2027 completion: https://denari.co/La-Brea-Hotel#:~:text=La%20Brea%20Hotel%20%2D%20NMDA%202023

The same website also says Q1 2025 groundbreaking. But I hope it is breaking ground I've always liked Neil Denari and wished more of his designs reached fruition.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Thats a really cool looking building.

[Build_SD_Maxwell]

Hello, I am not sure if yall have talked about this yet, but there are 2 SB 79 projects in LA area now, one in Santa Monica, one in South Pasadena, 8 units in Santa Monica, 5 story single stair building, unknown units or location for the South Pasadena project.

[ocman_]

Originally Posted by ReDSPork02

Cities like Burbank, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica take advantage of being adjacent to Los Angeles but dont want any of the big city regional issues.

It's a mutual relationship that props up all of LA county. Any time the LA City council comes up with a massively stupid idea, or the public passes idiocy like measure ULA, I thank god other cities in LA County aren't affected by it so at least their economies can thrive.

[craigs]

• Video Link

[kittyhawk28]

Originally Posted by ocman_

It's a mutual relationship that props up all of LA county. Any time the LA City council comes up with a massively stupid idea, or the public passes idiocy like measure ULA, I thank god other cities in LA County aren't affected by it so at least their economies can thrive.

SoCal is blessed by the fact LA City only makes up 40% of LA County's population, and < 25% of the broader metro area. Any idiotic laws passed in LA City (Measure ULA, gross receipts tax discouraging business) don't affect the other cities across SoCal. The lack of ULA in all of the region's cities sans LA and Santa Monica, and friendly business environment in places like OC and South Bay for aerospace and advanced manufacturing, allows the region to still thrive even in spite of idiotic LA city laws. It even provides a floor for how low LA proper can go since it can always become a bedroom community while businesses/development concentrate in the rest of the county and region and see indirect economic benefits.

If LA city were closer to NYC in scale (city proper makes up a majority of NYC metro) it would be much more problematic for the region at large.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by ocman_

It's a mutual relationship that props up all of LA county. Any time the LA City council comes up with a massively stupid idea, or the public passes idiocy like measure ULA, I thank god other cities in LA County aren't affected by it so at least their economies can thrive.

I agree that having dozens of independent cities in LA County provides a useful check against bad policy in the City of Los Angeles. If LA adopts taxes, regulations, or land-use policies that make investment less attractive, places like Beverly Hills, Culver City, Pasadena, El Segundo, or the South Bay can benefit at the margin because businesses and capital have nearby alternatives.

But I think it goes too far to suggest those cities can simply thrive regardless of what happens to Los Angeles. They are all part of the same regional economy, labor market, housing market, transportation network, and commercial ecosystem. A healthy LA is an enormous economic engine for the surrounding suburbs; if the city were seriously weakened by poor governance or sustained disinvestment, the effects would inevitably spill across municipal borders. So there is a mutual relationship: the suburbs provide competition and alternatives that can discipline LA policy, while much of their economic value comes from being embedded in the broader Los Angeles metropolitan economy.

[JSW]

Mods? Anybody? This thread is once again infested with politics. I don't see other city topics with this problem, but it keeps happening here.