Dying Malls: Temporary State or Time to Find New Uses

The retail industry has come to be hurt and usually the bad news in commercial real estate is accompanied after a downturn in the residential market. In the transformation of regular indoor shopping malls to more vibrant outdoor life style center, many old malls are a thing of the past. The debate continues on their alternative uses, and this week I have considered articles concerning the topic of shopping malls. The first is entitled “101 new uses for a deserted mall” by Nate Berg and is found on roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com. The other article informs mainly about a successful mall centre development in Vancouver, Canada and is written by Brent Toderian with the title: “Citifying a Suburban Shopping Centre”, on Planetizen.com.
Furthermore, the comments are posted at the respective site as well.

“101 new uses for a deserted mall”

comment

Thank you for an interesting article, I have yet to understand the different aspects of a modern shopping centre.However, it is nice to see the issue of future use of malls being raised to debate from the various perspective of the many wellknown professionals in commercial real estate, in the post. Although the phenomenon of the dying malls is not new, I agree with that the time has come where retails side is awaiting a change in demands of a "new consumer". In this time of transformation, the commercial side face the same demand as the residential, opting for new innovative and refreshing ways of developing shopping centres so that it allows for more outdoor areas where open air and public spaces are emphasized. Many malls that you have prescribed for new uses have been taking a new approach in incorporating educational service, or non-conventional uses, I personally believe that this may be a recipe for further hindrance of profitability since it may not intended traffic. A key difference in comparing the various malls, an observation can be noticed that some malls in order to survive are less conservative with the choice of new tenants, thus not thinking longterm, while other commercial developers emphasize more carefully the proportion and design that ultimately brings about a desired and attractive space for consumers and longterm profitability for malls. I also agree with you in that this would be an opportunity to repair the regional landscape by turning them back to open space and in the process of it perhaps making the effort to retrofit it to the community. Furthermore, I believe that retail field should take the same direction that residential real estate is taking in the many modern ambitious plans of reviving the green and healthy way of constructing and maintaining. James J. Farrell, a professor of history at St. Olaf College in Northfield, Minnesota, is the author of “One Nation Under Goods: Malls and the Seductions of American Shopping” and his ideas are very crucial to malls being viable and sustainable. This is again because the shopping culture is embedded in us and malls thus from an economical standpoint there should not be worries but the focus should be environmental as well. He says, "Right now, consumers can’t afford all the stuff we used to buy. But in the long run, the planet can’t afford all the stuff we do buy".

"Citifying a Suburban Shopping Centre"

comment

Firstly, thank you for an interesting post; I am intrigued to hear about the methods used at this centre being that this shopping centre is doing extremely well in the current economy. Furthermore many of the advantages are stated in your post and may be to use for other developers to consider. Another issue that is very vital to the longterm building of malls is whether they are economically viable while being environmentally sustainable. Thus I am curious whether the transformation from car oriented shopping to mass transit development in the past fourty years is the key to why the shopping centre has been one of the most succesful centres in Canada. One of the advantages seems to be the easy access that the consumer has to the centre. It seems that the mall is directed to the need of the local population and the size may be another factor why it is successful; the trend of major enclosed malls is replaced with new smaller but open air life style centres. However, I am curious whether this mall has been remodeled or if this is project that has been there ahead of its time. Another recent controversial phenomenon that you mention in your post is the minimized lending restrictions from banks and institutions. Do you believe this will have any effect in minimizing the size of the development and compromise with the environmental aspect of the malls, being that many malls today are not utilizing their square foot to successfully. Finally, I would be interested in what you think a good solution would be to bring about the issue of sustainability while re-purposing the mall developments in the communitues.

A New Time, a New Way of Looking at Cities: Paris Pointing the Direction Once Again

President Obama has shown attentive interest in supporting the new urbanism with sustainable and livable cities as a result. He signed an order on February 19 establishing the White House Office of Urban Affairs. However, the fraction ($47 million) of the entire ($787 million) of the stimulus plan that is to be assigned to infrastructure is a very modest number to achieve the desired results. This money will go toward transit, rail, roads, bridges, with the larger portion to the highway allotment. With what is left the question remains: how can we design better cities around the states, and how can Los Angeles be affected by this new visionary idea of urbanism. Perhaps a city like Paris and their master plan may serve as an example of a forward thinking approach to a future city planning in Los Angeles..

