Broadway Revitalization Development News [Archive] - Page 2

Westsidelife

September 6th, 2009, 05:28 AM

^^ most people? That really depends on what you mean by most people. The Broadway corridor sells more than old town and lake disdrict combined! Frankly, I don't think Broadway should be catered specifically towards the tourist business. There's plenty of that crap all around L.A. The only things that need to change on Broadway are the signs and storefronts. A big clean up. Honestly, Broadway is one of the busiest pedestrian corridors in most of L.A. If you don't like the people there, then that's your problem. The more I think about it, the more I feel that all it needs is a complete wash down.

Most people I know wouldn't buy any of that merchandise. Like I said, Downtown is already saturated with swap meets. It's called the Fashion District. And while I want all those businesses to vacate Broadway, I certainly don't want to see Gap, Old Navy, and the like replace them. How sterile would that be for an area with so much history and character? I would like to see some cutting edge mom and pop businesses -- tea houses, sushi bars, ice cream parlors, chocolate factories, candy shops, contemporary fashion retailers (like Popkiller in Little Tokyo), restaurants with outdoor dining, etc. I know this subject isn't the most politically correct, but you have to understand that cities are constantly evolving. Long before Broadway was what it is now, it was LA's premier entertainment and shopping district. We are trying to bring back those glory days and that is ever so apparent with our plans to have streetcars (hopefully the vintage Red Cars) once again running up and down the stretch of Broadway. While some may see these revitalization efforts as an attempt to weed out the current Hispanic ambiance, just know that the coalition leading such efforts is headed by Jose Huizar, a Hispanic. Mayor Villaraigosa, a big proponent of the revitalization, also happens to be Hispanic.

kidA

September 6th, 2009, 05:35 AM

^^Why evict them? They aren't doing anything illegal. They're running a business and people shop there.

Westsidelife

September 6th, 2009, 06:10 AM

^ I didn't even use the word "evict", did I? Simply put, our civic leaders want to maximize Broadway's potential and that doesn't come in the form of swap meets selling cheap items. It is in the way of revitalizing historic movie palaces for live entertainment, having streetcars running up and down the stretch of Broadway to pay homage to this city's history with the Pacific Electric Railway, rehabbing old edifices with ornate facades to give off architectural substance, and bringing back the kinds of businesses that once made Broadway a one of a kind destination. Unfortunately, all of this is at the expense of the current Hispanic ambiance. It isn't entirely at odds with Hispanic interests. Let me remind you, the Bringing Back Broadway coalition is chaired by a Hispanic. The mayor, one of the biggest proponents of the revitalization efforts, is also Hispanic. No, it's not politically correct, but we don't live in a politically correct society. Sorry.

kidA

September 6th, 2009, 07:05 AM

I wasn't talking to you hence the arrows.

milquetoast

September 6th, 2009, 07:43 AM

milquetoast

September 6th, 2009, 07:46 AM

Maybe Disney can come in and drop half a billion like they did for Times Square ............. :lol:

croyboy

September 6th, 2009, 08:10 AM

I agree with Fern. Downtown is already saturated with swap meets, especially in the Fashion District. Besides, most people wouldn't buy any of that crap, especially the tourists we are trying to attract.

yup it is full of swapmeets, but i strongly disagree with the last sentence. most people DO buy that "crap". everything is constantly selling and i don't think you will get more people downtown by trading those local buyers and sellers for tourists. i believe you would actually lose revenue and pedestrian traffic on broadway if it's dependant on tourists. more people crowd broadway OR the fashion district than i see at venice boardwalk or third street promenade.

and we're not trying to make broadway or fashion district more touristy (at all...ever). it's about district and neighborhood accessibility along with beautification. tourists can enjoy it with us if they want to, but this is mostly for us. i'm not people-pleasing anyone but ourselves here. we're the ones that will have to live with this, tourists can come and go as they please. and they end up coming to L.A. anyway, just because it's L.A..

Westsidelife

September 6th, 2009, 08:18 AM

and we're not trying to make broadway or fashion district more touristy (at all...ever). it's about district and neighborhood accessibility along with beautification. tourists can enjoy it with us if they want to, but this is mostly for us. i'm not people-pleasing anyone but ourselves here. we're the ones that will have to live with this, tourists can come and go as they please. and they end up coming to L.A. anyway, just because it's L.A..

Yeah, forgive me. It was poor articulation on my part. I actually agree with you and this is what I was trying to say.

Fern~Fern*

September 6th, 2009, 08:49 AM

Eviction was Fern Ferns #260 entry AND that's exactly what would happen if Broadway were to.. wait for it.....

^ It might sound cruel but let's keep these Swapmeets under control. As it is they took over the Alley on Santee and the everything around within a mile. So why let it keep expanding into Broadway, what's next LA Live or the parking lots behing Macy's on 7th Street... :ohno: "Enough"

We Want Swapmeets Out of Broadway!!!!!! :bash:

Maybe Disney can come in and drop half a billion like they did for Times Square .............

^ and they should, they owe L.A. some Love!!!! Disney Hall was the beginning and Broadway should be there next big $$$ investment. If they can afford Marvel Comics then Broadwayis ready to get Disneyfied!

ArchiTennis

September 6th, 2009, 09:09 AM

Yeah, forgive me. It was poor articulation on my part. I actually agree with you and this is what I was trying to say.

I never would have guessed. I also agree with croyboy. As a business owner, i would NEVER change something that producess a substantial amount of cash flow. There needs to be incentives set up by the city in order to entice all the owners along Broadway to clean up and fix up. The only evictions I agree with are with the theaters themselves. I think those do need to be set back up to their original purpose.

pesto

September 6th, 2009, 09:10 AM

The case against swap meets: Broadway has the finest architecture, the most beautiful theaters and the most central built-up stretch in LA. It should have uses that fit these attributes not distract or destroy them. Mid to upper end deparmtent stores, restaurants, cafes are probably ideal, but some reasonable variance is OK. Swapmeets are utterly inconsistent with the nature of the architecture. They would be fine on Maple or Los Angeles or any of 100 other streets, so why have them on the one street that could legitimately rival the best of London or NY?

I am also in favor of just streetcar; no cars or buses. I would also close Regent St., or Broadway and 7th in the Times Sq. area. I don’t see what cars bring to the party.

I do see what tourists bring to the party. I would make concessions for them on Broadway and other touristy areas. Main, Spring, Hill, etc., can be for the locals.

klamedia

September 6th, 2009, 05:55 PM

Eviction was Fern Ferns #260 entry AND that's exactly what would happen if Broadway were to.. wait for it..... Gentrify! Ta Da!! Because the amount of retrofitting for those theatres old bones would drive up the cost of everything. The area would be an active, big money theatre district and there would be no place for swap meets or anyone who would not be able to afford the new rent. The remaining theatres not retrofitted would be deemed obsolete and razed. You'd see Starbucks and diamond stores! The economy would have to be running on rails (no pun intended) for this all to happen. Give it 8 years? This thread has the beginnings of an old fashioned, L. A. racial, ethnic hoedown! Anyone out there think this city can support a theatre culture like that? So many theatres. I'd say 4 extra at the most is what this town can support. If single theatre movie watching ever comes back in vogue, add a few more.
"Milq" the current tenants already pay more rent than they do in Beverly Hills, business is good down there. What the city is attempting to do with Bdwy and what they will eventually do is str8 up social engineering. They will actually have to give breaks to the new "desired" businesses that move down there because they'd go under paying the rents that the current businesses do. This is not about integration of the market but exclusion. Just as all of those porn shops were surviving and thriving in Times Square prior Disney, the plan for the famous district had changed and no longer included peep shows and prostitutes. The plan has changed for Broadway as well and it no longer includes swap meets, Fallas Paredes nor a bunch of folks walking around Broadway who look like they were shipped in a box from Oaxaca the night before.

pesto

September 7th, 2009, 03:38 AM

I think of social engineering as an attempt by the government to change what people think or believe to be desirable rather than the government simply carrying out what the electorate has told them is desirable. I view everything that is proposed on Broadway as the latter. Repairing buildings, restoring normal signage and vendor density, cleaning sidewalks, putting in a streetcar is just good governance. DT LA happens to be Hispanic, but we already know that Huizar, Perry and His Honor are behind it.

Theaters: I don’t believe we can support 8 or 10 theaters. To me, this is the biggest hole in the redevelopment plan.

BTW, I spent most of the day in Santa Cruz and I had not remembered that the redevelopment of Pacific Ave. after the earthquake had effectively broken it into two pieces: the touristy, yuppy area (cafes, Urban Outfitters, custom jewelry, paper products) and the “down home” area (bars, clubs, Streetlight Records, used clothing). Both are nice and walkable. The yuppified area has more street improvement, but this may be because merchants contributed more in that area. In any event, DT will probably have to do the same, given the size of the area to be redeveloped.

pesto

September 7th, 2009, 04:22 AM

Westsidelife

September 7th, 2009, 04:49 AM

Theaters: I don’t believe we can support 8 or 10 theaters. To me, this is the biggest hole in the redevelopment plan.

You've stated this time and time again. May I ask why you feel this way? I think part of the reason why LA hasn't evolved into a full-fledged theater city is because we lack the proper venues. Broadway presents a unique opportunity to break through that barrier.

Westsidelife

September 7th, 2009, 05:18 AM

This post is a good summation of how I feel...

Yes we do, we are just about ten to fifteen years behind the curve of inner city renewal compared to Chicago which has undergone decline and renewal ahead of us.

Renewing the Broadway theaters is not really an issue of Anglo vs. Latino. It is recognition of the fact that we have a severely underutilized resource in this city (the downtown under used theaters) that could almost equal New York's theater district. We also have the biggest concentration of actors, musicians, writers, and creative people in the country. We are also a pretty good theater town contrary to poular opinion. There are about 250 active theater companies in LA. We actually see more productions in a year than NYC according to the folks at Reprise. The productions are just smaller and have much shorter runs. Why? because tourists come to NYC to see the shows. In LA the theater is pretty much supported by the locals. I hate to tell you how many times I have gone to NYC or London and found myself sitting next to someone from LA making a pilgrimage to see "theater".

You should really see what Chicago has done renewing its old movie theater district on Randolph Street. We could do it bigger and better.

Consider the inactive theaters downtown, many of them could be converted back with relatively little effort.

1.Million dollar
2. orpheum,
3. Los Angeles
4. arcade
5. belasco (on hill street)
6.cameo
7. globe
8. kim sing (in Chinatown, still close)
9. Linda Lea (recently reopened as Imaginasian theater showing Asian movies)
10. Mayan
11. Merced in Olvera street
12. Olympic auditorium
13, Olympic theater (on eighth)
14. Music Hall
15. Palace
16. Palace seventh st.
17. Regent (Main Street)
18. Rialto
19. Roxie
20. State
21. Tower
22. United Artists
23. Warner Brothers

Then let's not forget the theaters that are still open

24. Ahmanson
25. taper
26. Dorothy Chandler
27. Redcat
28-29-30 LA Theater center
31. Henry Hwang theater (Little Tokyo)
32. Shrine
33. Japan America Theater
34. St. Vibiana's
35. Bovard auditorium
36. Bing theater
37. Nokia

That's almost forty potential venues in the greater downtown area and I left out Bob Baker's marionettes, Disney Hall and the auditoriums at Thornton and MOCA. If most of these theaters were brought back to life with live theater, I am sure both locals and tourists would flock for this type of attraction. Especially considering the additional theater available in Hollywood, NOHO, the West side, Pasadena and scattered all over the city. Actually Hollywood could be redeveloped in the same way giving us two possibly three (counting NOHO) major theater clusters. LA could evolve into an alternative to London or New York for theater and entertainment lovers.

croyboy

September 7th, 2009, 06:49 AM

Theaters: I don’t believe we can support 8 or 10 theaters. To me, this is the biggest hole in the redevelopment plan.

how many screens or stages are in each theatre? it's probably so few that you might walk down broadway once and not find a single duplicated showing.

croyboy

September 7th, 2009, 07:03 AM

Watch out what you wish for. If you really wanted to restored Broadway to what it was, the principal top end and middle shopping street, you would have Nordstrom, Macys, Saks, Barneys, Neiman; Bed, Bath & Beyond; Nike; Fry's; and the usual mall women's stores. I would guess there were no trendy, cutting edge stores of any kind.

