LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 4.0

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by Vangelist

Right, let's just push all the artists and original urban pioneers that made the neighborhood what it was before the yuppies moved in OUT to Vernon...let's not keep it afford and economically diverse...

Their workspaces are now $3M lofts. Why would we want to avoid this?


are you serious or is that satire?

Yeah, because New York City absolutely sucks now that all the artists and urban pioneers have been relocated to New Jersey, Bronx or Queens!

Sorry peeps, this is evolution. It sucks, but each city/neighborhood that has a ton of attraction goes in this direction. It's about demand. Downtown LA didn't have the demand before, but it does now. New York, London, Paris, Chicago, Tokyo, SF, etc... all found ways to adjust because their urban centers became areas of demand. Though this scares people in LA, it's just evolving into a hotbed of demand. It's new...and frightening! LA is growing up, that's what I see!

We can always get some sort of affordable housing built in, but it won't be like it was before. But anyways...downtown LA 2011 > downtown LA 2005. You cannot deny that. Anybody really feel safe walking around 5th, 6th, 7th, Broadway, Main or Spring in 2005 compared to 2011?

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Yeah, because New York City absolutely sucks now that all the artists and urban pioneers have been relocated to New Jersey, Bronx or Queens!

Sorry peeps, this is evolution. It sucks, but each city/neighborhood that has a ton of attraction goes in this direction. It's about demand. Downtown LA didn't have the demand before, but it does now. New York, London, Paris, Chicago, Tokyo, SF, etc... all found ways to adjust because their urban centers became areas of demand. Though this scares people in LA, it's just evolving into a hotbed of demand. It's new...and frightening! LA is growing up, that's what I see!

We can always get some sort of affordable housing built in, but it won't be like it was before. But anyways...downtown LA 2011 > downtown LA 2005. You cannot deny that. Anybody really feel safe walking around 5th, 6th, 7th, Broadway, Main or Spring in 2005 compared to 2011?

actually many parts of Manhattan are quite boring these days. all chains and no character. the best parts of the city are where the creative minds live. i think a healthy mix is what were all aiming for here.

[bobcat]

I know it's so touchy-feely to say we want a "healthy mix" of high and low end, but the reality of the situation is that if you want DTLA to become one of the world's great urban centers with supertalls, luxury retail, etc., it's going to result in real estate prices that will push out the poor, starving artists. There's nothing that can be done about it and urban pioneers knew this when they first moved in. Bert Green even outright stated that artists being priced out of the Historic Core is a sign of success.

On the positive side LA is land rich and there are countless new neighborhoods that creative types can move on to. Our grandchildren will be long buried before all of LA becomes gentrified over.

[Vangelist]

I think the reason this forum will never understand why many New Yorkers LAMENT what Manhattan has become today, is probably because they are 20-something (or 40 something) guys obsessed with skyscrapers who have an inferiority complex about their own city

NOT artists

Manhattan - never a model for LA anyway - is about as far as you can get from its last artistic zenith in the east village late 70's/ basquiat early 80's, now that CBGB's closed down. Of course, I wouldn't expect some of you guys to understand the anti-materialistic ethos of punk rock in the first place, or why New Yorkers will terminally look down at the "glitz & glamour" of image-obsessed LA as being fake

So go ahead! Out-price all the artists, collectors, freaks, eccentrics - the sort that just populated LA Weekly's cover story on "Pacific Standard Time," - that make downtown unique and relevant in the first place! Gut all those old Broadway theaters and turn the shops into crappy expensive restaurants and Gucci and Anthropologie outlets!

[Vangelist]

Turn downtown into a wannabe Beverly Hills, then you'll finally get the respect from the East Coast as a legitimate "world city" right? Wrong

The only edge Los Angeles even HAS on New York (and San Francisco), aside from the weather, is the fact that it's NOT gentrified completely. Particularly its most stunning center city, with all that architecture, those theaters, that 1910s built environment; we should be preserving the eclectic mix that is there right now. It causes great envy in New Yorkers, since (barring some calamity) Manhattan is never going to be artistically exciting and hungry like that again, and many say that about the cultural relevancy of NYC as a whole. Art is being sold there but constructed elsewhere, and our downtown's affordability is probably its greatest asset at the moment.