With the Office of Urban Affairs and the stimulus package, the new administration is sending a mixed message: Yes, we are committed to re-envisioning cities, and yes, transportation and infrastructure remain status quo. This leads to questions: What model will the next urbanism take and who will design it?

Zellner coordinates the Southern California Institute for Future Initiatives (SCIFI) program at the Southern California Institute of Architecture.
The research based graduate program sponsors (with The Architect‘s Newspaper) a competition titled “A New Infrastructure: Innovative Transit Solutions for Los Angeles.” The idea has become more than before to train graduate students in disciplines like policy and planning and not merely restrict the education to design. This is a thought that will remain crucial for current and future planners as developers when assessing the direction of city planning. This idea is evident as the urban planning has become more complicated and tied in with more concern across the social, economical and environmental needs that a city is expected to deliver.. Zellner states that a closer look at the infrastructure in Los Angeles clearly derives to an understanding that the highway driven sprawl is no longer feasible. With the current rate of congestion and pollution and the effect it has on the residents of Los Angeles, the need of rebuilding and reframing the metropolis is recognized. Further, the subprime mortgages and the current economy points out the problematic situations even further by demonstrating a net outflow of people out of Los Angeles. Many just can’t afford living in Los Angeles anymore and transportation is most often an important factor. Sitting in traffic the many hours of the day is just not effective and becomes an economic issue for many families. New Urbanism model recognizes the need to redevelop urban cores, replacing them with walkable streets and transit hubs (see left), making it more efficient for people across all economical fields to be more productive.

Paris has unveiled their master plan for the city, the most ambitious vision in rebuilding the city since Napoleon III. The current economic collapse makes the plan very audacious and non-realistic, yet demonstrates a vision and forward thinking that is necessary for a change to occur. The architect Richard Rogers proposes burying the main train tracks underground, with a vast system of public parks draped over them, connecting to poor and middle-class neighborhoods. A system of subway above highways have been proposed (see below).Yet the 10 proposals for a new master plan for metropolitan Paris, which were unveiled last week, may just be the kind of bold idealism the world needs right now. The results of a nine-month study commissioned by President Nicolas Sarkozy, the proposals aim to transform Paris and its surrounding suburbs into the first sustainable “post-Kyoto city,” a reference to the treaty on climate change, with an expanded Métro system and sprawling new parks. The government has yet to say how it would raise the money to build this new city. And Mr. Sarkozy’s opponents, who have sometimes dismissed him as “President Bling-Bling,” have questioned whether this is anything more than an elaborate publicity stunt.

Yet all of the projects recognize the strong link between urban policy and social equality. In tying environmental concerns to issues of identity, they suggest ways to begin reversing the growing social divisions that mark the contemporary city. If they inspire a broader global debate on these tensions, they will already have accomplished something of significant value. It is time for Los Angeles to act before the trend driven by the negative impact of the economy where people see no other alternative to leave Los Angeles to reside in places where they find cheaper living. The policies regarding planning and development has to carry on a more sustainable approach to alleviate the hardship and burden many people are facing.

With its sprawling public space, Velib shared-bike system, a myriad of different trains and metros, this new Master Plan could be perfect for Los Angeles. The central idea of the new Parisian Master Plan was to preserve the current historic economic core, while breaking down social barriers by connecting less wealthy parts of the town to the historic core by burying the current metro tracks that separate the city into different demographics. Paris would then place even more parks over these train tracks to connect the city socially, while creating a new over-ground train line that would connect the city through sustainable means. This may perhaps be a perfect solution for Los Angeles’ urban sprawl problems. Imagine if Los Angeles city planners exchanged all freeways with parks, and established an efficient and effective train line that unites all suburbs of Los Angeles. Los Angeles would quickly become more sustainable. While this plan is not feasible, and perhaps will never happen, Los Angeles is in need of more public space, new recreational areas such as parks and community centers and more effort to create sustainable means of transportation.