But that's OK; there's Main, Spring, Hill and the side streets.

it would probably be better if businesses that moved onto broadway are not regular items you can find in just any other old city or neighborhood. every area that people go to or live in have something different... that's why some people live there or go there in the first place because it's something not found anywhere else.

if anything, put something different on broadway that attracts people to live there. it's why people may choose to live in old town pasadena, downtown culver city, santa monica, long beach, k-town, hollywood, and so on... put in something unique.

klamedia

September 7th, 2009, 06:21 PM

I think of social engineering as an attempt by the government to change what people think or believe to be desirable rather than the government simply carrying out what the electorate has told them is desirable.

Broadway already does good business, the merchants are able to pay rents that even the "desirable" shops couldn't sustain. So what electorate has told whom what? Are the folks shopping along Broadway already included in that electorate? I want Broadway to come back just like everybody else but let's not sugar-coat and do a little jig around what is really being attempted here.....which is change or "diversify" the foot traffic along this strip by forcing the market.
And since when does anyone so long as they are of like ethnicity or race get a green light to do whatever they please to others of similar background? Villar and Huizar are latino and Perry is black so I guess that makes it alright......bullshit! Just call it as it is.
What makes this interesting is that the merchants already are paying fine rent that the incoming "edgy" stores could not afford and must be lowered to attract. You already have a rapt clientele that patronizes these places. But yet a few folks want to change it all up. You want to drive out or minimize the impact of a certain demographic and the places that they shop in this area to attract another type of demographic.

Task 1:End the lease on Fallas Paredes and redevelop the theatre that this store is occupying into a single movie theatre and entertainment venue.
Note: This would drive away the current clientele that patronizes this merchant which is predominantly latino.
Solution: Must be done for the greater good of the entire district.

pesto

September 8th, 2009, 12:05 AM

Theaters: First, is the argument that we don’t have the proper venues; if so, what is the extensive list all about? The real problem is demand, which drives venues, attendance and price.

Movies have moved to multiplexes (even Westwood can’t sustain single theaters after having 15 of them 30 years ago). Someone will open a multiplex at 4th and Los Angeles and game over. I dislike them, but they are the economic chosen ones.

Live theater is dominated by Hollywood (large theaters on Hollywood; a group of 6 theaters on 3 blocks on Santa Monica and other pockets). NoHo, Westwood, WeHo, Venice, etc., also have pockets. Since demand also largely comes from these areas, I don’t see DT stealing it away.

In any event, much of this theater is supported by institutional contributions; it does not make money. The great majority of theaters are 99 seat equity waiver theaters where the actors are not paid and play royalties are minimal.

London and NY are the only real theater areas in the west. They rely on tourists very heavily and LA does not have nearly the cultural tourism or governement and business people on accounts needed to support $150 tickets. Moreover, we are not culturally oriented toward live stage: movies and computer screens are dominant here. So I don’t see either tourism or large-scale local support.

Finally, the theaters need huge work. They are generally big (1500 plus) and in poor shape. I would try renovating 1 or 2 to go along with the 2 in decent shape now. I’m guessing even the Orpheum loses money now. If they fill-up then we can go from there.

I love the list from “svs” but it doesn’t mean much. You could also toss in a hundred more warehouse performance spaces and hotel venues (I’ve seen Greek tragedy performed in an old bank building on Hill). The problem is the demand. If the demand really were there, somebody would be exploiting it. I suspect that live music or clubs would be a bigger draw than live theater. And that would pirate from the already under-used existing venues.

pesto

September 8th, 2009, 12:07 AM

Social engineering: I can only assume that the elected officials reflect the public sentiment. If not, the opposition should form their “Keep Broadway Rundown” and “Back to 1980” coalitions and drive them from power. It is a democracy and the Latino/liberal coalition controls 70 percent of the vote and City Council in LA. If that’s what the people want, let them shout it out.

As a practical matter, I suspect that given the size of the area under redevelopment, at least 2 or 3 blocks will be down-market. I have never seen actual statistics for rents on Broadway vs. Rodeo. I am curious how these profitable discounters will do if they have to actually use appropriate signage, one business per building, working windows and doors and proper ventilation rather than being basically street vendors.

In any event, it is the right of the landlord to determine if he wants a particular tenant or not and the people behind the Broadway changes include basically ALL the landlords. Are these people stupid or do they see something that is going to triple the value of their properties (that is, triple the net rents)?

Finally, nobody is trying to ban these businesses. The idea is to move them to buildings that have less potential architecturally than those on Broadway.

klamedia

September 8th, 2009, 03:46 AM

The folks who shop and spend their money on Broadway are not part of the "liberal latino elite". The folks who shop on Broadway are not going to coalesce into some political lion to keep Broadway the way it is, they may not even be aware what the grand plan actually is for the area and then they probably would welcome it. The landlords are banking on the fact that the businesses that will be moving into these spaces will be subsidized at least initially by the Bring Broadway Back Coalition which is either gov't or privately funded or a mix of both. They're betting on the fact that if Broadway is a success then they will even be able to charge higher rents in the future. I need to find the article but at least one of these businesses has actually purchased the entire building so they're not going anywhere.

And you're right, this is a democracy at least in name. So were you given a chance to vote on the revitalization of Broadway in the last election? You know and I know that this isn't an issue for the electorate, this falls under planning, design and renewal and these things are rarely given to the voters to vote on. If that was the case we'd be having weekly elections on where to place the next stop light in the city. So "pest" come clean. You and I both know what this is about.

milquetoast

September 8th, 2009, 08:50 AM

Klams. In one sentence. Straight up. (as Janeane Garafalo would spew) What is this all about? . It's monetary to me. We launch a lot of production that eventually works it's way out. Would be nice if we had some patron ready venues on Broadway but theatre isn't really a money maker. Here, or elsewhere. Barely. Paltry. I just can't stand these edifices being used for rent and tax. Makes me sick, but that's life. . Is Broadway booming or just making lemons into lemonade? .abbreviated
Last week Variety debunked the myth that bad times are good times for showbiz. The article, Showbiz not always recession proof had a great overview of Hollywood and Broadway’s financial performance during major recessions in recent history. It provides some very intriguing insight about the past, and some interesting and/or scary facts about what is happening currently.

Interesting fact and reality check – despite the great number of wonderful productions this year, profitability is down. I don’t think many folks will be shocked by this. Without question the last 12 months have offered a wonderful array of great productions, especially straight plays, but good reviews aren’t turning into full houses.

Like many observers, legit lawyer-turned-producer John Breglio calls the 2008-09 season exceptional from an artistic standpoint — "The high quality of the plays, revivals and new ones, and the high-profile stars is (why) we had a good season."

And from an economic point of view, Breglio is unenthused about recent tuners: "For musicals, it was not a good season," he says. The only certifiable recouped hit is the low-budget "Hair," capitalized at $5.75 million.

"Billy Elliot," which opened more than eight months ago, has yet to return its reported $20 million investment and did not begin to sell out on a regular basis until after the Tony noms were announced. The $16 million "West Side Story" is months away from recoupment. . So, while box office may be up a little, profitability is way down, with enormous losses tallied on failed shows, beginning with "A Tale of Two Cities" early in the season.

Scary Fact Number One – It’s all about the stars baby! . Look there have always been stars on Broadway. The relationship between Hollywood and commercial theater has always been important. But over the last few years we have come to see more and more limited run, star vehicles that have ushered in the era of “event theater”:

As for plays, with the exception of the occasional blockbuster like "God of Carnage," which just went on a six-week hiatus, the new paradigm appears to be the star-driven 12-week run where investors "just want to get their money back," says Breglio. "That’s just going to get worse and worse."

Stars like Hugh Jackman, Daniel Craig and Jude Law look to turn the incoming "A Steady Rain" and "Hamlet" into immediate hits. It’s only for 12 weeks — "but just when we need them most, in September," says Shubert CEO Philip J. Smith, referring to the worst B.O. month on the legit calendar.

This brings us to Scary Fact Number Two:

But there’s another key factor that has made Broadway this season very different from that of previous recessions: the new premium-price ticketing system.

"But the economics of the premium seats is a temporary fix," says longtime producer Emanuel Azenberg. "Ultimately the theater will be a luxury, because at some point you hit a ceiling. It’s why you have 38 producers on a show, because you need $20 million to do a musical and $3 million to do a play."

The late Beverly Sills maintained she watched the balcony, not the orchestra, to see if an opera was selling well. . Her thinking is no longer viable. Just last season, the Met Opera, with its top-priced ticket of $320, felt the need to institute a donor-sponsored rush program to sell some of its orchestra seats at $25 a pop.

Breglio says $300 tickets on Broadway or at the Met "aren’t selling like they were three years ago."

Scary Fact Number Three:

Nonprofit theaters have also worked magic to make the 2009 recession look like no other. As Lincoln Center Theater’s Bernard Gersten points out, "Three nonprofit theaters (LCT, Roundabout, MTC) now have Broadway-size houses. That’s a huge shift from 25 years ago," when even Lincoln Center’s Vivian Beaumont was dark during the early 1980s recession.

Only five new productions were offered by the nonprofit sector in 1982-83, the same number offered in the 1990-91 season. Last season, that number topped 10.

"Our grosses are part of that Broadway cume," Gersten says of the nonprofits. "Also, we bring at least half a dozen plays to the list, which helps fill up the (Tony) slots."

In the 2009-10 season, the overall B.O. tally should benefit from two nonprofit tuners, the Roundabout’s "Bye Bye Birdie" revival this fall and LCT’s new "Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown" in the spring. Add to that at least eight plays.

Those productions will add dollars that have nothing to do with profits, and should push Broadway’s total tally to more than $1 billion for the first time ever — making the ongoing recession look a lot kinder than it really is.

Everyone in the business is certainly aware of the growth of the nonprofit theater movement in New York over the last 25 years. Nonprofits have had a huge impact (some might say have taken over) off-Broadway. Now, FIVE Broadway houses are populated exclusively by nonprofits – and at any given time you are likely to see one or two more with a Lincoln Center or Roundabout show. All of those subscribers certainly help add to the grosses. (As for the impact of nonprofits on commercial theater note that this doesn’t even factor in transfers like Next To Normal, Hair, Avenue Q.)

Is the fact that nonprofits will bring 10+ productions to Broadway this season scary? Is it a good thing? I don’t think it is scary, but that doesn’t mean it is a good thing. It is really difficult to gather perspective without the budget details for the individual theatres. I don’t know whether M.T.C., Roundabout, or L.C.T. will have deficits this year, but I would imagine they are like most theaters and therefore they will, but from the outside, I don’t think anyone can say whether this is because of the Broadway productions – for all we know the Broadway shows are helping the bottom line. Jodi Schoenbrun Carter OFF-STAGE-RIGHT.COM

pesto

September 8th, 2009, 06:35 PM

Well, meaning is in the eye of beholder, so it is likely that you and I (and Milq and everyone else) have different meanings for what is going on DT. To me it is redeveloping the city and to you the removal of undesirables. Someone else might agree that it is redeveloping the city but that this is a bad thing. I have to concede that some businesses will presumably be gone after the development and that it’s a matter of opinion if swap meets are better than pricey cafes. Purely a matter of opinion.

So sticking to somewhat more factual issues: If the landlords and latinos and economic elites and liberals support it, whose left? Only the very recent immigrants? I am resonably sure they don’t care much about whether they buy on Broadway or Main or Maple DT (or pretty much any street between Atlantic and Western, from DT to 130th). If DT is mildly gentrifying, presumably they will move to other neighborhoods in any event. And it’s not like there aren’t other low rent Hispanic neighborhoods in the greater LA area. I didn’t shed any tears for the drug dealers, rip-off shops and pornographers who had to find new neighborhoods when SoHo or Times Sq. redeveloped and I don’t plan to do so for guys selling bad quality CD’s, knock-off Dodgers hats, and electronics whose warranty won’t be honored. They and their customers have a hundred places to go without butchering art deco and beaux arts treasures.

As to voting, of coure you don’t vote issue by issue, but elected officials normally keep a nose to the wind, especially when city money is involved. It’s a rare politician that spends city money in opposition to Latino business interests or Latino fairness issues in LA. Yet several liberal, Latino politicians seem to be doing that and are joined by Jan Perry, who has no problem bad mouthing business (including Anschutz and LA Live). They must believe there is something important going on here and that their consituents support it. Admitedly they are on the landlord’s side, but all that proves is that the landlord’s believe that a revamped Broadway is going to raise property values, and property values typically only go up when there is an expectation of people and businesses moving in, and increased customer spending.

Westsidelife

September 8th, 2009, 09:31 PM

Theaters: First, is the argument that we don’t have the proper venues; if so, what is the extensive list all about? The real problem is demand, which drives venues, attendance and price.