Don't believe me?

Look at New Yorker Magazine already taking potshots at DTLA's gentrification, desperate that it will turn into exactly WHAT you guys WANT to do to it: a pseudo-Soho

Up or Down on Downtown?

Downtown L.A. spent the latter half of the twentieth century increasingly marginalized—businesses fled, homelessness boomed. But just over ten years ago, developers started transforming crumbling office buildings into luxury lofts, the Staples Center provided a family-friendly tourist destination, and now an NFL franchise and stadium are more or less a done deal. For all this activity and investment, locals continue to debate the sort of identity Downtown L.A. should have. Something diverse and functional, like Brooklyn? Something homogeneous and commercial, like Times Square? Five dwellers share their thoughts.

http://nymag.com/travel/2011/spring/los-angeles-downtown-2011-4/

Then they purposely picked the 5 people that represent the worst of the current process of gentrification

The reason artists flocked to downtown is the amount of light & space we get, and the freedom here. Yes we know its skid row adjacent, but that's part of the point. It's stunning to read some of you saying you want us gone in lieu of supertalls, in a risibly misguided attempt to compete with "Soho." That's never going to happen; get real. After you push us all out and bring in some $, it will lose all its character and be laden with empty condos, compared to San Diego's Gaslamp District at best

And you still wouldn't have solved the homeless problem, and with the city as broke as it is, are you really going to raze all of Skid Row to the ground, and rebuild the entire built environment from Maple to Alameda streets? Yeah right

So think about it, picking up the latest copy of LA Weekly on Pacific Standard Time. In this era of non-existent growth and terrible unemployment, the art scene IS Los Angeles' one bright spot along with Measure R, one symptom of success. Don't actively try to kill that, and disperse it from downtown (you should be CHEERING the Curbed article, not dismissing it)

[JDRCRASH]

LA Weekly is a joke. I ignore it now.

[Illithid Dude]

@ Vangelist

I'm not going to quote, there is just too much. I will say, however, is that if downtown is to continue developing, it will have to become more upmarket. It can't just stay the way it is, it will plateau, stagnate. Besides, I hardly think replacing artists with yuppies will destroy the entire art scene of Los Angeles. Just as it was said a few posts before, L.A. is a huge place. There will always be a neighborhood in need of gentrification. Hell, right next to downtown, around McArthur park, is a perfect example. Downtown will continue to develop, and it is naive to try and halt that progress. Just be happy that it is actually something worth fighting for now, not bemoaning that it became that which is worth fighting for.

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by Vangelist

Turn downtown into a wannabe Beverly Hills, then you'll finally get the respect from the East Coast as a legitimate "world city" right? Wrong

The only edge Los Angeles even HAS on New York (and San Francisco), aside from the weather, is the fact that it's NOT gentrified completely. Particularly its most stunning center city, with all that architecture, those theaters, that 1910s built environment; we should be preserving the eclectic mix that is there right now. It causes great envy in New Yorkers, since (barring some calamity) Manhattan is never going to be artistically exciting and hungry like that again, and many say that about the cultural relevancy of NYC as a whole. Art is being sold there but constructed elsewhere, and our downtown's affordability is probably its greatest asset at the moment.

Don't believe me?

Look at New Yorker Magazine already taking potshots at DTLA's gentrification, desperate that it will turn into exactly WHAT you guys WANT to do to it: a pseudo-Soho

Up or Down on Downtown?