Los Angeles at the Crossroad: Prolong Individual Car Ownership or Sustainable Transport Systems?

The answer to whether people should choose between individual car owner ship or mass transit would come as a no-brainer to many. Cheaper, more environment friendly, faster and more efficient are all conditions to create a more sustainable society. However, the current land use policies add up to make this quandary a much more complex matter. There are different suggestions on how to go forth dealing with future transportation issues. I have considered two proposals attempting to attack the issue from different perspectives. In doing so, I have shared with these authors my point of view, which can be read on the respective site. The first article is written by Nate Berg on Planetizen.com, entitled “better transportation need better cities.” He employs an appealing approach. He explains that in order to improve the mass transit we need first to adapt our cities to become friendlier to any idea of transportation system. Furthermore, I consider a post by David Albert on greaterwashington.com. The post is entitled, “let’s stimulate with a major bike sharing program.” David Albert is a strong supporter of environment friendlier alternatives and suggests the benefits of the bike sharing programs in his article. He offers a more specific solution to how we can mitigate traffic and at once develop a sustainable environment.

"better transportation need better cities.”

Comment

I am glad that somebody else recognized that the grand idea is not only to start mass transit projects with expectations that congestion from cars will be reduced and transit will increase. I agree with you that the first task is to build a city where there is no need for cars. You touch on this point by stating that the city needs a better mix that’s better distributed. Further more you state that we would start walking if it were possible to walk 20 minutes and pass a grocery store, a childcare facility, a restaurant, a pub a park and so forth. This is a great initiative and a closer look at other cities such the ones in Europe is a proof of a functioning model (see left). The real issue to me seems to be the complexity with land use policies and the zoning laws that cause a setback in changing the structure of the old. Having lived in Sweden for many years, I have had the benefits of both great mass transit system and also a community that caters to all my consumer needs within a close range in proximity to where I live. The problem the people of Los Angeles face is that they make a great distinction between where they live and where they fulfill their daily needs such as shopping, running errands as such. Thus I am curious to ask you whether you suggest this model solely for the city or the “suburbia” as well. It seems to me that many people are rather comfortable with housing in the residential area being separated to the shopping and business in the commercial area. Do you think that the people of Los Angeles are susceptible to the idea of integrating all these various businesses into their communities? In addition, I am interested to see if you think that it is possible to take it a step further and actually associate the commercial side to a closer range of proximity to where we live. Such example being to incorporate these businesses like a modern grocery store or other appropriate entities as close as beneath or between housing structures. Yet as the idea may appear unattractive and unpleasant to many urban and suburban dwellers, it can actually be very practical and by architectural means approved in terms of design and functionality as it conforms to the rest of the structure. Knowing that Californians are not accustomed to this type of model, it would be great to see what you think about a similar idea in the future being implanted in the urban planning of Los Angeles.

“let’s stimulate with a major bike sharing program.”

Comment

Though I have never experienced a part of the bike sharing program personally, it appears to me that it brings about a positive attitude to a new wave of dealing with transportation systems, as it reduces the dependency of cars and at once eases congestion in metropolitan areas. The Parisians were first to try this, and they have as a result of the experiment experienced less congestion in their city, but only to the expense of the vandalism and the thefts that have occurred in relation to the program. You mention in your post that Washington being the first state to try this project has not experienced the negative spillovers such as the ones mentioned above. Thus, I am curious whether you think that a similar project could be employed in Los Angeles, being that the urban planning is somewhat different and the distances are greater than what a regular bike route is considered by normal standard. Furthermore, as you are optimistic about the bike sharing programs bringing about an improvement of the infrastructure (friendlier bike transit) like a chain reaction, assuming that the more bikes we have, the better infrastructure. I am a little skeptical whether that is sufficient reason to invest in such a project, being that a bike is relatively just a small cost and very accessible to the average consumer. On the other hand, the infrastructure is the main concern and I would like to know is you don’t think that just having enough stalls and friendlier bicycle lanes is itself more important and sufficient than a bike sharing program, as it will boost the economy as people buy their own bikes (I know it’s a far stretch, but just an example).