Well, the theaters would need to be rehabbed for live theatrical performances. And before that can happen, there needs to be the right clientele, which plays into the whole theme of revitalization. Again, this isn't about weeding out the undesirables. The unfortunate reality is that economic progress and urban revitalization often come at the cost of minority populations.

Movies have moved to multiplexes (even Westwood can’t sustain single theaters after having 15 of them 30 years ago). Someone will open a multiplex at 4th and Los Angeles and game over. I dislike them, but they are the economic chosen ones.

This has been a topic of discussion in this thread time and time again -- cinema vs. live theater. I don't think those theaters along Broadway are suited for contemporary blockbusters. They have a certain character and ambiance that is worthy of something much more special. Besides, we already have the Regal Cinemas at LA Live. There's your multiplex.

Live theater is dominated by Hollywood (large theaters on Hollywood; a group of 6 theaters on 3 blocks on Santa Monica and other pockets). NoHo, Westwood, WeHo, Venice, etc., also have pockets. Since demand also largely comes from these areas, I don’t see DT stealing it away.

But I'm talking about recruiting popular Broadway plays and musicals -- Mamma Mia!, Jersey Boys, Lion King, Phantom of the Opera, etc. At present, there are only two venues that host such shows -- Pantages and Ahmanson.

London and NY are the only real theater areas in the west. They rely on tourists very heavily and LA does not have nearly the cultural tourism or governement and business people on accounts needed to support $150 tickets. Moreover, we are not culturally oriented toward live stage: movies and computer screens are dominant here. So I don’t see either tourism or large-scale local support.

Who says none of that can't change? And I disagree about the cultural tourism. How does Vegas manage to do it?

Finally, the theaters need huge work. They are generally big (1500 plus) and in poor shape. I would try renovating 1 or 2 to go along with the 2 in decent shape now. I’m guessing even the Orpheum loses money now. If they fill-up then we can go from there.

Michael Delijani is the owner of many of the theaters and he's pretty committed to turning them around. Read some of the articles posted on the first few pages if you haven't already.

I love the list from “svs” but it doesn’t mean much. You could also toss in a hundred more warehouse performance spaces and hotel venues (I’ve seen Greek tragedy performed in an old bank building on Hill). The problem is the demand. If the demand really were there, somebody would be exploiting it. I suspect that live music or clubs would be a bigger draw than live theater. And that would pirate from the already under-used existing venues.

I don't know if there's the demand needed to support the 12 theaters within the Bringing Back Broadway jurisdiction, but I certainly believe we can support more business. Wicked did very well during its run at the Pantages.

pesto

September 8th, 2009, 11:04 PM

WSL: I am extremely skeptical but am not going to repeat myself. Let’s look at the upside:

1. tourism from Asia is bound to increase; this could be a source of theater goers just as NY capitalizes on the rest of the US, and London on continental Europe
2. as recent immigrants learn English, they or their children could be another source of patrons
3. gambling could be legalized (LV’s secret to making clubs and theaters successful)
4. a certain level of density creates critical mass; people coming DT for other reasons may add a show to their itinerary
5. the DT community tends to be artsy; perhaps they have an above-average interest in live theater;
6. maybe sign up Cirque de Soleil for one theater? They bring their own fan base.
7. maybe Dudamel’s or Placido Domingo’s charisma can get something musical going in one of the theaters
8. maybe a muscial history of LA: tribute bands for doo-wop; the Beach Boys; the Mama’s and Papa’s, the Eagles; the Doors; and as much punk and new wave as audiences can stand.
9. and everybody should sign up for a Shakespeare class this semester and go to a live theater performance this month (Goldstar makes much of it affordable); we’ll turn LA into London in no time

klamedia

September 9th, 2009, 02:36 AM

Well, the theaters would need to be rehabbed for live theatrical performances. And before that can happen, there needs to be the right clientele, which plays into the whole theme of revitalization. Again, this isn't about weeding out the undesirables. The unfortunate reality is that economic progress and urban revitalization often come at the cost of minority populations.

That's all I wanted to hear. Frank and honest. I can't believe I'm saying this but thank you "westy" for being real!

"Pest" I think a musical about the music that has come out of LA would be highly successful, unique and could bring back Broadway singlehandedly! But amidst all of the new wave, punk and surf music you failed to mention the biggest money making forms of music to ever come out of Los Angeles and what will pack'em in: The Hair Band and Gangsta Rap phenomenas. I'm just wondering what high profile Hollywood actors we could get to play Axl Rose and Eazy E?

pesto

September 9th, 2009, 06:46 AM

Do they kill each other at the end?

I'm never sure any more what will sell and what won't since I laughed off 'N Sync as sure losers.

But since you mention it, Broadway could probably support 2 LA based music shows; one for the pre-1980 crowd and one for the punk/hip-hop/metal crowd. There is a rich heritage to pick from. And jazz would contribute as well, so maybe 3 rotating shows.

And let's not forget musicians who died or got arrested or hospitalized here.

milquetoast

September 9th, 2009, 07:13 AM

I can see those shows uhhhhh, not doing well! That kind of thing is called "Lightning in a Bottle" and you just never know. I see more traditional theatre downtown but,.. eh. One thing is for sure. Some of those theatres need to be reconditioned now! This next seismic event will weed out the weak.

pesto

September 9th, 2009, 07:43 AM

I just read the first few pages of this thread. It began 2 years ago with an article on a new plan for Broadway. The reactions ranged from skepticism to complete frustration. People blamed the city and property owners for the state of Broadway, with claims that they were stupid or lazy or didn’t care. Hopes were expressed that Broadway could some day be like 3rd St. Promenade.

The tone is very different now. There is very little skepticism about the basic idea of street improvements, a streetcar, housing improvements, repairs and cleaning, public and private commitment to change. I think we also now agree with what was pointed out even back then: that the failure of prior plans was that they pushed a vision that was not in line with what people wanted, and that the only way to bring back Broadway is to utilize existing and growing demand.

Interestingly, the demand was thought to be coming from Park/5th and the Grand Ave. Project. Instead it is coming from LA Live and thousands of individual decisions people have made to move into lofts and high-rises on or near Broadway. Now these people are demanding better restaurants, better street life, more shopping options, and the landlords are willing to take a chance on building a new long-term economic base to cater to them and tourists.

And our aspirations are for something so far beyond 3rd St. that it isn’t even in the rear view mirror. Major retailers, multi-ethnic markets, edgy boutiques, cafes, 24/7 nightlife and theaters to rival NY and London, transportation connections to every part of DT and the Southland. And all of this occurring in the middle of a recession.

It’s far from a physical reality but the first change comes inside the head.

pesto

September 11th, 2009, 02:48 AM

See attached article re SF closing Market to some auto traffic. I had wondered about why 3rd St. in SM had done this as have other places, but SF had not. As I suspected, the shopowners worried it would hurt business (although I am not sure why).

I can't help but believe that closing off Broadway to everything but the streetcars and pedestrians would be a great benefit to walkability, cafes, chess players, musicians, etc.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13308770?nclick_check=1

croyboy

September 11th, 2009, 06:25 AM

closing market street in san francisco is like closing olympic or figueroa here. besides 3rd street promenade, i don't support the closing of either market street or broadway to private vehicles. traffic flow would be choked even more than it is already.

in market street's case, it would be especially disruptive to traffic since market has very very few crossings and alternatives. the city would literally be split in two without any way to cross the street except by foot... very inconvenient for those living in the cheaper side by the south freeway (oakland bridge) that work by the piers and ports.

broadway has a better "flexibility" of traffic flow as far as crossing from east downtown to west downtown... but can anyone here imagine having to move all the traffic on broadway daily (busy enough during non-peak hours) onto the surrounding streets which are also already heavy in traffic?

milquetoast

September 11th, 2009, 10:42 AM

Recent use of The Los Angeles lobby on September 8; The DLANC board meeting http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee192/trolltoast/album%202/er575757.jpg ERIC RICHARDSON FLICKR

pesto

September 11th, 2009, 06:12 PM

They look kind of under-dressed. Like maybe Russia after the revolution.

klamedia

September 11th, 2009, 07:14 PM

I don't think I want Broadway closed off to traffic either. Part of the charm is the hustle and bustle of people on the sidewalks and the staggering amount of busses running up and down the street.

croyboy

September 11th, 2009, 11:02 PM

^^ yes. another romantic quality of broadway as it's traffic conditions currently exist

pesto

September 12th, 2009, 01:34 AM

Market is fairly lightly travelled now due to the impossibility of making left turns off or on and the priority lanes provided for bus and rail. Closing it will have minimal effect on car traffic. Traffic will still be going across Market between the financial district and SOMA; it just won’t drive east along Market. But it will be interesting to see how the experiment goes. I would assume closure in both directions will follow, with expanded sidewalks, cafés, etc., and one of the great walking streets of the world. Fifth Avenue with cafes and charm.

I don’t see that much traffic effect in DT LA, except for an increase in bus traffic, which would presumably move to Hill and Spring mostly. My sense is that there are not that many cars that are using Broadway for through traffic since it is very slow compared to other streets DT. And, of course, the point is to get the local traffic out of their cars. If this doesn’t work, then the whole idea of streetcars and narrowing Broadway is ill-conceived to begin with.

The most interesting part to me is the reaction of the businesses, which switched to support after the test days. Maybe there can be tests on Broadway in conjunction with the streetcar construction.

But it's a matter of taste: hustle and bustle like traffic on 2nd Ave. or 42nd St. or cafes and strolling like 3rd St. or Fressgasse in Frankfurt (plus streetcar).

klamedia

September 12th, 2009, 02:41 AM

Broadway 1945
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q138/tmaxx6/broadway1945.jpg

milquetoast

September 12th, 2009, 10:20 AM

That is kind of mirroring the drive for shutting down vehicular traffic in Westwood.

croyboy

September 12th, 2009, 10:27 AM

as much as we would all like to make L.A. (or any other city) walkable, i believe all means of transportation should be in use.

vehicle traffic will not be redused by making a street pedestrian only (it would more likely clog our streets and polute our air for longer periods of time). it does encourage walking on the one street, but the business and private "attractions" should do that on their own anyway.

santee alley works very well because we're not shutting down streets, yet there is a pedestrian destination that's very "real" within the city that has to interact very little with the private automobile or busses. even the area surrounding has excess pedestrians that have spilled out of the alley onto olympic, maple, santee, and other surrounding streets. probably the most sidewalk-utilized corridor in all of L.A..

i suppose to get a good pedestrian effect out of broadways plans, we would just need more items and businesses that appeal to many people. streetcars for example and cleaner sidewalks with businesses moving into blank spaces would appeal to many (including both locals and tourists).

pesto

September 12th, 2009, 08:55 PM

croyboy: I generally agree; usually I’m the one talking about not hurting traffic just for the sake of artificially “helping” mass transit.

I would like some level of tourism on Broadway to complement the tourist appeal of other parts of DT and LA generally. My concern is that Broadway with cars, streetcars and pedestrians becomes just another grid-lock prone street (Sutter in SF; 57th in NY). This does not attract tourists. The Gaslamp, 3rd St. and Old Town Pasadena are generally low-rise areas that can be made charming. Broadway is a little too urban muscular for cute. So I think it has to go more for large open areas, better perspectives, maybe some closed corners, terrace level dining above the street: some grandeur and urbanity. Otherwise, no tourists. And if no tourists, why bother with the streetcars, lampposts, wide sidewalks, etc.?

I admit that you will get the locals even with cars on Broadway. And banning them will cause some more traffic on other streets, although there are many streets through DT.

The closest analogy I know is Market St. in SF which they are aiming to close down to cars to create a great walking street (of course, Market has huge advantages). If the goal is to make Broadway more than just an OK shopping street I think the cars need to go and there needs to be greater concern for the whole scene.

croyboy

September 13th, 2009, 09:43 PM

^^ a very respectable point of view.

one thing i'm worried about making broadway more appealing to tourists is that locals will be turned off to broadway altogether because the prices in retail/restauraunts will rise sharply. broadway would be a tourist dominant destination.

klamedia

September 14th, 2009, 02:22 AM

Westsidelife

September 14th, 2009, 02:23 AM

They look kind of under-dressed. Like maybe Russia after the revolution.

I got the same vibe while looking at that picture.

milquetoast

September 14th, 2009, 03:40 AM

They're Bolsheviks

pesto

September 14th, 2009, 10:17 PM

Too touristy is definitely a mistake, especially for Broadway which is a real urban street, not part of a cutesy tourist trap.