Downtown L.A. spent the latter half of the twentieth century increasingly marginalized—businesses fled, homelessness boomed. But just over ten years ago, developers started transforming crumbling office buildings into luxury lofts, the Staples Center provided a family-friendly tourist destination, and now an NFL franchise and stadium are more or less a done deal. For all this activity and investment, locals continue to debate the sort of identity Downtown L.A. should have. Something diverse and functional, like Brooklyn? Something homogeneous and commercial, like Times Square? Five dwellers share their thoughts.

http://nymag.com/travel/2011/spring/los-angeles-downtown-2011-4/

Then they purposely picked the 5 people that represent the worst of the current process of gentrification

The reason artists flocked to downtown is the amount of light & space we get, and the freedom here. Yes we know its skid row adjacent, but that's part of the point. It's stunning to read some of you saying you want us gone in lieu of supertalls, in a risibly misguided attempt to compete with "Soho." That's never going to happen; get real. After you push us all out and bring in some $, it will lose all its character and be laden with empty condos, compared to San Diego's Gaslamp District at best

And you still wouldn't have solved the homeless problem, and with the city as broke as it is, are you really going to raze all of Skid Row to the ground, and rebuild the entire built environment from Maple to Alameda streets? Yeah right

So think about it, picking up the latest copy of LA Weekly on Pacific Standard Time. In this era of non-existent growth and terrible unemployment, the art scene IS Los Angeles' one bright spot along with Measure R, one symptom of success. Don't actively try to kill that, and disperse it from downtown (you should be CHEERING the Curbed article, not dismissing it)

you wanna preserve all the swap meets on broadway??? but even before all the artists and everything you see today, downtown LA was exactly what new york was.. just smaller... with the rich and the department stores and all that stuff... bringing gucci, Lord & Taylor, Bergdorf Goodman, Forever XXI, Guess and some other non chain stores is just simply bringing the rich and prosperous downtown back from the early 1900's when downtown was THE center and place to be before going west. Bringing all those varied stores you see in suburban malls today(Sephora, Apple, Vans, H&M, Gamestop, etc) back to the city center. It works in Tokyo, SF, Chicago, NY etc.. why not?? if it'll bring more money and people then i'm all for it. Broadway was Los Angeles' premiere SHOPPING and theatre district during it's hey days... why not bring it's original character as the retail hub of downtown back?? not as a dirty swap meet center. Even San Diego wasn't afraid to open up a Coach, Louis Vuitton, and BCBG MAX AZRIA in downtown. The city now has a Macy's and Nordstrom

Whats wrong with Gaslamp Quarter?? the area back in the day used to be a bunch of porn/ adult shops, Prostitute houses, massage parlors(happy ending??), and gambling halls for military personnel on liberty in the city. I think today it's now a very successful entertainment hub inluding movie theaters, retail, galleries and restaurants with outdoor patio seating(something LA wants).. EVERYBODY visits gaslamp when they come down here and and is a major draw towards the city. San Diego is a pretty good example of urban revitalization

http://youtu.be/bsJLF29YcxM

SORRY I KNOW I GOT OFF TOPIC AND I'M NOT TRYING TO GET INTO A CITY VS CITY... I LOVE AND ENJOY BOTH CITIES AND GO BACK AND FORTH A LOT.. JUST COMPARING THE REVIVAL.

SD is traditionally and historically suppose to be more suburban than LA. yet SD completely brought its downtown back to life.

THIS COULD BE SOUTH PARK WHEN THE STADIUM GETS BUILT
0:30-0:53
http://youtu.be/jkyegfusM4w

[LosAngelesDreamin]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

@ Vangelist

I'm not going to quote, there is just too much. I will say, however, is that if downtown is to continue developing, it will have to become more upmarket. It can't just stay the way it is, it will plateau, stagnate. Besides, I hardly think replacing artists with yuppies will destroy the entire art scene of Los Angeles. Just as it was said a few posts before, L.A. is a huge place. There will always be a neighborhood in need of gentrification. Hell, right next to downtown, around McArthur park, is a perfect example. Downtown will continue to develop, and it is naive to try and halt that progress. Just be happy that it is actually something worth fighting for now, not bemoaning that it became that which is worth fighting for.

YES!!! EXACTLY =] Artists can still move to the arts or warehouse districts.. which is perfect for galleries and such.

[Vangelist]

Jesus. Did I ever say I want downtown to "not develop" ? No

I specifically was responding to a poster - Pesto - who directly said it would be better if downtown went completely upscale, lost the diversity, and that the artists moved out to make it a "premiere shopping/dining," district like Soho...