Obama’s Approach to Mass Transit: Stimulus for Mass Transit, Un-Stimulus for the Auto-Industry?

With the allocation of about $16.4 billion for the transportation system, the stimulus plan is embarking on a new era. New leadership under president Obama has taken a completely opposite approach to the distribution of funds, with $8.4 billion for mass transit and about $8 billion for high-speed rail (see left). This is obviously an improved attempt by the new President to distribute more resources than former President Bush’s final budget of a mere $11 million for the same project. President Obama’s extensive attempt at creating a cabinet for urban policy (see below) is an attempt to rebuild for future prospects. Why did the new leadership take on a completely opposite approach to mass transit then the previous administration had done? Perhaps, we have come to the realization that the need for a correlation between urban city planning and transportation function is the way of the future. A fact the Bush administration chose to neglect by allocating more funds towards the auto industry, and less towards the future welfare of the Nation. In a previous post I made reference to the endless benefits to the rural community once an accurate and reliable transit system in downtown Los Angeles is put into place; and the unpleasant results and monetary lose it will bring about for the auto industry. Clearly the time for change has come, as we consider the recent increase into public demands for a reliable transportation system. Although, the prospect of a wide-ranging transit system might inadvertently contribute to the already dying auto industry, the question remains as to how this will affect the current economy in the United States? Nonetheless, serious investments in constructing a better transit system will aid in building a sustainable society in terms of environment, social and economical prospects for our Nation.

The auto industry has for long been a power-house, strongly and successfully lobbying to delay the implementation of any future modernized transportation systems. Unfortunately, by implementing such a system many innocent people might lose their jobs in the process. Nonetheless, we should not waste anymore resources to bailout GM when obviously they lack to present the public with any credible proposition for the future. I propose that we set up a training program for the many qualified employees of the auto industry who might show interest in having a sustainable career in the mass transit industry. A point Massachusetts Professor Robert Pollin, who is also a consultant at the Department of Energy further develops by stating that; “Obama should instead invest the bailout billions into transportation that moves billions of people, and creates several times more jobs than what GM and Chrysler say they will lose.” Professor Pollin goes on to state that every dollar in mass transit results in creating more jobs then it would if it is spent in the auto industry; $22 billion for every $1 billion. When we put all these facts together it should persuade us to invest massively in a transit system at the present time for the purpose of building a better future. We should prioritize and work on the various ongoing but yet unfinished projects in the transit sector rather then aid and assist auto makers who lack to present a long term resolution to an ever growing problem.

Los Angeles should refer to the European countries and Japan as a good source of reference for building a reliable transit system. These countries are in the forefront and have benefited from their endeavors greatly. Perhaps, we could even use smaller cities like Chicago and New York as good references for having excelled in utilizing a massive transportation system. It makes me wonder why Los Angeles has fallen behind in this race and has yet to become sufficient in the matter? I am left to conclude that industrialization played a major role in this development. In cities such as New York and Chicago the population and its citizens were not as spread out as they are in Los Angeles, making the construction of a reliable transportation system much more practical in these smaller cities. Moreover, another fact that should not be overlooked is the age of the city in question. Both New York and Chicago grew and matured quite rapidly in comparison to Los Angeles which gave rise to a compelling need to a fast growing transit system. Therefore, Los Angeles being a relatively young city I believe it too is destined to undergo similar progress. It could be argued that the realization has come later then the necessity for building such system in Los Angels. Nonetheless, what is certain is that the 30 million people who found their way to Los Angeles during the past five years is a definite indicator that the policymakers will have to take a serious and long-term approach when deciding upon the shape and structure of mass transit system – an eminent fact. However, there are numerous factors as to why it is important for us to change our policies towards such a system one of which is to diminish the dependency of foreign oil. Furthermore, this will reduce the emission rate in our city and save the states energy crisis. Debates have been raised to address the question of making the urban center environmentally friendlier than the suburbs. However, all such debates rely on whether we are going to have well working and functioning transit system?