Given the length (2nd to Olympic) there will probably be both tourist and local areas. Some shops (unique jewelry or clothing, cafes, drug stores) could appeal to both, but most local stuff will probably be on side streets due to lower rents. (Eventually one of these side-streets will catch-on and get pricey, ala Rodeo or Old Bond St.)

Maybe I'm going over-board and trying to turn Broadway into Grand Ave. But I figure this is our once in a life-time chance.

pesto

September 14th, 2009, 10:31 PM

I think deco can handle dressed-down, but regency and baroque decor beg for tuxedos, gowns and hats. This may happen at occasional galas, but I'm afraid we're mostly Bolsheviks these days.

Maybe we could title the picture "Worker's Committee Voting to Convert All Theaters to Flea Markets". Just kidding, no politics please.

milquetoast

September 15th, 2009, 04:25 AM

Someone say politics?

pesto

September 25th, 2009, 06:17 PM

The Museum of Neon Art is looking at moving to Glendale's burgeoning DT area, and SF now has a proposition on the ballot to convert a long fairly seedy stretch of Market into a Times Square of the West (theaters, lighted super-graphics, prime retail, etc.).

This is particularly ironic since the Neon Museum is currently located about a block off of Broadway. It seems the restored Broadway would be a natural for displaying signs, either of an actual commercial nature, or of a historic nature, as added light displays along the street or in specially designed paseos or alleyways in conjunction with cafe, restaurants or just benches.

Glendale is basically offerring them free rent for a couple of years. I would think that LA could find some space DT that they could use at a reasonable rate and/or retain them to provide signage services on Broadway in return for fees to cover the rent.

Am I missing something?

milquetoast

September 26th, 2009, 08:47 AM

Yes. The current city attitude towards the current economy I'm The King of Generalities and I declare VICTORY!!

VZN

October 28th, 2009, 03:18 PM

Thought this was noteworthy...

http://blogdowntown.com/2009/10/4800-broadway-effort-nets-rehab-commitment-from

Broadway Effort Nets Rehab Commitment from Owner of Los Angeles and Palace Theatres
By Eric Richardson
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, at 01:52PM

http://photos.blogdowntown.com/4051064132_f818721607.jpg
Buildings at 621, 629 and 635 S. Broadway would be torn down as part of a project to build a new City-owned parking garage. The structure would serve offices, retail and the historic theatres.

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — A new City-owned parking garage on Broadway may be just the spur needed to bring life back into the historic Los Angeles and Palace theatres.

Ezat Delijani, head of the family investment firm that owns four Broadway theatres, on Friday pledged to restore the two if the City proceeds with plans to build a garage between 6th and 7th. The Bringing Back Broadway project is asking the City to approve the $23.5 million purchase of five parcels on Broadway and Hill.

The project, which would require another $2 million in tenant relocation and $31 million in pre-development and construction costs, would result in several hundred new spaces for uses along Broadway.

While Broadway has a number of parking garages, a recent study showed that these structures are near 100% occupancy during the day. Many close at night, and several structures have recently made exclusive arrangements with residential properties.

In a letter delivered at the Bringing Back Broadway Trustees meeting, Delijani promised to "restore and rehabilitate" the Palace and Los Angeles, including installing all infrastructure necessary to make the venues "accommodating for regular public use."

The theatre commitment is a big win for the Bringing Back Broadway effort, headed up by Councilman Jose Huizar's office. "Between them moving forward with the parking garage and the streetcar getting adding to the Long Range Transportation Plan, there's some great movement," said Russell Brown, Executive Director of the Historic Downtown BID and a Broadway Trustee. "That's especially true with the theatre improvements."

Brown said that he has spoken with the heads of business improvement districts in Pasadena, Culver City and Santa Monica. In each case, he heard the same thing. "City-owned community parking was the key as the first foundation to revitalizing the district," he said.

The City and Delijani would develop "mutually acceptable timelines" to make sure that the rehabs would be completed as the parking became operational.

First, the City needs to purchase the five parcels, located at 621, 629 and 635 S. Broadway and 628 and 630 S. Hill. The consolidated site would sit adjacent to the Los Angeles, at the end of St. Vincent's Court.

In May of last year, Council budgeted the bond funds necessary for the purchase. A motion filed last Wednesday (CF 08-0533-S1) asks that $31.2 million be allocated for purchase, relocation and pre-development.

The parking garage would contain retail on the ground floor, loading facilities for the retail and the theatre, and would be build with the necessary foundations to support potential future development above.

pesto

October 28th, 2009, 07:41 PM

Good news; hope the commitments are in writing.

One advantage of Broadway is that it has architectural gems, but also has expendable buildings as well. Getting rid of some of the losers, along with ugly signage and marginal tenants, while getting more parking, seems like a big winner. Hopefully the alleys, paseos, etc., will be looked to as well.

BTW, assuming Spring and Main are going to be artsy, hip and trendy, there is still plenty of low-end retail space on Los Angeles, Maple, San Pedro and other streets for the dispalced bargain stores on Broadway to move to. San Pedro in particular, has few shops open on the weekends. Not that there is a desperate need for more stores selling unlicensed sports wear, close-out electronics, etc., but if that's what the market demands...

DVD AI

October 29th, 2009, 01:36 AM

It's a rule that usually locals and tourists don't mix. The locals don't want to be where the tourists are because it's usually played out.
So either Bdwy will become really touristy so that the locals don't want to go(at least on a regular basis) or it will stay obscure and a local hangout kind of like it is now. I think I can sacrifice a piece of Dtwn to bring in tourist dollars therefore making the whole of Dtwn that much better.
In saying that I also think that there are degrees of this tourist/locals seperation. I think LA Live is banking big on tourists and convention goers meaning that I probably won't be seen there. But Bdwy with its theatres and street car culture may be appealing to tourists and locals alike.

For the most part, Here in Huntington Beach, Tourism and Locals mix. Locals may complain a bit but in the end, it's where they live so it's still theirs.

I think if you have people living above broadway, instead of most places being vacant or below normal standards of living, it won't matter if it attracts tourists as well because they (the locals) will in nature, take ownership of the place.

LAsam

October 29th, 2009, 01:42 AM

If we could get live theatre back in these venues on a consistent basis... oh what possibilities.

Westsidelife

October 29th, 2009, 03:51 AM

Just make sure the parking garage has some architectural flavor and that it blends in with the surrounding context.

LAsam

October 29th, 2009, 06:36 AM

^Absolutely.

pesto

October 29th, 2009, 07:04 AM

So would a LA Live look, glass and shiny metal, be allowed? Or all glass, assuming it had some style to it? I'm talking about buildings in general, not just parking structures. Or do we have to stick with deco, beaux arts and derivatives.

I am inclined to exclude anything too modern unless architecturally striking; there are places where the very old and very modern create excitement when juxtaposed, but a plain glass box is out.

klamedia

October 29th, 2009, 11:17 PM

If you're going through the trouble to build a streetcar that connects to the larger transit system why would such an emphasis be placed on parking? (Rhetorical Question)

pesto

October 30th, 2009, 01:09 AM

It's actually a bona fide question. The answer is that in an ideal world, little or no new parking would be required. Pershing Sq. and the trolley are all you need.

But back to reality: local residents and customers want parking spaces (or at least that's what most business owners, politicians and developers believe). There is plenty of space available on upper levels and it sounds like ground floors will be retail and the architecture will be harmonious with existing buildings, so it seem about as good as is likely.

I suspect as time goes by, the demand and rates will go up and most people not living or staying DT will switch to transit.

Westsidelife

October 30th, 2009, 01:32 AM

What about parking off Broadway? Ideally, this street would be pedestrian-only.

pesto

October 30th, 2009, 01:51 AM

That would be my first choice and I think it's very important. But last I heard it hadn't made it onto any of the proposals, all of which include a trolley and some traffic lanes. I think that parking will be prohibited on Broadway but there will be driveways into parking structures.

Westsidelife

October 30th, 2009, 05:39 AM

^ One day it will be converted into a pedestrian-only thoroughfare. One day.

Westsidelife

October 30th, 2009, 05:40 AM

And instead of demolishing the existing buildings, we should keep the original structure and just redo the facade. Preservation anyone?

pesto

October 30th, 2009, 07:01 PM

In general, yes. But assuming the buildings to be demo'd are the 4 and 5 story warehouse-like spaces in the picture, I would assume that it is much easier to get rid of them and build from the gound up than to accommodate their age and existing problems. And architecturally they are zeros.

Dreaming: I would like to see some proposals for the strucutres with an updated take on the deco or Churriguresque style that the local theaters have.

LosAngelesSportsFan

October 31st, 2009, 12:33 AM

another important piece of information was that this garage is going to be built with a future development on top in mind, so the structure will be ready to grow when the economy recovers. it will also have retail on the first floor. i hope it has a similar feel to the old school buildings in the area.

pesto

October 31st, 2009, 02:32 AM

[QUOTE=Westsidelife;20062506]http://farm1.static.flickr.com/124/321148171_14b1764fbe.jpg
The Los Angeles Theatre is part of a single development
with the Fox Building, on Hill street.

More Theatre Reuse: Units for Palace, Los Angeles? (http://www.blogdowntown.com/2008/04/3227-more-theatre-reuse-units-for-palace-los-angeles)

WSL posted this sometime back; something that picks up these themes would be appropriate since the new structure is just down the block. Full Spanish baroque may be a bit much but I'll bet that a competition among architects would yield something interesting.

slipperydog

November 1st, 2009, 05:34 AM

Can anyone summarize the theatres and their current or anticipated status? It seems like a really good idea to try to bring some of them back.

klamedia

November 1st, 2009, 04:46 PM

I thought that the street would have traffic as in streetcar and motor traffic or is it to have a promenade type feel?

pesto

November 1st, 2009, 06:39 PM

The leading plan appears to be 4 lanes with trolleys in each direction (judging by the pictures); trolleys going 1 way only is also discussed. How much debate there is on this I don't know. Parking is off-street but driveways into parking structures is permitted.

I have argued for just trolley, no cars or buses at all, but some have raised concerns about traffic on other streets and hurting business.

The question is whether you picture a bustling DT street (say, 57th in NY or Post in SF) or a more relaxed promenade with trees and benches. I worry that the former just turns into another noisy grid-locked street.

pesto

November 1st, 2009, 06:49 PM

The theaters are discussed in considerble detail here: http://www.bringingbackbroadway.com/theatres/index.htm

In general, they are now filled with retail or are used for storage; one is a thriving church. Two or three are actually used for shows at this time and a couple more have had some exterior work but need interior work.

There are also several others that are not salvageable, usually because the auditorium has been re cemented.

LA Conservancy probably has detailed info.

Fern~Fern*

November 1st, 2009, 10:05 PM

^ Don't forget that some are run down Asian swapmeets selling junk from china.

pesto

November 17th, 2009, 11:15 PM

Just got this invite. Some of you DT people may want to attend. Give some input on getting rid of cars, widening sidewalks, providing seating, paseos, signage or whatever you think is important. And bring back some reports on which way the wind is blowing.

Please join us Tuesday Nov. 24 as we share the Final Designs for the Broadway Streetscape Master Plan. Attendees will be asked to review and provide input on the final concepts for the design of Broadways public right of way areas, including elements on the sidewalks and in the street itself which enhance the environment and historic character of the corridor, and better serve pedestrians and transit riders, including:

Street Configuration and Station Design
Planting, Materials and Furnishings
Wayfinding Signage
Identity Elements

Tuesday Nov. 24 from 5:30-7:30pm
Attend when it's most convenient for you
Open house format with presentation at 6:30pm
The Exchange 114 W. 5th Street (5th btwn Spring & Main)

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=305294625087

For more information, contact:
Valerie Watson
Meléndrez - Landscape Architecture, Planning & Urban Design
213-673-4400
vwatson@melendrez.com

pesto

November 18th, 2009, 10:07 PM

I guess I am on the mailing list, since I got another notice from BBB telling me about the leading proposals to be looked at on Tuesday; supposdely they will announce what has been selected as the leading choices so as to allow focused discussion with the public and stakeholders.

The sign and streetscape choices all look pretty good to me. I am not sure if I want to go more traditonal or more high-tech. Traditional could get too cutesy. High-tech will give it a more contemporary look.

It seems however, that all proposals include both cars AND parking on at least one side of Broadway. If this includes buses as well, then it's hard to picture tourists having a leisurely time there. This is a street with numerous 8-15 story buildings in the middle of a huge city; we're not talking about Pasadena or the Gaslamp District, which are much smaller business centers. To me, this means gridlock if the area does really develop. I really think the cars and parking entrances should be "off-Broadway".

I look forward to comments from whoever can get over there on Tuesday.