...which he said in response to Curbed LA - CURBED LA! - hailing the news about the artist development project as being "good," to PREVENT the dreaded culture-killing "Soho Effect"

Curbed LA agrees with me: it's about balance, diversity and wanting to preserve the essential character of a place, not anything about "preserving swap meets" or catering to the wealthiest amongst us...

...some of you guys see things in such polarized black & white terms, extreme this or that; sigh. It really gives justification to ed luva's complaints that we're not all playing with a full deck here, mentally speaking

[Vangelist]

actually many parts of Manhattan are quite boring these days. all chains and no character. the best parts of the city are where the creative minds live. i think a healthy mix is what were all aiming for here.


I'm going to calm down now. But I'm glad old-school posters like you LASF, are still here whether lurking or posting (like me, after 7 years when the revival began) to provide some goddamned perspective..

[Vangelist]

...which he said in response to Curbed LA - CURBED LA! - hailing the news about the artist development project as being "good,"

And let's be clear: if it was up to some of you, there would be NO projects like this being planned for or in existence, to keep the community what it is.

I'm so thankful that you guys are not urban planners, for you use these sentiments: "Bringing all those varied stores you see in suburban malls today(Sephora, Apple, Vans, H&M, Gamestop, etc) back to the city center. It works in Tokyo, SF, Chicago, NY etc.. why not?" to plan for downtown Los Angeles, comparing it to other cities

Instead of thinking about the residents who actually live here and their needs. Maybe we're not dying to have a Sephora before a Trader Joe's

[Vangelist]

I've calmed down now, and don't wish to present myself as antagonistic or condescending towards other forumers; generally I don't lose my temper

But I think I should abstain from getting into any sort of back & forth as I know I'm probably in the minority here, and have many artist and musician friends that would be priced out of DTLA if the homogenous corporate gentrification that's being so lionized here were to actually come to fruition

I guess I lost it when I saw, how shall we say, such a cavalier attitude ("they can always live in Vernon") taken towards the topic of displacement

Seems to be a "build it, whatever the fuck it is," / developers thread-ethos going on here, which is just sad. Aside from DistrictDirt, Rich Alossi and ColeMonkee I don't even know if a single one of you also lives downtown. I'd rather not know my neighbors if they'd prefer to price people like me out of the 'hood!

[LA/OCman]

I live Downtown Vangelist and I somewhat agree with you on your points. What I would like to see is a real mix. I don't think Downtown is anywhere near becoming the Manhattans or San Franciscos... If I had my way, it would be mix of shops, cultures, artists, new and old, museums, sports etc. Broadway can develop with affordable housing for the working class above the retail. Retail ala..Flea, Crack Gallery, Two Bits, Blends, Loft Appeal..but also some of those funky shops for caps and hats, used books and still have a mix of Latino oriented shops. The difference between SF, NY and DT is that there is so much space in all directions. I think South of Olympic around Broadway has some of the coolest old buildings for housing that could be affordable for all. The working class Latinos who shop on Broadway don't live on Broadway....and they are being drawn to other shopping areas.

For me the priorities should be housing the homeless, cleaning up facades and getting more residents and creative type businesses in the upper floors that are currently empty.
Retail to me does not mean Nordstrom. DT could grow like the individual shops on Melrose. But I also know with small retail shops you will see the Forever 21's, Banana Republics and Crate and Barrel's. South Park is perfect for those types of shops! Oh, and lastly....more green space with pocket parks, skyscrapers in the Central business district, the growth technology based incubator start ups.

[LA/OCman]

Yesterday the city broke ground on the Spring St. Park...one less parking lot Downtown!

I also called LAHSA..Los Angeles Homeless Service Authority about a guy who has set up camp at 3rd and Main. They put the homeless into housing. They were quick to respond and send out a team...this is what they responded to me:


On October 5, 2011, Senior ERT Member Kenon Joseph and I responded to the southeast corner of 3rd Street and Main Street, Lo Angeles, due to the request for service. We found the aforementioned homeless’ possessions but he was not located in the immediate vicinity. This homeless appears to be the same homeless I dealt with during my time performing outreach in the downtown area. His name is Bill and he is highly resistant to any forms of assistance offered by outreach teams. I have dealt with him on numerous occasions and each time I have dealt with him, in the past, he has openly mocked attempts to house him. He believes there is no reason pay money to be housed when he can have all his money sleep on the street. We will attempt to contact Bill on another day and engage him when the weather is more favorable.

