Los Angeles in Decline? City commission seems to think so

[Eightball]

Don't believe the right wing hype (btw Fox News et al have been mighty quiet about these large surpluses). Brown is (wisely) fighting against more spending initiatives, but the state is doing great financially, and it will only improve. Pensions are a concern, but they have been repeatedly addressed at the municipal level without that much pushback (see SJ, etc). And Brown wants to address the state wide pensions.

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/artic...on-4997158.php

Reserves are projected to continue growing to nearly $10 billion by June 2018.

That's per year, btw.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Quixote

You could tear down half the city and no one would shed a tear because it wasn't worth saving. And because this city isn't ruled by institutions, bounded by history and tradition, or caught up in maintaining the status quo...

I beg to differ; there's always some group that wants to save some 80 year-old taco stand or whatnot; but there are also substantial structures, like anything designed by Richard Neutra, that are under threat of demolition.

It's often the LA newbies that don't know about or care about the city's history.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I beg to differ; there's always some group that wants to save some 80 year-old taco stand or whatnot; but there are also substantial structures, like anything designed by Richard Neutra, that are under threat of demolition.

It's often the LA newbies that don't know about or care about the city's history.

Yeah but let's face it, too much of this city is shitbats and insignificant cookie cutter stucco SFHs from the 60-70s. That crap can be turned into parkland and extra Bäco Mercats for all I care. And then there are structures like Jardinette Apts that architecture/history-loving forumers like myself don't find much value in either. We have some architectural gems that are worth saving but it certainly is not the majority.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I beg to differ; there's always some group that wants to save some 80 year-old taco stand or whatnot; but there are also substantial structures, like anything designed by Richard Neutra, that are under threat of demolition.

It's often the LA newbies that don't know about or care about the city's history.

Well, 50% was hyperbole.

I was referring to the neighborhoods with all the crappy dingbats and multi-story apartment complexes. You could tear down most of Koreatown, Palms, and West LA without losing anything significant.

I actually think LA's architecture is underrated at times. The public architecture sucks, but venture into the older neighborhoods in central LA and you have a rich stock of Spanish Colonial, Craftsman, and Mid-Century modern buildings. All three styles are equally "LA" to me.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

I just watched Jerry Brown last night on the news warning of dire budget problems coming soon.

It's only a problem if we continue the cycle of making budgets based on rosy revenue predictions.

Kudos to Governor Brown for his restraint.

Yes, CA has a surplus this year, but look into the unfunded liabilities.

Well, if I recall correctly, technically the only 2 things we are required to allocate funds for in our state budget according to the California State Constitution are, in this order:

1. K-12 education
2. Payments on General Obligation Bond Debt.

Everything else can be sacrificed, and should if need be imo.

As far as unfunded govt employee retirement, this is a huge national issue, not just specific to California.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/st...ions-data.html

It is in the hundreds of billions. Where is that $ going to magically come from?

It's not all due right at this exact moment. Neither bond debt, nor unpaid retirement benefits are 100% due right now. They are paid incrementally.

We are walking a very fine line with the mounting retirement debt, on that we all agree. Something must be done to lower our future expenses.

Now factor in the changing demographics. Yes we're still growing in population but this is because of foreign immigration. Some of those immigrants are highly skilled Indians and Asians, but let's be honest many of those are third world, no/low educated individuals that are having lots of kids. (American birth rates don't replace themselves).

Yes, but as I was stating in another forum, Immigration is NOT a state issue, it's a federal issue and I believe there has been a decrease in illegals if I recall correctly.

HOWEVER, you should know that California attracts highly educated foreigners, actually a lot.

Originally Posted by 2012 American Factfinder US Census Bureau

Adults who moved from another country and the percentage who possess a Bachelor Degree or Higher, 2012
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana 51,218....46.8%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 11,689......30.0%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont 27,694........64.0%
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Ana 18,944.........75.6%

As well as those from other states:

Originally Posted by 2012 American Factfinder US Census Bureau

Adults who moved from another state and the percentage who possess a Bachelor Degree or Higher, 2012
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana 83,360....54.6%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 32,168......30.3%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont 47,979.......72.2%
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara 18,342......78.7%

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

And then there are structures like Jardinette Apts that architecture/history-loving forumers like myself don't find much value in either. We have some architectural gems that are worth saving but it certainly is not the majority.

I like the Jardinette.

The fact that this was built in 1927 makes it pretty significant; I think it was decades ahead of its time for an American building. Maybe it just needs to be restored to the way it originally looked (as do most old buildings that were repainted or restuccoed or remodeled over time).


media.archinform.net

But yeah, I wouldn't mind if most of West LA were demolished.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I like the Jardinette.