Westsidelife

November 24th, 2009, 09:49 PM

http://photos.blogdowntown.com/4128078001_5ce163f1c1.jpg
A rendering from the Broadway Streetscape Master Plan shows the roadway reduced to
three lanes, with curb bump-outs, street trees, loading and parking space and a granite
band design motif that runs along the street.

Refined Broadway Streetscape Plan Ready for Public Debut (http://www.blogdowntown.com/2009/11/4878-refined-broadway-streetscape-plan-ready-for)

By Eric Richardson
November 23, 2009

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — As they move forward on efforts to revitalize what was once Los Angeles' shopping and entertainment hub, Broadway planners are proposing something very un-L.A. -- taking lanes away from cars.

On Tuesday evening, the public will get the chance to comment on a Streetscape Master Plan that includes the removal of three traffic lanes, new space for parking and loading, a wider sidewalk and a unified motif for paving and fixtures.

Those who saw the very early plans presented by Melendrez in February will find the refined work to be much more toned down. Colorful paving flourishes have given way to a more stately design of granite and concrete, intended to allow the theatres and the existing stretches of colorful terrazzo to stand out.

The street itself would be reduced from three lanes in each direction to one lane traveling south and two going north. Sidewalk bump-outs at the corners and mid-block would frame new space for parking and loading on both sides of the street.

The western sidewalk would be widened eight feet, allowing a southbound streetcar track to run far enough toward the center of the street to clear existing utilities below.

Designs on tree grates and transit shelters would take their inspiration from the look of Broadway's original streetlights, replicas of which would be installed at half the spacing of the currently existing lights. Street trees would make an appearance, with a focus on vertical species that would not block views of the theaters. Planters in the bump-outs would provide stormwater filtration and greenery.

While the design is still being tweaked, traffic studies done for the project say that the lane configuration is doable, and both LADOT and Metro are said to be on-board.

Don't expect to see these changes any time soon, though. Environmental studies are likely to be done as part of the streetcar project, and installation would come in 2014. A demonstration project, using planters and paint to simulate the traffic changes, could take place in 2012 or 2013.

Both the streetscape plan and the streetcar are part of the Bringing Back Broadway effort being led by Councilman Jose Huizar's office.

A public presentation on the streetscape plan will take place on Tuesday, November 24, at The Exchange (114 W. 5th). Open house format from 5:30 to 7:30pm, with a presentation at 6:30pm.

Fight On Archies!

November 28th, 2009, 04:26 AM

Hi guys! Here are some quick pics I took of some of the boards at Tuesday night's meeting. Sorry for the poor picture quality. Definately not my best work, haha, but you can get a basic idea of what the most recent streetscape master plan looks like just incase you didn't make it on Tuesday. What do you guys think?

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1036.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1035.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1037.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1046.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1039.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1042.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1043.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1044.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1040.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1045.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1047.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1048.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1049.jpg

http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1050.jpg

saiholmes

November 28th, 2009, 05:26 AM

Broadway Improvement Plan Gets a Hearing
Plan to Transform Thoroughfare Would Take Four Years, Cost $30 Million
by Anna Scott, Staff Writer
Los Angeles Downtown News
Published: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:18 AM PST

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES – More than 100 people attended a meeting in the Historic Core on Tuesday, Nov. 24, to offer input on a plan to give Broadway a pedestrian-friendly makeover.

The proposal is part of 14th District City Councilman Jose' Huizar’s Bringing Back Broadway initiative, which aims to revitalize the thoroughfare between Second Street and Olympic Boulevard. The public was invited Tuesday evening to The Exchange building to weigh in on final designs for the Broadway Streetscape Master Plan, which lays the groundwork for cosmetic and structural changes to the street.

The plan, focused on improving the street’s appearance and encouraging foot traffic, includes narrowing the street to three lanes of traffic with parking and loading on both sides, bumping out the sidewalks, planting new trees on the widened sidewalks and adding bus stops.

According to Huizar’s staff, the Streetscape Master Plan would cost approximately $30 million; the Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently awarded $4.5 million to the project, which will be available in two years, and Huizar’s office may also apply for federal funds. Officials hope to start construction by 2013, at the same time as work begins on the proposed Broadway streetcar.

Westsidelife

November 30th, 2009, 01:16 AM

Thanks a lot, Archies!

My comments...

1) I like how the sidewalk landscaping accentuates the crosswalks.
2) I love the classy elements such as new, more elegant street lights and signage. This is the way to go!
3) Does anyone else prefer the old Red Cars to the ones found in, say, Portland?
4) I would prefer the entire street be closed off to traffic, but I could live with this plan.
5) I don't like how one sidewalk is wider than the other.
6) Street furniture is always nice.
7) I love the brightly lit rooftop signs and radio towers.

VZN

November 30th, 2009, 06:18 AM

Looking at the last picture, the future looks bright for Broadway (no pun intended). :)

Can't wait...

Fern~Fern*

November 30th, 2009, 07:40 AM

LosAngelesSportsFan

November 30th, 2009, 11:22 PM

klamedia

December 1st, 2009, 04:52 AM

I prefer the older streetcar look. But whatever......just do it.

Fern~Fern*

December 1st, 2009, 05:16 AM

I prefer the older streetcar look. But whatever......just do it.

^ Hey Mr Cheerful... :hi:

pesto

December 1st, 2009, 07:12 PM

Pretty much everything else is a huge improvement so these are relatively smaller points:

- the neon Broadway Tower is the bomb; it will join City Hall as an icon for DT.
- in general Bway has busy architecture and a lot of people; simplicity is the way to go in streetscape and signage
- their graphics show mostly tiny cars but that’s not the way it will look; buses, trucks, heavy traffic unless something is done; I prefer no trucks, no vans (and preferably no SUV’s); also get rid of the buses; too noisy in the canyons; or make them quieter
- aren’t the trolley shelters and public seating going to have derelicts 24/7? I don’t mean just homeless people, but those with nothing to do all day
- get rid of parking lanes; deliveries in back or between midnight and 7AM; vehicles get 5 minutes stopping only and then get out

Westsidelife

December 1st, 2009, 09:29 PM

^ Oh yeah, I forgot to mention how I dislike the on-street parking. Major cities across the world do not provide parking on their busiest, most commercialized streets.

pesto

December 1st, 2009, 11:24 PM

Frankfurt, Munich and Amsterdam don't even allow cars on their busiest shopping streets. Add London to the list if you include Regent, where only buses and cabs are allowed.

klamedia

December 3rd, 2009, 10:24 AM

This is America folks.

pesto

December 3rd, 2009, 08:09 PM

klam: but you notice that even in America we don't allow cars in our busiest shopping thoroughfares: South Coast Plaza, the Great Mall, Century Plaza and 10,000 more malls.

5th Ave, Michigan Ave., Post St. and such are the exceptions nowadays.

pesto

December 4th, 2009, 02:47 AM

Some life in the Broadway Theater District:

Orpheum Theatre, 842 S. Broadway, Downtown Los Angeles, 90013

The City Ballet of Los Angeles celebrates the holidays in its new home on Broadway with an original rendition of The Nutcracker set in 1940s Los Angeles. With familiar settings like Hancock Park, this ballet performed by City Ballet of L.A. is a unique treat. The ballet performs at 2 p.m. and 8 p.m., with tickets from $20 - 40.

VZN

December 11th, 2009, 06:51 PM

http://blogdowntown.com/2009/12/4926-historic-united-artists-theatre-up-for-sale

Historic United Artists Theatre Up for Sale, Listed at $15 Million

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — The 1927 United Artists Theatre and its attached 14-story office building is up for sale, listed for $15 million. Since 1989, the building has housed the University Cathedral, a church headed by colorful television evangelist Dr. Gene Scott until his death in 2005.

One of the dozen historic theatres to line Broadway, the United Artists is in perhaps the most turn-key shape, according to Los Angeles Historic Theatre Foundation head Hillsman Wright. His group is interested in acquiring the theatre.

The University Cathedral ministry is continued by Scott's widow, Pastor Melissa Scott. The church has split time between Downtown and a facility in Glendale, where it will now focus its efforts.

Along with the 1,500 to 2,000 seat theatre, the building contains 73,783 square feet of office space.

The building is perhaps best known for a pair of neon "Jesus Saves" signs that Scott installed on the structure when he moved in. They originally stood atop the Church of the Open Door, at 6th and Hope.

pesto

December 11th, 2009, 06:58 PM

LOS ANGELES (Dec. 10, 2009) —The Downtown Los Angeles Streetcar effort was awarded $250,000 by the U.S. House of Representatives today when federal funds for major programs and projects were announced through the House’s 2010’s Omnibus Appropriations Measure.

The funding, championed by Congressmember Lucille Roybal-Allard, will help implement a modern streetcar transportation system in Downtown L.A., which is a major component of Councilmember José Huizar’s Bringing Back Broadway initiative.

“A downtown streetcar will create jobs, help people circulate between destinations, connect transit options and spur economic development while reducing greenhouse gas emissions,” said Councilmember José Huizar. “I applaud Congressmember Roybal-Allard for believing in our goal of riding a streetcar Downtown by 2014. We’re very fortunate to have a strong streetcar advocate in Washington D.C.”

Congressmember Roybal-Allard is a member of the Appropriations Committee and served on the conference committee tasked with negotiating the final Omnibus spending agreement, which included targeted investments in important projects she feels are important.

Comment: Bway gets 250k from the feds? Please! These is too puny to even count as moral support. And Roybal-Allard is on the Appropriations Committee?

Westsidelife

December 17th, 2009, 06:22 AM

Streetcar Project Receives Federal Funding, Wants to Ask for More (http://www.blogdowntown.com/2009/12/4936-streetcar-project-receives-federal-funding)

By Eric Richardson
December 14, 2009

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles Streetcar, Inc. and Councilman Jose Huizar last week announced $250,000 in Congressional funding, but the project's sights are set on bigger dollar amounts. Executive Director Dennis Allen said that the project plans to apply for $25 million out of a $280 million grant fund just created for "urban circulator projects."

Until now, the project had been unsure whether it would be going for federal money to cover part of its estimated $90 - $100 million construction cost. "If you go for the federal funding, it just extends your timeline," said Allen. Funds from the new grant program, announced on December 1 by U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, come with drastically reduced requirements, allowing them to be put to use much quicker.

Projects from around the country are expected to apply for the money, but Allen thinks Los Angeles has a good chance of being picked. "We think that we'll have as competitive of an application as any streetcar out there," he said.

The $250,000, championed by Congressmember Lucille Roybal-Allard, is part of the House’s 2010’s Omnibus Appropriations Measure. It would help fund the environmental analysis the project will be doing in 2010.

Council is scheduled to consider the grant request on Wednesday. The Department of Transportation would submit the application in coordination with the streetcar non-profit and the Community Redevelopment Agency.

VZN

December 24th, 2009, 11:11 PM

From Curbed L.A.:

A new phase for a downtown theater? Last week, renovation plans for the Tower Theater on Broadway surfaced on the Dept of Planning's web site. Per the application, owner Ezat Delijani is looking to sell alcohol at the 1927 theater, and allow for public dancing and live entertainment. The request is all part of a larger proposal "to restore the 20,106 square-foot Tower Theater and reestablish historic uses of the property, including the use of the theater for live performance, special events, and movies." The theater has been used off and on for events, according to Blogdowntown, which covered the Edwardian Ball,held at the space earlier this year. And its renovation has been talked about as part of the larger Bringing Back Broadway effort, a plan to revitalize this stretch of Broadway.

pesto

February 2nd, 2010, 06:54 PM

I notice that NY is considering making the pedestrian zone along Bway and 7th in midtown permanent. SF is also moving forward with a plan to get Market to pededstrian only (or very nearly so). Both will allow cross traffic at intersections (ala 3rd St. Promenade in SM).

The pedestrian density isn't there yet but I think will be there soon near the Hollywood subway stops and along Bway (the trolley will take space and increased tourism and theater-goers are likely). Better to build it into the plans now.

klamedia

February 2nd, 2010, 08:44 PM

I was thinking the same thing while viewing those Hollywood Blvd photos in the other thread. Hollywood Blvd between La Brea and Highland could surely go pedestrian if not all the way to Vine.

pesto

February 2nd, 2010, 11:36 PM

Good idea. For beginners, maybe pedestrian between La Brea and Highland (except for a turn-around during special events at the Kodak) and wider sidewalks and no parking from Highland to Vine (or Gower if there will be growth that direction). The clubbin' crowd is going to want reasonable taxi and limo access to most of the boulevard and immediate side streets.