With raising population rate the issue of transportation can no longer be ignored. Some people in Los Angeles may seem satisfied to some extent with their mass transit system, but this number represents the minority of the population. Moreover, I recognize that we have an established transit system – an unavoidable fact – but I do assert that it is neither whole nor is it sufficient. Multiple projects have been undertaken that are still incomplete due to a lack of funds on the one hand, and attention and care on the other; project that can better serve the masses if completed. I am not alone in this conviction and wish to direct your attention to data assembled by the National Associated of Realtors (N.A.R) on this subject. A poll conducted by this institution reveals strong support for public transportation. When people were asked what they believe to be the greatest and best way to solving traffic problems almost 50 percent favored improving public transportation, 25 percent expressed that they rather desire to build communities where driving is not required, and only 20 percent answered that building roads was best. Fifty six percent of the people who participated in this survey stated that, the federal government has neither committed nor has it taken enough initiative to prioritize and distribute sufficient resources for such a project. Lastly, 75 percent – the majority – expressed that they wished this country to improve “intercity rail and transit.” In short, it is time for a more sustainable future in all shapes and forms. It is time that we finish what we should have started a long time ago.

A Better Downtown: Expansion and Mass Transit Hand in Hand?

In my previous post I wrote about the future of downtown Los Angeles. I dedicated a small but very crucial portion of my post to the need of new ideas and further expansion of downtown. Nonetheless, the projects assigned to an urban center need a healthy policy that benefits the people that are affected by it one way or another. Moreover, I emphasized the importance of a reliable and adequate mass transit system. When the notion of a subway system from downtown to the sea came to us, many Angelenos were relieved. This week, I am looking into a post written by Anna Scott entitled “USC plans for the future” on ladowntownnews.com blog. It explains the future plans of the university to expand its development surrounding USC campus and extend outward. This will enable the university to build stronger ties to downtown. University of Southern California has always been a focal player in shaping downtown. Furthermore, I will also examine the role of the transit system that is meant to bring the people to the urban center; an article written by Yonah Freemark on thetransportpolitic.com blog entitled: “After measure R, Los Angeles Transit Plans Advance….Slowly”. I believe these two subjects inter-relate and points Los Angeles city into the right direction. It creates a possibility on one hand to easy access for the public and on the other hand, conforms to the modern standards regarding urban design and safety. As I explore and comment on these two articles below, they can also be found at the respective sites (see comment).

"USC Plans For the Future"

Comment

USC has for a while been a well recognized and trendsetting actor in the downtown scene, formatting the course of action to create a healthier and safer environment. This has proved to be true when examining the area surrounding the university campus. In this article, Ms. Scott has made clear in detail the underlying and apparent reason to expand – this being to secure and provide housing for future students, creating an improved array of businesses that meet current standards in terms of providing healthy function and innovative design. Furthermore this is meant to lift up the community surrounding the university. As much as this development is due to the self interest of USC it will also serve for a “greater common good”. However, I agree with the previous comment emphasizing that, while working to be more engaged and forward thinking in the community, USC must take notice to the diverse ethnic groups and minorities that are an essential component of this district. Their engagement should be fostered and taken into consideration when projecting for the future. This project should aim to create and uphold jobs for the creative class and encourage the minorities while giving incentives to small and mid-size business to be active and committed players. As the university builds on to create a more sustainable environment, USC as a trendsetting and respectable actor in the community must be cautious not to step over small business. However it is of great importance to set standards and make sure that businesses adhere to those standards, as it has been proved that safety in the community goes hand in hand with improved businesses. John Macdonald, the leading researcher on the study and also a criminology professor at the University of Pennsylvania confirms this statement by saying: "These districts make a place not such an attractive place for crimes of opportunity such as robbery." The mixed use of businesses brings more security that deters crimes. This is a concern that not only the community share interest in but one that parents of students and the entire student body cares strongly about. Hence this should be a fundamental concern of the university, – to create and maintain a safe environment for students. Finally, thank you Anna for a comprehsensive and constructive post. This is a great direction to intensify what has already been seen around campus. It can create opportunities and pass on positive spillovers to the various players of the community.