I commend LAHSA but we need all homeless off the streets. It is dangerous, unhealthy and many will die...But "Bill" should not be given a choice...we should insist that he live in housing.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by Vangelist

Jesus. Did I ever say I want downtown to "not develop" ? No

But, for it to stay as an artists paradise, it can't develop. That is simply the natural order of things. And believe me, the last thing I want is for downtown to be filled with chain stores. My favorite parts of L.A. (besides downtown) are the ares filled with modern, dynamic stores, such as the part of Fairfax directly south of Melrose, or Abbot Kinney. I'd hazard a guess that it is in this direction that most downtowners would wish the city to develop, not in a way akin to the Promineade or Hollywood, but like Venice or West Hollywood.

Also, great news about the park. Yet another thing to keep an eye on!

[pesto]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

But, for it to stay as an artists paradise, it can't develop. That is simply the natural order of things. And believe me, the last thing I want is for downtown to be filled with chain stores. My favorite parts of L.A. (besides downtown) are the ares filled with modern, dynamic stores, such as the part of Fairfax directly south of Melrose, or Abbot Kinney. I'd hazard a guess that it is in this direction that most downtowners would wish the city to develop, not in a way akin to the Promineade or Hollywood, but like Venice or West Hollywood.

Also, great news about the park. Yet another thing to keep an eye on!

Since this discussion has about run down, I'll just clarify mis-interpretations of my comments. In general, I don't object to artists, but they shouldn't be confused for the CAUSE of the development. They just go to where rents are cheap and the area reasonably safe. This is what happened in NY, basically because Giuliani said he would no longer tolerate drug use south of Houston.

There is no reason that large brands should push everyone out of DT. DT is large enough that I don't believe mid-priced and trendy retailers will ever be squeezed out; certainly not for the foreseeable future. They certainly are not squeezed out on Melrose or comparable districts of NY, London, Berlin, etc., that have been hot for years.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by Vangelist

I specifically was responding to a poster - Pesto - who directly said it would be better if downtown went completely upscale, lost the diversity, and that the artists moved out to make it a "premiere shopping/dining," district like Soho...

I think both pesto's wishes & your concerns about them coming true are going overboard. or it's like arguing about whether a piece of candy eaten by a 800 pound person is going to make him too obese. Or, maybe better yet, talking about whether a piece of candy eaten by a 80 pound adult suffering from severe anorexia is a good or bad thing.

however, i agree with you about how the hood needs diversity & I think it would actually hurt the economy & culture if artists no longer wanted to stick around. But the only reason why think LA is greatly different from NY, tokyo, paris or other major cities where a concern about too much gentrification does make sense is cuz no other city in the top tier in north america, europe & asia has as many areas like this, alameda st south of 4th....


maps.google.com

^ much of the east side of dt really is similar to this & I don't see that changing anytime soon. if anything, I understand skid row is becoming a big open sore all over again, as homeless encampments are starting to get out of hand due to court rulings.

another thing: I read that the amt of empty office space in the hood has gone up again, to a level that many other cities would consider a sign of a broken economy. that comes on the heels of many bldgs in dt not having enough businesses to fill them up for over 20 yrs. worse of all, that's in spite of a good amt of existing space having been converted to apts or condos or housing equipment instead of workers.

So I don't think ppl have to worry about LA, esp much of dt, becoming too gentrified. It would be similar to worrying that transit is going to become too popular in LA, esp from all the ppl who now prefer cars switching over to trains. A major reason I say that is cuz this is another thing I don't see changing much anytime soon...

this is from a story in the LA times a few months ago:

I have been castigated by readers who felt I over-dramatized the peril of riding L.A.'s subway system in my Saturday column about the fatal stabbing of a Red Line rider 11 days ago.