Bway still strikes me as liable to be congested if things turn-up DT and the theaters come back. But maybe having parking and loading only from the alleys will help.

soup or man

February 3rd, 2010, 08:36 PM

Excellent news Archi, hopefully they can pull this entire make-over on Broadway. Did they mentioned what type of light rail is being planned. I've seen some European type smaller version futuristic trains which would blend in perfectly here. I am also with WSL on #5, the sidewalk thingy is not happening...

Bit late in responding but it needs to be clarified: Those are trams. Which personally, I believe would be a much better fit on Broadway than historic streetcars. Broadway has far too many people to accommodate a small historic streetcar that would probably only be one car length. But I do think that there should be a different type of streetcar as opposed to the Skoda's that Portland have.

This is a Skoda.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/pdxgreen/2007/12/streetcar1218.JPG

I would love to see downtown LA (read: Broadway) get a streetcar along these designs:
http://www.trainnet.org/Libraries/Lib019/SBOURG2.JPG
http://jfi.uchicago.edu/~rschroll/france/00126.jpg

A few cities across the US are proposing a modern streetcar system.

Baltimore
d0i8bibLZv8

Sacramento
LEkKs88RqnA

Cincinnati
5LmSjWbsEpQ

Vancouver
ESTlOqPrGJY

Tucson
8RG-MC420gE

Toronto (Modernizing current streetcar system)
vTvKkB11E5s

And of course Europe has dozens and dozens of them.

Barcelona
yL4CCrbr3Gg

Paris
y6ucG-9fGU4

Bordeaux, France is notable for being the first streetcar that uses a third rail (no overhead wires). DTLA should look into this.
zpn5VYTrwqg

As you can see, I'm a fan. I think that a modern streetcar system is highly important in downtown Los Angeles. Not just on Broadway but all over. I think it's highly important that while we would love to see Broadway to be a truly urban and pedestrian environment, I think it's also important that we move these people in a clean, swift, and quiet manner.

LosAngelesSportsFan

February 4th, 2010, 12:43 AM

ive said this before a few times. i think that every major city in the county should have a street care system. Tie into the MTA backbone, but then have their own street car systems. without a doubt, the following should have streetcars: Downtown LA, Pasadena, Long Beach, Hollywood, Santa Monica, Glendale, Burbank, West Hollywood.

If we are to be a metro that can be accessible without a car and easily on foot, these are a must. Im glad to see that Long Beach, Pasadena, Downtown are all looking into streetcars, i just hope that they come to fruition asap and the other cities do so as well.

pesto

February 5th, 2010, 06:50 PM

unless you are trying to attract tourists, shuttles are a lot cheaper and more flexible.

soup or man

February 6th, 2010, 07:40 AM

unless you are trying to attract tourists, shuttles are a lot cheaper and more flexible.

Isn't that what DASH is?

klamedia

February 6th, 2010, 10:03 AM

:lol:^^
Yup that's exactly what DASH is and it won't attract tourists or the weekend urbanist. With that said, I'm with pest that streetcars should be used sparingly. We really only need a few.....Pasadena, SM, Hollywood and Downtown. Perhaps the LBC with connections to the Blue Line.

But a robust bus system which feeds into a comprehensive regional rail network is truly what LA needs (and will have) to serve the people who live here who come first.

pesto

February 12th, 2010, 11:09 PM

Got this email from Bringing Back Broadway today:

Downtown L.A. Streetcar Project Competes for $25 Million
Public-private partnership pushes forward on plan to ride a streetcar downtown by 2014

LOS ANGELES (Feb. 10, 2010) —The City of Los Angeles, on behalf of the public-private partnership advancing the streetcar plan, today submitted its application to the Federal Transit Administration for a $25-million grant for the Downtown Los Angeles Streetcar. Los Angeles will compete with a number of other cities in the U.S. seeking funds from the recently announced $180 million Urban Circulator grant program, part of President Obama’s Livability Initiative.

According to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the funds will be used to support “urban circulator projects such as streetcars…to support communities, expand business opportunities and improve people’s quality of life while also creating jobs.” According to the Federal Transit Administration, a maximum amount of $25 million will be made available for individual projects that foster the redevelopment of districts into walkable, mixed use and high density environments.

“A downtown streetcar will create jobs and housing, help people circulate between destinations, connect neighborhoods and transit options, spur economic development and reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” said Councilmember José Huizar. “I applaud the City of Los Angeles, Bringing Back Broadway, L.A. Streetcar Inc, CRA and the entire team that put together this strong package. Now we will look to our colleagues in Washington to help us take a major step towards becoming the country’s largest streetcar city by 2014.”

The Downtown L.A. Streetcar will connect Historic Broadway with downtown's other entertainment and cultural destinations, including L.A. Live and Bunker Hill/Music Center in an approximately 4.7 mile couplet route, intended to be operational by 2014. If plans to bring a streetcar to downtown Los Angeles are successful, Los Angeles would be the first big city in the U.S. advancing a modern streetcar system.

The project has been discussed with the community for more than a decade. Now feasibility studies are complete, route options have been determined, and traffic studies have begun, as part of the environmental review expected to be completed by 2011.

“We’re thrilled that streetcars are getting the appropriate attention and funding opportunities on the national level and we feel Los Angeles is an ideal recipient for these funds. Los Angeles can become a model for how streetcars benefit not just small and mid-sized cities, but can make a huge impact in a big city like L.A.,” said Dennis Allen, Executive Director for L.A. Streetcar Inc. (LASI). LASI (www.LAStreetcar.org) is a non-profit coalition of property owners and downtown leaders, which was formed to raise private funds for partnership in designing, planning and implementing a downtown streetcar system, using Portland/Seattle as the model for this public-private partnership.

The City’s application for the Downtown Streetcar grant funding received incredible support from a wide-range of community members, civic and business leaders, organizations and elected officials. Etc.

VZN

February 12th, 2010, 11:20 PM

^^ Great. Just that alone will knock out about 1/4 of the total funding and once we get that up hopefully the city council will see that we need it in other parts of the county as well (LB, Hollywood, SM, etc.)

klamedia

February 14th, 2010, 07:16 PM

I believe each city's city council would have to apply separately and it's best that way since these are relatively small transit projects and can be done quickly. I would hate to see this taken up by the countywide MTA and put on a 2036 time schedule.

pesto

April 6th, 2010, 05:57 PM

Got this yesterday: sounds like some free food. Apparently, they will also be discussing assistance for new businesses DT.

Bringing Back Broadway is pleased to invite you to the Grand Opening / Ribbon-Cutting celebration for Mac & Cheeza at 8th & Broadway.

Thurs. April 22

223 8th Street (near corner of Broadway) in the beautifully restored, historic Chapman Building.

5:00pm - 6pm Presentation: 5:30pm

Mac & Cheeza has been on a "soft open" for a few weeks, and this event will mark the official Grand Opening. Come enjoy samples, mix & mingle with other downtowners, and wish owners Larkin Mackey & Joshua McBride (who are already Downtown residents) good luck in their new, yummy, endeavor. All are welcome!

future_trance011

May 2nd, 2010, 08:21 AM

Broadway’s Mixed Bag

Plan to Revive Street Takes Key Steps Forward, But Huge Hurdles Loom
by Richard Guzmán

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES - When 14th District City Councilman José Huizar launched the Bringing Back Broadway initiative in January 2008, the ambitious plans were the latest in a series of failed attempts to restore the street to its heyday. In front of hundreds of area stakeholders in the Los Angeles Theatre, Huizar laid out a vision that would allow the street to recapture its role as a Downtown destination, replete with nightlife, pedestrian-friendly amenities and even a streetcar.

Two years later, Huizar has taken some significant strides, generating more momentum than any of the previous attempts. Millions of dollars worth of street repairs have taken place and there is widespread community buy-in.

During a recent meeting with Los Angeles Downtown News editors and reporters, Huizar expressed optimism about what has been achieved to date.

“Bottom line is, we are very happy with where we are with the Bringing Back Broadway plan,” he said.

However, the most significant tasks in the 10-year effort await. Plans for the streetcar and a parking garage that could lead to wider use of the street’s 12 theaters hinge on securing millions of dollars in scarce funds. In fact, the garage effort suffered a setback when $10 million that had been expected instead dissipated during the city’s budget crunch.

The garage has long been a chief desire of some theater owners on Broadway. In particular the Delijani family, which owns the Los Angeles, the Palace, the State and the Tower theaters, have pushed for the city to build and pay for such a facility, claiming that existing area parking is insufficient for large nighttime crowds.

As part of the Broadway effort, Huizar pursued a $52 million garage plan. The intent was to purchase four existing properties for approximately $27 million, and spend $25 million to convert them into a single structure with 300 parking spaces.

Huizar had $10 million set aside to begin the garage effort. But once the city’s budget crisis arose — a shortfall of $485 million is expected for the fiscal year that begins July 1 — he had to give up that money in exchange for city promises to use Municipal Improvement Corporation of Los Angeles funds. Now those are unlikely to materialize.

Huizar downplayed the significance of the setback.

“I wouldn’t call it a big blow,” he said. “I would just say something has stalled, we have other plans in place. We have preliminary drawings, designs. We just have to rethink how we get the financing.”

The back-up plan is an automated parking system, which would use machines to lift and park cars in stacks. It would occupy less space than a conventional garage. Funds have not been secured.

Still, Jessica Wethington McLean, the executive director of Bringing Back Broadway, said it’s not a question of “if” new parking will be built, but rather how. She said officials are pursuing public-private partnerships for the facility.

Huizar said Delijani — who did not return phone calls for comment — had agreed to put more money into his theaters if the city can provide a parking garage. But other theater owners say parking is not an issue that should slow down the overall plans.

“I don’t see that that has any bearing whatsoever in bringing back the theaters,” said Steve Needleman, who owns the Orpheum Theatre at 842 S. Broadway. He reopened it as a concert and events venue in 2001 following a $3.5 million renovation. He has also created apartments on the floors above.

“Everyone will find a place to park,” he continued. “I don’t think there’s any way to make economic sense out of putting in one of these garages in today’s time, and I think that long term we have better uses for our money.”

Street Action

Another key part of the effort is the Broadway Entertainment Overlay Zone and Design Guide, which aims to make the street more pedestrian-friendly with new standards for signage, lighting, landscaping and the appearance of buildings. The plan, which also seeks to upgrade and establish consistency in storefronts and façades, was adopted by the City Council last September.

Some of the changes coming as a result of the ordinance include alterations in signage. Large-scale painted wall signs and open panel roof signs will no longer be permitted.

The plan will also affect any rehabilitation that occurs in buildings, including new businesses that want to come to Broadway, McLean said. That would apply both to mom and pop shops, and any large chain seeking to capitalize on the residential growth in Downtown.

“What we did there is put in some provisions so that stores who want to come to Broadway can come, but that [store] has to look like Broadway,” McClean said. “Broadway won’t be made to look like the store.”

The street itself is also getting a makeover, with an infrastructure plan estimated at $35 million.

More than $7 million in work has already taken place, with sidewalk repairs on portions of Broadway between Third and Fifth streets. The upgrades, which cost $1.5 million per side, per block, include reconstructing the basements under the sidewalks, since the current sub-surface infrastructure can’t sustain any aboveground improvements, Huizar said.

Other parts of the plan call for wider sidewalks, transit stations and reducing traffic flow to three lanes, with two running north and one heading south. The streetcar is slated to run along the southbound curb.

“Obviously people want to see a more pedestrian-friendly Broadway,” Huizar said.

So far $13 million has been identified for the project. Officials expect to spend $4 million on improvements this year. After that, the source of the money remains uncertain.

“We haven’t really identified the full funding for this, but as we’ve been going along, we’ve been finding money here and there,” Huizar said.

Plans are not limited to street level. Huizar also wants to activate some of the 1.5 million square feet of vacant upper floor space along Broadway between Second Street and Olympic Boulevard.

Huizar’s office has been working with officials from the Fire Department and the Department of Building and Safety on creating an ordinance that would allow them to reactivate that property. It could be similar to the Adaptive Reuse Ordinance, which made it easier to turn old office buildings into housing.

However, Huizar said moving forward has not been easy.

“We ran into some trouble with Building and Safety and the Fire Department, some disagreements,” he said. “For example the Fire Department, in some cases, is concerned about windows, emergency exit safety issues.”

Despite the hurdle, some are enthusiastic that progress will continue. Russell Brown, president of the Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council, said the next step is to get property owners along the street on board.

“I feel confident that going into the third year of a 10-year plan that a lot has been done, and all of the foundation work has very much been done,” he said.