The fact that this was built in 1927 makes it pretty significant; I think it was decades ahead of its time for an American building. Maybe it just needs to be restored to the way it originally looked (as do most old buildings that were repainted or restuccoed or remodeled over time).


media.archinform.net

But yeah, I wouldn't mind if most of West LA were demolished.

Pasadena, South Pasadena, greater DTLA, parts of Hollywood, Wilshire corridor, Beverly Hills, West Adams, Angelino Heights (obviously), . . . Basically any neighborhood with prewar construction The number of neighborhoods that are actually worth fully preserving isn't many.

[TSSTaylor]

The President announced LA to be one of 5 "Promise Zones" http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-to...ic-initiative/

I hope the City Commission is wrong and maybe this was blown out of proportion for other reasons or motives, but I'd be concerned long term if the City Commission and the President were actively stepping in.

[202_Cyclist]

And here is another view of how LA is doing.

L.A. County poised for full economic recovery, study says

By Shan Li
LA Times
January 13, 2014

"The economy of Los Angeles County is rebounding with signs pointing to a full recovery, according to one report.

That is good news for California as a whole, since L.A. County alone contributes more than a quarter of the state's total economic output, or gross domestic product, according to a report by the National Assn. of Counties.

The study took a look at local economies around the nation on a county level by tracking the performance of some 3,069 counties through four indicators -- economic output, employment, the jobless rate and home prices..."

http://www.latimes.com/business/mone...#axzz2qKZ91TkH

[Chicago103]

Perhaps this is alluding to the relative (to decades ago) population stagnation in the past couple of censuses? The last decade that Los Angeles really boomed was the 1980's when it grew by 17.5%, in the 1990's it grew by only 6% not much more than Chicago's 4% and that decade New York City actually had higher growth (9.4%). In the 2000's LA only grew by 2.6% which is the lowest in it's entire history, however the census estimates for this decade so far look pretty good. Not that growth is everything, honestly I don't even know why cities like NYC or LA are even bothered by relative population stagnation, they are both at their peak populations and are in no danger of losing their #1 or #2 status sans some future succession proposal like how the San Fernando Valley almost did 12 years ago and even then that would be city limits only.

[TexasRE]

I don't think LA is in decline presently, but the city does need to forecast possibilities decades down the road to prevent its decline. LA like any other city needs to stay on top of its financial situation, what it will be able to do years and decades down the road. City planning is no easy job, things can change rapidly. What LA needs to do is make better use of its mass transit and develop accordingly nearby. That would hopefully, lessen the expense of highway/street upkeep. Create a critical mass of people to support the neighborhood retail, and at the same time, make the streets safer by having more people on the street. I've enjoyed my many trips to LA over these past decades, but there are several problems that would prevent me from living there. Traffic is horrendous, I can't accept the typical prolonged delays on the freeways to get anywhere. Crime is a major problem, there are neighborhoods that simply need major investment to get people to work. Housing stock needs to improve, that comes with more jobs in neighborhoods. Downtown was a ghost town for many years, finally, with new investment, people are on the streets. That's what will help LA in many ways, improve downtown, more white collar jobs, housing, hospitality /entertainment businesses, and a major improvement in retail. For as large as LA is, downtown always lacked retail, much like my hometown of Dallas. It's a ghost town, very very few people on the streets. With new housing, that'll create demand for more and better retail. Making walking or using mass transit to support these businesses. LA is a lifestyle, auto-driven, people need to walk to their nearby stores and businesses, not drive to nearby malls, and for what? The same things that nearby stores have but too lazy to walk there? Every major city has the same problem though, LA needs to make major strides here and it appears that they are. That's a very good sign.

If LA doesn't address the issues that are in front of them, I can see a major exodus in 10-15 years, demographics and lifestyles change during aging. Hopefully, LA meets the needs of its residents, so it can remain a shining star city.

[mhays]

Downtowns need residents to support groceries, furniture stores, and weekend-morning coffee shops. Residents add a dimension you don't get otherwise.