“After measure R, Los Angeles Transit Plans Advance….Slowly”

Comment

One of my main concerns has been for a while the future of the proposed subway system that would ease the transportation issue for many residents between these destinations, - destinations being generally a reach from downtown to the Pacific Rim (See left). I am glad that you have answered my concerns and laid out there a detailed plan concerning the construction and timeframe of this development. However, what you consider being one of the most ambitious plan in the US history seems to me being the least prioritized project. I can not really comprehend why it would take an approximate 25 years (according to the timeframe you have provided) to build a 10 mile subway system. Considering that Metro with the mayor Antonio Villaraigosa as the chairman on the board has acknowledged the project timeframe as unacceptable. Metro is stating that this delay is due to a low prioritization when it comes to transport policy.

While I understand the complications that come with costly projects such as this, I recognize that the current economy might setback this project. However, I might be fair in arguing that now is a good time for building and developing. This project would create many new jobs within a sector that is already

bleeding. Furthermore, as money has been heavily invested in downtown, it seems only fair to fill downtown with people so that businesses can thrive and generate revenues to the city. It is apparent that the various developing projects aiming to give the city a facelift will not fully function without people to give it the spree of energy and pulse. This is without doubt something that a mass transit system can change. You mentioned the costly side of it being that it would be very hard to finish this project earlier due to insufficient funds. You considered the help from the business community and I totally concur with you and strongly believe that as we are in this tough economy, we are also moving towards a time where efficiency and effectiveness are strongly emphasized. Being that these are the magic words in the current economy, we should look into the great advantages with public-private partnerships. This would create more business and at the same time provide the funds required to get this project on and going with more efficiency. Surely, I also believe that an adequate portion of the stimulus plan should go towards this project being that it will help to ease and stimulate the economy for many reasons, which I mentioned above. - Firstly it will create more jobs in crucial sectors, secondly it will, indisputably give the people of these areas an easier access to downtown. This will bolster the economy and help businesses to thrive. Thirdly, these businesses will generate tax to the city which can later be used to pay of the debt of this subway system. Lastly, we will have a sustainable mass transit system that will generate revenues while setting the tone for future similar projects. The only problem is yet to stand in the way – the low prioritization that is based on the wrong assumption- the notion that we do not really need to prioritize this project neither now nor in the future!

Does Los Angeles Need a Downtown: An Urban Heart or Waiting for its Moment

Cities such as New York and San Francisco come to mind when I frame the picture of a metropolitan downtown. For a while, the people of Los Angeles have been curious about the faith of the downtown in their city. Will it ever happen and if so, what shape will it take? This topic is of major interest to most Los Angelenos and currently much focus is on the development that is taking place in downtown Los Angeles (see right). L.A. Live being one of such projects, which aims to injects a pulse into the city life. Looking at the various metropolitan cities around the world we may come to notice that many of them, although different in shape and form share the same characteristic. In other words the city model, where there are suburbs with their respective urban centers but with one major center where everything seems to happen. What’s more, the planning of every city is connected to its history and the opportunities associated with it. Looking back at the history of Los Angeles, one question may be worth inquiring upon, whether Los Angeles really needs a downtown? While urban planners and developers agree about the necessity of a complete and functional downtown, the conclusion of the essential ingredients of what constitutes an urban center in Los Angeles differ. The debate continues with planners and nearby communities attempts to realize their ideas in how to reshape the downtown district. To fully grasp the subject, the topic requires exploring the various aspects associated with a proper and unified definition of what make up an urban center–its history, the planning, the people, its opportunities, and all the other crucial factors that must be taken into consideration of such a center.