Ticket to Ride

Perhaps the most anticipated portion of the Bringing Back Broadway plan is the return of the streetcar, which Huizar had ambitiously pegged for 2014.

In 2009, the nonprofit organization L.A. Streetcar Inc. was formed to handle the design and construction of the line that would ultimately connect L.A. Live and Bunker Hill. So far, a little more than $10.5 million has been secured for the project that is estimated to cost $100 million.

Huizar is looking at a mix of federal and private sources to raise the funds, including an assessment district in which property owners along the proposed route would be taxed. The amount to be secured from the assessments has not been determined.

The 2014 timeline may rest on a $25 million grant the group is seeking from the Federal Transit Administration’s Urban Circulators program. The application has been filed and an answer is expected in June.

If it comes through, it could keep the project on the fast track. But a denial could derail a 2014 opening, Huizar admitted.

“It’ll make us re-look at our numbers on the assessment,” Huizar said. “We’ll look at the assessment, reevaluate those numbers and maybe the timeline.”

Another $10 million in federal funds is also being sought.

Meanwhile, Metro has agreed to include the project in its Long Range Transportation Plan, which means that if funding ever becomes available or Metro plans for the long term use of the area, the streetcar is in line to get some money.

The ultimate goal is to have Metro operate it, Huizar said, although the transit agency has yet to commit to that.

McLean added that one way or another, there will be some streetcar action in 2014.

“This summer we’ll figure out if 2014 is a grand opening or groundbreaking for the streetcar,” she said. “If we have to go out with shovels in January 2014 and break ground ourselves, we’ll do that.”

Contact Richard Guzmán at richard@downtownnews.com.

klamedia

May 3rd, 2010, 06:32 PM

Broadway’s Mixed Bag

Plan to Revive Street Takes Key Steps Forward, But Huge Hurdles Loom
by Richard Guzmán

“I don’t see that that has any bearing whatsoever in bringing back the theaters,” said Steve Needleman, who owns the Orpheum Theatre at 842 S. Broadway. He reopened it as a concert and events venue in 2001 following a $3.5 million renovation. He has also created apartments on the floors above.

“Everyone will find a place to park,” he continued. “I don’t think there’s any way to make economic sense out of putting in one of these garages in today’s time, and I think that long term we have better uses for our money.”

In the center of the most transit accessible area in the city along with a countywide push to accelerate transit projects significantly we are still running around talking about a fucking parking garage. What will the streetcar be for then? Why spend money on a streetcar if you are encouraging people to drive downtown instead? I'd rather see Broadway just stay the way it is instead of encouraging more cars downtown. Of note: How do the people who spend enough money in the stores along Broadway that btw are paying Beverly Hills rents get to Broadway? And why can't the new more "attractive" crowd do the same? DISGUSTING!

pesto

May 3rd, 2010, 11:01 PM

Maybe you’re right. If the landlords can charge Beverly Hills rents, the businesses must be doing pretty well and space must be tough to get. And I think this must be the case, because the business owners don’t even have to bother making the premises look attractive and can still attract enough paying customers to afford BH rents. It’s hard to understand why a streetcar or additional parking is needed in a healthy booming area to say nothing of streetscape, etc.

Maybe they’re right in the Valley and the city should be spending more money out there.

klamedia

May 4th, 2010, 04:09 PM

If you have to provide parking downtown (the most transit accessible area in the county and will soon be receiving even a streetcar to make it EVEN more transit accessible) perhaps LA isn't ready to have a REAL downtown. We're not just talking about a centrally located parking structure for a diverse array of activities downtown but every project that is planned or that has opened downtown has a gaggle of parking that completely undercuts what a walkable and vibrant downtown is all about. You can't tell me that 5 major transit lines along with an innumerable amount of busses converging upon downtown LA can't bring in enough people to sustain a downtown scene.
I get the feeling that downtown LA may not be ready for a really vibrant downtown scence and yeah perhaps we should turn our attention solely on the Valley then we could build all the parking structures that we want there and it make sense.

NOTE: “Everyone will find a place to park,” he continued. “I don’t think there’s any way to make economic sense out of putting in one of these garages in today’s time, and I think that long term we have better uses for our money.” - Steve Needleman, who owns the Orpheum Theatre

pesto

May 4th, 2010, 07:26 PM

Needleman is a good guy who has benefited DT. Perhaps the Orpheum is far enough south so that there is parking available and that is not true at 4th or 5th. And the proposed structure is near theaters owned by his competition and far from his, so take it for what it’s worth. In any event, parking for 1 semi-active theater is very different from 6-8 active ones.

The problem we have is that you seem to have an image of Broadway being pretty much OK as is. Thriving businesses paying “Beverly Hills” rents (btw, could someone provide documentation on what exactly is meant by this and how it is calculated?), plenty of access via mass transit, local residents satisfied with how it looks and what services it offers. All that’s needed is for people to use transit more and things will be great.

I see 8 essentially unutilized theaters; 2 underutilized theaters; dozens of 11-story buildings with 100% vacancy above the ground floor; retail that consists mostly of flea markets moved semi-indoors; metal covering every window at night; small businesses hanging on until business improves.

The streetcar is good but mostly for within DT. The MTA is a good way to get there, but not everyone who is going to a theater (or shopping or grad night, etc.) is going to take a subway. When you are nicely dressed you are not likely to do so. You are going to go in a car and you are going to want a convenient place to park.

SF Civic Center (opera, symphony, concerts): massive multi-story underground lots covering blocks. Union Sq: 5 story structure; within a few blocks an 8 story structure; a full city block structure and dozens of smaller structures; dozens of restaurants with valet service.

And LA even has enough vacant lots and unused buildings to accommodate parking structures. The structures proposed on Broadway are in uninteresting buildings that need fundamental reworking and new facings in any event.

klamedia

May 5th, 2010, 05:10 AM

Who said that I was fine about how Broadway looks? I would love to see those old theatres revitalized. My beef is with the continued over-abundance of parking. You mention SF but you don't mention when this parking structure was built. Was it 10 years ago? 20 years ago? SF seems to be trending away from an over-abundance of parking and especially in places like Downtown LA which has a plethora of transit choices available parking should be supressed. From the NY Times:In June, San Francisco
replaced minimum requirements downtown with maximum standards allowing no more than 0.75 parking
spaces per unit. In Portland, where central city parking minimums were eliminated six years ago, developers
are breaking ground on projects with restricted parking.
“In the future,” Dr. Shoup said, “we will look back at minimum parking requirements as a colossal mistake.
Change will be slow, but it’s happening now.”

Btw, when I was in NYC a month ago I saw people dressed up on the trains with no problem. And yes I know what you're going to say...."it's different here blah blah blah....." Asking someone who is used to driving to politely give up their car knowing that cheap and easy parking is available is like asking a crack addict politely to stop giving blow jobs in the park to get his next fix. Don't provide cheap and easy parking and next time you won't be the only one riding to Disney Hall alone on the train.

I was under the impression that you knew that the Broadway tenants were already paying top do$$ar for their spaces? Which begs the question, if the tenants are already paying top dollar and the customers are generating enough revenue to rival Beverly Hills then what is all the fuss about how people will get down there? The present customers seem to be finding there way to Broadway without the over-abundance of parking just fine. I'm with Needleman.

The Hispanic-oriented retail district along Broadway in downtown Los Angeles, renowned for generating gross sales surpassing virtually all other local retail districts except Rodeo Drive. While retail stores on Broadway sell mostly small-ticket items and are frequented by mostly low-income Hispanic families, they have been known to regularly generate higher gross sales per square foot than even some exclusive boutiques on Rodeo Drive. Broadway shop owners, in turn, also pay rental rates approaching those paid by their high-brow Beverly Hills counterparts.http://www.allbusiness.com/sales/504434-1.html

Many of the existing Latino tenants on Broadway, for example, pay as much as $8 a square foot per month for street-front space on the busy corridor (more than what people pay in Beverly Hills), often in cash. It's a deal few landlords want to give up, and an arrangement that would discourage "mainstream" tenants such as bookstores, boutiques and high-end restaurants.http://www.ladowntownnews.com/articles/2007/12/03/news/news01.txt

By asking landlords to lower rents to bring in "desired" tenants and building multi-million do$$ar parking garages(w/ tax dollars) because uncouth and underexposed Josh and Meegan feel it's scary to ride a train dressed up when people do the same thing that they do the world over, is continued below the radar affirmative action for all of the wrong reasons and for all of the wrong people.

pesto

May 5th, 2010, 07:44 PM

Well, it’s entertaining to air the issues every few months. In general, there is much to agree with in your comments but I'm not sure that DT is the place where they apply.

First, it seems like once again you are painting a thriving picture of Bway; high rents, businesses with high turnover, along with sort of a yuppie driven conspiracy to take them over. It makes you wonder how these local retailers can accomplish this. Maybe it’s by selling knock-offs and stolen merchandise, having cheesy plastic signs and fixtures reminiscent of the 3rd world, minimal building maintenance and (presumably) way below legal pay scales with no benefits. I’m just guessing.

The rents you cite hardly seem like BH rents. I would like some more detail on the size of the space rented at those rates. Do the front 5 ft. go for high rates and the back 70 ft. and upper 12 stories go for zero? That’s not BH rents, that’s Gary, Indiana rents. But in any event, it’s a matter for the landlords to determine if they like the current arrangements or not. No one is forcing them to do anything. Is there some group of landlords who believe they will be getting lower rents after the Bway renovation program?

Second, DT SF and Manhattan are places with huge demand for housing far exceeding any reasonable level of availability and with density that by almost anyone’s standards is too high. Controlling growth by limiting parking (or water meters or sewer connections, etc.) makes some sense. Relatively speaking, DT LA has very low demand, low density and low prices. The issue here is not to meter the number of people, it’s to encourage them. There is plenty of room for growth eastward in both existing and new buildings and reasonable levels of parking is an amenity. In SF and NY those who can afford it, sometimes pay $1000’s a month to get parking and many others fight for on-street parking. I don’t think DT LA can get arrogant about eliminating parking, at least not yet.

More generally, there are going to be hundreds of new buildings going up between, say, Hill and the river. They will need parking for residents, shoppers and other visitors. This can be provided in relatively discreet 3-5 story garages (with ground retail, offices above, etc.) or by the hundreds of surface lots already there (it’s not like we are running out of room). For the sake of argument, say there were 10 surface lots on Bway near the theaters. Wouldn’t it be better to build 2 multi-story garages instead? And convert the rest to parks or other uses?

In any event, I could live with a program to standardize the opening hours and terms of lots DT so that visitors could feel comfortable that parking was available and not a matter of hunting for who’s open and how late and how much they feel like charging that day. But discreet garages strike me as more beneficial than scattered surface lots.

klamedia

May 6th, 2010, 11:16 AM

I cited two articles one from our very own and much invested in downtown Downtown News. If you still want to quibble about whether or not the retailers currently there are paying BH rents or how they are able to generate so much revenue from people who got there on a bus, why don't you go and find an article(s) that refutes what I researched. You asked for it and I came with it and now I'm done with it.

Now about parking downtown. I just don't see how your suggestions about parking availability and making space for even more cars is going to change anyone's commute habits or travel methods. The demand that you cite in SF and NYC having is contingent on transit as well as land available, I know that you understand that. We also know that it is purely artificial since especially in NYC there is plenty of land to continue to grow outward. In fact unlike SF and LA, NYC isn't even hemmed in by natural boundaries.
Los Angeles also has pretty astronomical and skewed pricing for residential, you do understand that as well. In fact LA's problem is a lack of affordable housing and a deficit in overall residential units. We already know that to accommodate the steady stream that is expected to come to LA over the next 30 years we need to build many more residential units i.e. multi-family dwellings. We also know that it would be counterproductive to reduce or mitigate congestion( in reality ) by adding thousands of newly constructed units within the city and encourage more driving and car ownership. You sound as if you think of LA as Phoenix or Albuquerque, we are not predicting a congestion crisis 20 years from now, we're in it now! What better way to suppress car dependency in the city in the hope that other dense and transit accessible areas follow the lead of downtown LA by discouraging car usage and car dependency in the Central City and making downtown the archetypal 21st century neighborhood for LA?
Btw you must have never visited Bdwy because if you had you would have known that it's a pretty busy and bustling thoroughfare already. Which again begs the question: If people are already using public transportation to get to Broadway now why is their a need to add additional parking? For whom?

Fern~Fern*

July 7th, 2010, 06:08 AM

I went Downtown during the week and saw a tour bus with tourist on Broadway. Unfortunately, I did not have my camera nor celly handy!

milquetoast

July 8th, 2010, 11:22 AM

^^ So then it doesn't really matter- what are you doing down there anyways? That's for the cultured peoples of the world, Ferns!