But unless you're talking six figure densities, large-scale retail in a downtown is more about tourists and non-downtown locals. A hotel room is worth several condos, because each room will be a bunch of shopping sprees per year. Non-downtown locals can be the downtown workforce plus a decent share of people mostly from inside the first ring of malls. You need multiple types if you want well-rounded retail.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by TexasRE

I don't think LA is in decline presently, but the city does need to forecast possibilities decades down the road to prevent its decline. LA like any other city needs to stay on top of its financial situation, what it will be able to do years and decades down the road. City planning is no easy job, things can change rapidly. What LA needs to do is make better use of its mass transit and develop accordingly nearby. That would hopefully, lessen the expense of highway/street upkeep. Create a critical mass of people to support the neighborhood retail, and at the same time, make the streets safer by having more people on the street. I've enjoyed my many trips to LA over these past decades, but there are several problems that would prevent me from living there. Traffic is horrendous, I can't accept the typical prolonged delays on the freeways to get anywhere. Crime is a major problem, there are neighborhoods that simply need major investment to get people to work. Housing stock needs to improve, that comes with more jobs in neighborhoods. Downtown was a ghost town for many years, finally, with new investment, people are on the streets. That's what will help LA in many ways, improve downtown, more white collar jobs, housing, hospitality /entertainment businesses, and a major improvement in retail. For as large as LA is, downtown always lacked retail, much like my hometown of Dallas. It's a ghost town, very very few people on the streets. With new housing, that'll create demand for more and better retail. Making walking or using mass transit to support these businesses. LA is a lifestyle, auto-driven, people need to walk to their nearby stores and businesses, not drive to nearby malls, and for what? The same things that nearby stores have but too lazy to walk there? Every major city has the same problem though, LA needs to make major strides here and it appears that they are. That's a very good sign.

If LA doesn't address the issues that are in front of them, I can see a major exodus in 10-15 years, demographics and lifestyles change during aging. Hopefully, LA meets the needs of its residents, so it can remain a shining star city.

Thankfully, everything you addressed here is being tackled in a huge and impressive way all over the LA metro. LA is transforming in front of our eyes and is headed in the right direction. This place will be drastically different by 2020

However, the crime statement is pretty much false. As a whole, the city of LA has an average if not below average crime rate compared to tehe rest of America and a very low crime rate for large cities. Yes, we still have bad areas, but even those areas have drastically improved over the last decade.

LAPD site with charts and tables if you like that stuff

http://lapdonline.org/crime_mapping_and_compstat

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by TexasRE

I don't think LA is in decline presently, but the city does need to forecast possibilities decades down the road to prevent its decline. LA like any other city needs to stay on top of its financial situation, what it will be able to do years and decades down the road. City planning is no easy job, things can change rapidly. What LA needs to do is make better use of its mass transit and develop accordingly nearby. That would hopefully, lessen the expense of highway/street upkeep. Create a critical mass of people to support the neighborhood retail, and at the same time, make the streets safer by having more people on the street. I've enjoyed my many trips to LA over these past decades, but there are several problems that would prevent me from living there. Traffic is horrendous, I can't accept the typical prolonged delays on the freeways to get anywhere. Crime is a major problem, there are neighborhoods that simply need major investment to get people to work. Housing stock needs to improve, that comes with more jobs in neighborhoods. Downtown was a ghost town for many years, finally, with new investment, people are on the streets. That's what will help LA in many ways, improve downtown, more white collar jobs, housing, hospitality /entertainment businesses, and a major improvement in retail. For as large as LA is, downtown always lacked retail, much like my hometown of Dallas. It's a ghost town, very very few people on the streets. With new housing, that'll create demand for more and better retail. Making walking or using mass transit to support these businesses. LA is a lifestyle, auto-driven, people need to walk to their nearby stores and businesses, not drive to nearby malls, and for what? The same things that nearby stores have but too lazy to walk there? Every major city has the same problem though, LA needs to make major strides here and it appears that they are. That's a very good sign.

If LA doesn't address the issues that are in front of them, I can see a major exodus in 10-15 years, demographics and lifestyles change during aging. Hopefully, LA meets the needs of its residents, so it can remain a shining star city.

Dallas is far more auto driven than LA is. LA is one of the safest cities in America now. How is crime a major problem? They've done very well in the past 10-15 years and crime continues to drop.

Downtown LA isn't a ghost town either. What are you comparing it to? I'm not seeing a major exodus.

[ChrisLA]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Dallas is far more auto driven than LA is. LA is one of the safest cities in America now. How is crime a major problem? They've done very well in the past 10-15 years and crime continues to drop.

Downtown LA isn't a ghost town either. What are you comparing it to? I'm not seeing a major exodus.

To further add to this comment

Downtown LA was never a ghost town, not even at its worst. In fact today Broadway has far less pedestrians today than when it was looking it worst. Latino shoppers and to a lesser extent African Americans whom still frequent the street in decent numbers up to the early 1980's. I would pass through downtown LA making a transfer onto another bus at 10pm at night on a weeknight back in the 80's I can can assure you there was plenty of people out and about. Of course about half were kind of questionable, but also many workers going home from their jobs and the buses were packed, standing room only.