Firstly, we must ask ourselves of the purpose and function that urban centers serve to the people. To answer that, perhaps it would be appropriate to paraphrase the distinguished professor Manuel Castells who was one of the panelists in a forum (that CalArts held at the REDCAT February 11th)on the discussion of urban planning in Los Angeles. According to Mr. Castells, downtowns evolve around two issues: one being the urban centrality, a place where people can meet, communicate and interact with one another freely. Second, it is a place where people have access to public space be it for shopping, sports events, public demonstrations, and the like. In other words, a place where “things happen.” Urban planners at the forum were in agreement about the insufficient efforts to create such public spaces in Los Angeles. This is evident in the fact that there is not enough foot traffic in downtown due to this shortage of public space. Cecilia Estolano, the CEO of the Community Redevelopment Agency of Los Angeles was one of the speakers of the forum and expressed her ideas about downtowns being a place for “descent,” a place for “celebration,” a place where we can get together and share our “opinions” and “ideas.” Furthermore, Ms. Estolano is not in agreement with Mr. Castells about there not being enough people in downtown, using the audience as evidence pointing to them and saying; “they are here.” However, Ms Estolano agrees with Mr Castells that there is not enough public space attributed to downtown Los Angeles. The CEO emphasizes the importance of creating more places where people can express their creativity, mourn, and celebrate, using President Obama’s inauguration as an example of creation of a public space oriented to serve such a specific purpose-the gathering of people from all walks of life to share what was a crucial and historic moment.
To talk about the city of Los Angeles, it would not be fair without discussing its history. One man of great importance comes to mind when mentioning the city of Los Angeles; William Mulholland. The various projects he created helped the city to thrive further to meet the needs of businesses. However, we need to recognize that Los Angeles is still a young, vibrant city. It needs a new breed of Mulhollanders to usher our city to the 21st century. At 100 years of age, metropolitan Los Angeles is still relatively young and has much room to grow.
Currently, downtown, Los Angeles is undergoing many changes and there are many actors trying to influence the direction of how these changes should take shape. A decade ago, most landuse in the central city were contributed to industries and office spaces. Today, many of the industry spaces have been converted to lofts for the artists and other creative people wishing to work and live in a vibrant city. Some areas of the city have undergone a conversion of commercial to residential landuse which has brought about an increase in the land value as a result. This policy has brought about a concern that many of the industries will instead move to other locations, thus reducing the amount of tax they generate to the city. According to Mr Castell: the city is thriving on the day as the corporate world fills it with life, but the night and weekends follows with lifeless and empty streets. Most businesses associated with the downtown in Los Angeles are real estate, finance and insurance related. This makes downtown sensitive to current economic time. The message is clear from Castell: “the days of corporate downtown are over” and the only way to sustain a healthy urban center is to create more public spaces.
Our path is clear-more residential building that will ultimately bring life to the city. A waste of space is eminent. The city of Los Angeles must set forth a policy that combines living and work. We can see examples of developers today that have rebuilt many lofts and old industry locations to luxury apartments. City government must help to ease the transition by helping middle and low income people settle in to these various housing alternatives. A downtown without people living in it is just a corporate office downtown with emptiness and downfall of an urban center as a result. As we plan for a city, planners must not forget the people that make the city. In Los Angeles, there are many various ethnic groups and the different parts of the city are a manifestation of this phenomenon. It is important to embrace this multicultural place and plan to include its various people, no matter of race, ethnicity or income, to be a part of this change.
There are many up and coming new generation tech-businesses that can prosper in the city, leaving a trace of creativity and innovative ideas. A strategic planning should incorporate these pioneering professionals and small businesses to central parts of the city, as surrounding areas are occupied by venture capitalist firms to support their ideas. There are many monuments and artistic sites that make the city stand out in art, culture, and social events. We can build from that and make Los Angeles one of the most prominent cities in the world.
Professor Edward Soja (also attending the forum) states that Los Angeles had a different experience during the industrialization era in comparison to cities such as Chicago and New York. The typical clustering of businesses, organizations and people did not pile up in the city as they did in Chicago and New York, which leaves Los Angeles in a different position. It should be noticed though that Los Angeles is yet the second largest city in respect to the amount of government employed people. It is also the densest city in respect to the various parts of the city. This is a positive indicator. Past data shows that more than five million people have moved to Los Angeles in the last thirty years. Some are concerned that internet will take away the need for that clustering that has prevailed in the archetypal downtown. Nowadays, information is spread over the internet quickly, and thus it has been argued that people need no longer to be in vicinity of a center in order to encounter and exchange information. Professor Soja answers to that saying: “a cluster will always prevail in creating more innovations, cultural creativity and interaction between people. It is something that no computer can replace, especially in these economic times”.