"You're joking, right?" wrote Julia Tyson La Grua. "I rode the Gold, Red and Purple lines every weekday for 3 months when I was on jury duty in Koreatown and they were immaculately clean, prompt and I felt entirely safe."

But I was also scolded by readers who thought I soft-pedaled the risks that passengers face on the city's five subway lines.

"I have seen several violent arguments, many extremely crazy people and I would never be surprised if someone pulled a gun and started shooting," wrote Dan, who rides the Red Line regularly from North Hollywood to Staples Center.

"If you have any sense, you should be afraid and wary," he wrote. The Red Line "is the Wild West."

So, apparently, is the Green Line, according to a reader who feels the need to carry pepper spray and a stun gun on his rides from Norwalk to Redondo Beach. A few months back, a fellow passenger tried to push him from his seat. "I punch him in his face and spray him," he wrote. "He jumped off the train at the next stop."

"You have no idea what we have to put up with a daily basis."

And the passengers riding the Gold Line last Friday night can't be feeling too good right now. Two fellows began brawling as the train rolled through Pasadena, and one stabbed and seriously wounded the other.

Wild West or Mayberry RFD? The truth, I suppose, depends on many things: the neighborhood, the time of day, the random calculus of fate … and the personal perspective the rider brings.

...Safety is about perception, though, not just bare statistics. And passengers feel safe when they trust one another and have confidence in the system to protect them.

Reader Dan spent his career "around violent people, so I am not easily intimidated," he wrote. On his Red Line ride, he sees rude passengers "taking up two seats and daring you to protest" and rule-breakers "who board with ELECTRIC GUITARS (battery packs) and begin torturing the riders" with music.

Julia rode the Red Line too. But on her train, "Total strangers chatted with one another. Younger riders gave up their seats for pregnant women and the elderly. Everyone was generous with directions."

Across town, on the Green Line, "the ride is pure hell," the man with the pepper spray said. "You have people talking loud with foul language, thugs menacing riders, transients stretched out sleeping on the train all day long.…

In other words, a sense of lawlessness on the trains may push reality closer to perception.

Judging from my emails, a lot of riders feel that way. They are, no doubt, a tiny proportion of the 1 billion passengers who have ridden the subway. But almost all say they have been regular riders and many expressed a sense that things are getting worse.

"I think the MTA is cheaping out on security and cleaning of the system," wrote David Sanchez. The stations are dirtier, "and you don't see the sheriff's deputies on the trains and in the stations like you used to."

[JDRCRASH]

How can people possibly worry about LA becoming too gentrified? It couldn't even if it wanted to.

Originally Posted by Vangelist

Seems to be a "build it, whatever the fuck it is," / developers thread-ethos going on here, which is just sad.

Not really, given that we are in no position to be picky in this f**ked economy, which might be in the midst of the LONGEST downturn/recovery in history.

I'm sick of this "I would rather have nothing at all if I can't get exactly what you want" attitude.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Vangelist

I've calmed down now, and don't wish to present myself as antagonistic or condescending towards other forumers; generally I don't lose my temper

But I think I should abstain from getting into any sort of back & forth as I know I'm probably in the minority here, and have many artist and musician friends that would be priced out of DTLA if the homogenous corporate gentrification that's being so lionized here were to actually come to fruition

I guess I lost it when I saw, how shall we say, such a cavalier attitude ("they can always live in Vernon") taken towards the topic of displacement

Seems to be a "build it, whatever the fuck it is," / developers thread-ethos going on here, which is just sad. Aside from DistrictDirt, Rich Alossi and ColeMonkee I don't even know if a single one of you also lives downtown. I'd rather not know my neighbors if they'd prefer to price people like me out of the 'hood!

FYI, i live down here to. I think there is plenty of room for every kind of person down here. Every little neighborhood offers something different and distinct from one another yet its the whole that makes Downtown such a great place with so much potential. there is nothing wrong with wanting artists to be able to live down here and there is nothing wrong with wanting corporate execs to as well. Same goes regarding retail. if downtown was just 4 blocks, it would be a different story, but fortunately, its very large.