TBT I had never seen such a dead downtown for a city it's size until I went to Dallas. Never has LA looked that vacant, we've always had areas in downtown LA that was bustling with total gridlock streets.

Today it certainly has a different type of crowd with more trendy restaurants, bars, clubs,and coffeehouses. Believe me I'm very excited to see the improvements. But I have also sad because I noticed that downtown LA streets seems less populated overall than when it was in a decline. If I had a scanner I could share some old photos I took when I was a teenager back in the day showing the huge crowds on Broadway. Sidewalks were so packed back then it would look like a wall of people coming towards you at each intersection as you crossed the street and everyone trying to maneuver around the crowds to reach the other side.

[Altauria]

Something catastrophic would have to take place to see a mass exodus of LA. Decreased living conditions having to do with poor city planning will never be one of them.

[dc_denizen]

LA: 1980s America, honed to perfection. 1985 LA looks like 2014 LA, despite Bladerunner.

(I am currently visiting and this is my impression staying in El Segundo. Seeing too many half-empty 80s office towers. Yes, it's not LA's fault that the banks consolidated, that the defense aerospace business dwindled, that foreign/HK money didn't deem LA the place to build lots of needle-point condo towers. But still).

That said, Manhattan Beach is pretty effing sweet and the general level of activity and bustle is top notch. Also the food is fantastic.

[Quixote]

http://www.fastcolabs.com/3026306/ho...a-startup-town

How Los Angeles Is Kind Of, Almost A Startup Town

All it takes is one IPO to make it official, say locals, and it feels like it's right around the corner.

By Anna Nicolaou
February 11, 2014

Los Angeles has never been a real tech titan. The city has yet to breed its own Facebook, Google, or Tumblr, whose vast successes generated sophisticated tech ecosystems in San Francisco and New York.

The big question lingering over every coffee shop and meetup in Silicon Beach right now: Will Los Angeles’s growing hotbed of startups finally yield a blockbuster company? There are reasons to be optimistic. Snapchat recently turned down a $3 billion buyout offer from Facebook, a bold move for any startup.

“Have you ever heard of an L.A. company doing that?” said Mike Jones, former CEO of Myspace and founder of Los Angeles "company-builder" called Science Inc. “We’ve heard of Google or Facebook turning it down, but not L.A. companies. That’s a good sign.” The Los Angeles tech scene has grown at a dizzying pace in the past few years. Los Angeles saw 130 technology venture capital deals in the first three quarters of 2013, valuing a total of $943 million, according to CB Insights. This is a 60% increase of $591 million valued from 95 deals for all of 2010.

“I was in New York at the beginning of Foursquare and Tumblr, and that was a great moment for New York,” said Courtney Holt, COO of Maker Studios, one of the hottest startups in L.A.

“(In 2012) I started to feel that energy here,” Holt added. “There’s a lot of companies with a lot of wind at their backs.”

So where are all of these entrepreneurs planting their feet?

Los Angeles is a sprawling city. Bad traffic and isolated neighborhoods make it difficult to form a tight community. Rather, several pockets have emerged across the city. Eli Portnoy graduated from the TechStars accelerator in New York and then moved to L.A. to start his company, ThinkNear. “When I was out in New York, there was a very concentrated area where startups were. You’d walk into a coffee shop and bump into an investor. That happens less in L.A.”

Santa Monica is undeniably the densest patch, earning it the title “Silicon Beach.” Silicon Beach houses 36% of all L.A. startups, according to represent.LA, a website that tracks startups in Los Angeles. Santa Monica boasts Snapchat, Hulu, and Riot Games, as well as popular local incubators Launchpad LA, Science Inc., and MuckerLab. Five miles east lies Culver City, another hip breeding ground. Pasadena, West L.A., Orange County, and downtown L.A. have also developed into budding hotspots.

The tech community is making strides to sew these neighborhoods into a cohesive group. In January 2013, a members-only club tailored toward the tech crowd opened in Santa Monica. Local entrepreneurs such as BeachMint founder Josh Berman invested in 41 Ocean, an upscale beachfront property off of Ocean Avenue. The Spanish-style courtyard restaurant attracts entrepreneurs, investors, and venture capitalists alike. It’s become the unofficial clubhouse for the tech community, says Angelo Sotira, CEO of online community DeviantArt. 41 Ocean is just five blocks away from Third Street Promenade, where hip coffee shops are another magnet for the Silicon Beach crowd. “The promenade is probably the number one place to find people,” says Portnoy.