A city such as New York is an incredible city full of life and pulse, but to compare Los Angeles to New York is like comparing apples and oranges. Los Angeles should pursue its own original and unique way of creating an urban center. In order to be realistic and true to the genuine idea of an urban center in Los Angeles, we must start from the standpoint of the city’s history. It involves cultural creativity, innovative ideas, art, the diverse people we have, and the various midsize to small businesses that gives an urban center its unique niche. Secondly there must be a stronger effort to create more public spaces for people that it can be used as mediums to reach stated goals. Another issue that seems to be ignored is the mass transit and the availability of transportation from remote communities to visit Los Angeles downtown. There is no viable link that connects the distant communities to the city core. The ongoing debate about the subway from the Pacific Rim to downtown (see below)may alleviate this problem. That would change the notion of Los Angeles downtown as a place to work and not to visit. It seems that the populations of the suburbs are generally disconnected to the wide offerings of artistic and cultural events of downtown. A sound, safe and convenient transportation system would change this. We can look at today’s L.A live project as one of those projects attempting to bring energy to the city. The notion of downtown as an unsafe place will diminish with similar projects like LA Live in combination with a sustainable and efficient transportation system that can carry on this idea. So my final words are: more public space in Los Angeles Downtown, more people, more life!


[i]Manuel Castells who is the Wallis Annenberg Chair in Communication Technology and Society at USC and author of Society, The Information Age: Economy and Culture; presented his point of view on the 11th of February at the Redcat building in downtown, Los Angeles.

[ii] Cecilia Estolano is the CEO of the Community Redevelopment Authority of the City of Los Angeles. http://www.crala.org/

[iii] It would serve as a form of injustice to fully explain the meaning of this phrase – as it would require more space than is provided in this blog.

[iv] distinguished professor of Urban Planning at the UCLA School of Public Affairs and author of Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places;

Planning and Development in Los Angeles, Where Are We Headed?

Los Angeles aspires to be one of the world’s cleanest cities. The history of Los Angeles is one with people from many different ethnical backgrounds, and is manifested through the diverse architectural designs we encounter today. There are many differences between the various districts in the city of Los Angeles, due to a style and tone inspired from the many diverse groups settling into these various areas around 1950 and later. These numerous groups have contributed to the Los Angeles that we see today. A view of Los Angeles in present day illustrates many changes taking place during the past century and urbanization is a crucial factor. We are facing a rapid change in the development of our communities; partially to meet today’s quality standards and regulations, whether it concerns style of architectural design, modern engineering or sustainability and green building requirements. As a new writer in the blogosphere I intend to present and discuss issues relevant to the planning and development of greater Los Angeles; our city. The topics will range from transportation, sustainability, preservation of historical buildings, to ongoing and future news of the development projects in Los Angeles.

To my help, I have chosen from the many insightful websites, such as Planetizen , American Planning Association, which I located from directories such as The Internet Public Library, USA.gov, to name a few. I have compiled a list of these websites in my sidebar link roll (see right). The Sources were all chosen after a profound scrutiny, guided by Webby Awards to secure structure, visual design, functionality and overall quality, and IMSA criteria (labels to the right), to assure accountability and a stricter focus on the bloggers authorship and credibility. Furthermore, the material from these websites will be a point of reference throughout my writings and will reflect the content of my blog. I reserve to change or add more sites as new topics are presented. I hope that the viewer will find these websites helpful and valuable. The future of planning and development has never been as exciting as it is today; new technology and standards ensuring better sustainability and durability with more creativity in architectural design.