But there’s a major roadblock that keeps Los Angeles tucked into the shadow of the Valley: money. Namely the dearth of it.

We're not talking about rich people--we're talking about capital. Venture activity in Los Angeles pales in comparison to Silicon Valley (as everyplace else on Earth does). Los Angeles has about one-tenth of the venture capital investment of Silicon Valley, according to incubator Be Great Partners’ 2013 L.A. startup industry report. Justin Choi, CEO of Nativo, named the hottest startup at L.A.’s November 2013 Tech Summit. Choi recalls that two years ago, when meeting with a VC firm in San Francisco, the partners expressed interest but told Choi there was one problem: “You’re all the way down in L.A.”

Choi calls the incident “disheartening,” but says he doesn’t hear these comments anymore. Silicon Valley funds are now visiting Los Angeles regularly to stake out local prospects. Lightspeed Venture Partners, a Menlo Park fund, backed Snapchat and Whisper. There’s still a severe lack of locally based investors. There are now roughly 50 angel and VC firms in L.A, making an average of about $4.07 million into each startup venture, according to Be Great Partners. “There’s a thriving angel community emerging, but it’s still thin in terms of pure L.A. based VC funds,” says Jones.

Hollywood is deeply embedded in the DNA of Los Angeles, and the tech world is no exception. Hollywood and startups are becoming increasingly intertwined as technology seeps into the core business that ran this town for the past 100 years. Entertainment, adtech, e-commerce, and media dominate the startup industry. Walter Driver, CEO of Scopely, says this is no accident.

“L.A. is about producing cultural experiences,” Driver said. “Snapchat, Whisper, Tinder, Scopely. They’re about finding new ways for humans to interact with each other.” Celebrities are on board. Ashton Kutcher is one of the most active angel investors in town. Leonardo DiCaprio, Justin Timberlake, Kim Kardashian, and many others have dipped their toes in the water with investments and endorsements. Hollywood’s golden hand also shapes the talent pool. The classic stereotype, that every waiter you meet in L.A. is an aspiring actor, may need to be updated. Hopeful actors, writers, and producers are catching on to the job opportunities in tech.

These are inexpensive, creative risk-takers, looking for flexible schedules and quick paychecks. Portnoy says it’s “an easy match.” “An actor or screenwriter has a dream, but in the meantime they want to pay the bills, and they want flexible hours,” he explains.

Others make a longer-term switch. Walter Driver was a screenwriter before founding Scopely. Courtney Holt studied film and worked in the music business for decades before joining Maker Studios.

Even the most devoted Angelenos admit that Los Angeles will probably never be the (Silicon) Valley. Still, there is hope that a game-changing company can nudge Los Angeles out of its little- brother status. According to Mike Jones, L.A. needs a big name to “really go for it,” launch an IPO and breed a mature tech ecosystem.

“One of the magic parts of the Valley is that someone like Zuckerberg says: I’m not going to sell. I’m going to build a huge company here,” said Jones. “And then he (Zuckerberg) creates billions in wealth, and an ecosystem is born.”

Whether or not it blossoms into Valley-esque proportions, Los Angeles is carving out an identity. As Walter Driver puts it, Hollywood is “the business of providing an escape, a peek into other realities.”

“That’s why film was invented. And these companies that are coming out of L.A. are a part of that,” he says.

It’s yet to be seen whether L.A. will get its long-term billion-dollar asset, although technology blogs are teeming with rumors that Snapchat or Rubicon will go public soon. Los Angeles is certainly approaching a tipping point, says Holt: “It’s a fascinating moment in time for us here.”

[DJM19]

This article is sort of positive? I dont know why it seems to be acting like LA is just on its way with start ups just because its not silicon valley. I've seen LA ranked the number 3 in start up ecosystems in the world.

Also, tired of people confusing Venice and Playa Vista as just being Santa Monica.

[SD_Phil]

Originally Posted by Quixote

http://www.fastcolabs.com/3026306/ho...a-startup-town

Santa Monica is undeniably the densest patch, earning it the title “Silicon Beach.” Silicon Beach houses 36% of all L.A. startups, according to represent.LA, a website that tracks startups in Los Angeles. Santa Monica boasts Snapchat, Hulu, and Riot Games, as well as popular local incubators Launchpad LA, Science Inc., and MuckerLab. Five miles east lies Culver City, another hip breeding ground. Pasadena, West L.A., Orange County, and downtown L.A. have also developed into budding hotspots.

One of these things is not like the other, one of these things does not belong...