Calsonic

August 14th, 2010, 03:38 AM

croyboy

August 14th, 2010, 10:07 AM

actually, you probably need that many people to keep all those businesses in business

pesto

August 14th, 2010, 07:16 PM

That picture compares interestingly with Bway at 7:00 in the evening. On the other hand 3rd St. Promenade was quite crowded on the weekend and Monday.

klamedia

August 14th, 2010, 07:58 PM

You're basically barking up the wrong tree. That will probably never be a "Broadway". That is more along the lines of Hollywood & Highland or the Promenade/Pier NOW!

Calsonic

August 14th, 2010, 10:12 PM

Hollywood and Highland and promenade is nowhere close to being like Nanjing Road.
What makes it Different from the promenade:
-The street stretches for about 2 miles of muti tiered shopping. Promenade is on .38 miles of single levels.
-It is right in the middle of the city with Shanghai Museum, Shanghai Art Museum, Shanghai Grand Theater, and People's Square all just one subway stop away to the west. Yuyuan Garden and Old Downtown Shanghai one subway stop to the south. Pudong district( With all those tall buildings) one subway stop to the east.
-There is no subway line to 3rd street as of now.
What makes it similar is that Santa Monica has the pier and Shanghai has the Bund where you can see Pudong across the river.
Nanjing Road being located in the middle of the city makes everything more dynamic as you can travel around to other places also.

What about with Hollywood and Highland?
It doesn't stretch that far. Only has the Kodak theater. You can finish it in a couple of hours. It's not that close to downtown.

Now if Broadway can develop like Nanjing Road, we would have almost a mile of street space and multi level shopping. LA Live and Concert Hall are just a street cars distance away, LACMA, Little Tokyo(they are developing their own small shopping town), China Town, Japanese American Museum, are all close by. If LA Central and that park over the 101 were to be built, that would be a plus. There is just so much potential with Downtown LA to be the greatest city center in the world. There just needs to be something to unlock it. That is what this Broadway project can do.

Mr.Hollywood

August 15th, 2010, 02:27 PM

i Agree 100% i LOVE LA but it needs to Get its Act Together for Something that Extraordinary to Happen

pesto

August 15th, 2010, 06:02 PM

calsonic: not crazy about the red banners

Actually, it's an interesting vision, but that's a ways off. For now, a trolley, a thorough cleaning, some middle range businesses and some improved occupancy in the classic old buildings is probably the do-able game plan. The tourist spillover from Grand, Olvera and LA Live is worth something too.

Neon signs and lighting the buildings like some on 7th are now doing would be interesting as well.

klamedia

August 15th, 2010, 07:29 PM

Ok I see your vision which doesn't just encompass Broadway but the whole of downtown. Likewise the .38 mile Promenade spills out over to the SM Pier and that spills out all the way down to Venice Beach that has to be longer than just .38 miles. Have you seen the aerial shots of these places on a good weekend? Two different places to be sure. But I say revitalizing downtown is great but let's work with what is working now. We have one rail line being built to the Promenade for sure within the next 5 years or so and possibly a second planned sometime in the future. What LA is known for (at least one of the things) is its beaches and beach culture due to its climate. As a tourist I wouldn't want to come to LA and see only downtown in a city that is known for its sun, beaches and beautiful people.
My vision is not just one centered area of excitement but in true LA fashion having different nodes serving different interests. Hollywood really should be our sign district and hold much of the Vegasy/Times Square gaudiness and tackiness that was shown in the previous photo of Nanjing Rd. Downtown will be a cultural and entertainment district while SM/Venice takes care of the beachfront attractions. Hopefully all connected by rail transit in the near future.

pesto

August 17th, 2010, 03:02 AM

amen.

I'm not pushing either way, but the Nanjing Rd. scenario is rather inconsistent with the "slow-down-traffic, neighbors-greeting-neighhbors" scenario. It's hard to have honky tonk gaudiness on Bway and quiet cafes and dog-walking on Hill and Spring.

soup or man

August 29th, 2010, 05:34 PM

Would be great if they cut off traffic to this project. I just came back from Shanghai and this street called Nanjing Road over there is very amazing and lively. I wish we could have something like this in LA.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2125/2912986161_790c002daf_b.jpg
of course with a little less people ;)

This is what I DON'T want to see happen to Broadway. A lot of times, people think that lights and pretty colors add to a urban environment. Which simply isn't true. What Broadway needs is a mixture of businesses (ranging from Gucci and Prada to Pancho's Tacos and McD's) that cater towards everyone. Residential conversions is also needed so Broadway could be truly 24 hours. Not only that but the theaters need to be restored and utilized not just for concert venues but for Broadway musicals and cultural events. Broadway needs to not be the Gaslamp District. What Broadway needs to be is a anchor to the lights and sounds of LA Live to the culture and refinement of Bunker Hill.

Calsonic

August 30th, 2010, 12:26 AM

This is what I DON'T want to see happen to Broadway. A lot of times, people think that lights and pretty colors add to a urban environment. Which simply isn't true. What Broadway needs is a mixture of businesses (ranging from Gucci and Prada to Pancho's Tacos and McD's) that cater towards everyone. Residential conversions is also needed so Broadway could be truly 24 hours. Not only that but the theaters need to be restored and utilized not just for concert venues but for Broadway musicals and cultural events. Broadway needs to not be the Gaslamp District. What Broadway needs to be is a anchor to the lights and sounds of LA Live to the culture and refinement of Bunker Hill.
Lights and pretty colors DO add to an urban environment visually. It is probably what people would remember the place by. Many great shopping and gathering urban places use lights and glamor.

Times Square of course
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_urwVlrQqWC0/SmQMzCJ8iII/AAAAAAAABn0/KRaAvg2PLQc/s1600/Times+Square+Skate.jpg

Nathan Road in the Tsim Sha Tusi district in HK
http://www.12hk.com/area/TST/TST_NathanRoad_IMG_0592_w600.jpg

Shinjuku
http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/tokyo/image/shinjuku-neon.jpg

Shibuya
http://images1.fanpop.com/images/photos/2200000/Shibuya-Crossing-japan-2281944-2560-1920.jpg

Ximen Road in Taipei
http://s2.hubimg.com/u/53273_f520.jpg

Mongkok in HK
http://thehongkongtravelguide.com/pix/mongkok.jpg

I agree that the things you listed will add a lot to the environment, however if you take away the bright lights, the environment wont have a lively feel to it.

soup or man

August 30th, 2010, 01:49 AM

Leave that shit for LA Live. Broadway is so much better than that.

Aside from that, you can have a old building (such as those on Broadway), and light them up and still have them look very cool and classy. Have you seen The Roosevelt?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3222/3095766510_af1a8c1afc_b.jpg

Calsonic

August 30th, 2010, 02:27 AM

soup or man

August 30th, 2010, 04:38 PM

I've seen it. It's pretty nice at night.
LA Live is small. If you're not going to a concert or game, there is nothing there to do but eat. Even with LA Central, it would still be small in comparison to these places and Broadway.
Broadway is suppose to be a place with liveliness and bright lights since it is a theater district also. Isn't that what Broadway is like in NY?

I've been to Ximen, Nanjing Road, Mongkok, and Nathan Road and just the atmosphere with the bright lights and adverts and shops surrounding it make just standing in one place exciting. I go to 3rd street, the atmosphere feels generic.

LA Live is small. But it has a tremendous amount of space to grow.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_-ycIEdQ6wf0/THNy4MppMII/AAAAAAAAAUo/woCsocbXW8M/s912/IMG_3850.JPG
ziggy3331

I see room for at least 8 or 9 buildings. Just in that shot alone. That's not to mention the space directly east of Staples.

Broadway I want to see it turned into a place of refinement and shopping and dining and clubs with lots of rehabbed buildings. They need to be whitewashed and filled with people. But I don't want it to turn into some dumb tourist trap full of tacky lights and 20 foot tall McDonalds ads.

This I can live with though:
http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1037.jpg
http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1035.jpg
http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww181/FightOnArchies/Broadway/DSCN1050.jpg

Calsonic

August 30th, 2010, 07:51 PM

soup or man

August 30th, 2010, 09:05 PM

That is another billions of dollars AEG would have to spend and another 25 years away before anything gets started knowing LA.

When I see those pics of Broadway, I just can't help but think of Victoria Gardens or Irvine Spectrum with bigger buildings.
I don't think the lights will look tacky if they are done right. They certainly looked amazing in the places I went.

Anything can look amazing when done correctly. But in an area as important as Broadway, plastering giant flashing ads for Toshiba, Gatorade, Playstation 3 and McDonalds is not warranted. As I said, leave that type of stuff for LA Live. I don't want to see Broadway look like Vegas or Hong Kong.

Broadway could look totally amazing at night without the need for huge jumbo lighting displays. You can have ultra modern nighttime displays mesh extremely well with old buildings. This is the type of stuff that I would put along Broadway (and throughout the Historic Core for that fact).

http://www.thefifthestate.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/smart-light-lumeoncity-by-sascha-crocker-andrew-daly-and-sean-bryen4-390x421.jpg

http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/rlovegrovesolartreess.jpg

http://www.thenewecologist.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/urban-nights.jpg

http://www.enlightermagazine.com/images/2008/11/this-way-2.jpg

http://www.wintermagic.ca/files/images/DSCF6629resize.jpg

http://www.enlightermagazine.com/images/2009/03/moodwall1.jpg

http://www.quartierdesspectacles.com/files/projets/2/project_bigimage.gif

http://www.urbanartcore.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/luz-interruptus-light-art.jpg

http://www.enlightermagazine.com/images/2009/01/binary_waves_345.jpg

http://www.nichemodern.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2563435109_15b2bb937a_o.jpg

http://www.urbanartcore.eu/thumbs/kubik-berlin-l.jpg

http://www.manhattanstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Grand-Central-Light-Show.jpg

http://www.urbislighting.com/images/switch_on/2003/20033_thylia_night.jpg

http://www.urbanprojects.ltd.uk/portfolio/civic/civic/blackburn_files/blackburn-2.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2718/4310918097_de784af70b_o.jpg

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p139/doperpopsicle/SM%20Light%20Residences/lightscalemodel.jpg

http://www.portsmouthnh.com/musichall/images/21stC_BeauxArtsLobby_560.jpg

http://illusion.scene360.com/wp-content/themes/sahara-10/submissions/img1.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_g_uUtJnuE-Y/TFCrn6mwiHI/AAAAAAAAAyg/HPoAjdAsLeQ/s1600/112.jpg

Mr.Hollywood

August 30th, 2010, 11:30 PM

soup or man

August 31st, 2010, 12:07 AM

Broadway needs more than Gucci, Prada, and Coach. Broadway needs class and elegance. Something that matches the architecture on Broadway. Los Angeles has the largest collection of pre war buildings in the US. Something other than stores that you can find at any mall in the US is warranted. I'd reach higher: Bograds, Van Clef and Arples, Tiffany, Barney's, numerous high class restaurants and clubs. Not to mention preforming arts centers, a museum (Broadway would strike GOLD if there was a museum devoted to the history of Los Angeles), and event centers. Cultural events, concerts and those sort of events could very easily happen on Broadway.

I think that Spring Street is fast turning into a haven for hipsters.

CITYofDREAMS

August 31st, 2010, 12:34 AM

http://i37.tinypic.com/2a7901d.jpg

Now... that looks classy. The street doesn't look polluted with signs but lively with people all over. It almost has a European feel to it.

Mr.Hollywood

August 31st, 2010, 04:51 AM

^^ I know right and i do agree with Soup aswell. But what do you guys think in a realistic way the city of LA will do to fix it up or in the shoes of the city planning what would they propose for Broadway? How will it most likely look in a few years?

XLucky4LifeX

August 31st, 2010, 05:41 AM

There should be a mall in Broadway for high-class stores. Fill up one of those parking lots. Like Santa Monica Place, Hollywood Highland, and throughout the world, they all have a mall and is very successful. Broadway is the perfect spot for one. I think the classy stores wouldn't want to replace the ghetto stores. And they don't want to be next to the ghetto stores either.

Kenni

August 31st, 2010, 06:07 AM

I REALLY want to see those Red Cars up and down Broadway!

LosAngelesSportsFan

August 31st, 2010, 08:45 AM

We all want Broadway to be revitalized. i think it has slowly started with the changes and rehabs of some of the buildings. Obviously the bringing back Broadway initiative is huge with the red car, the landscaping and design specifications. I also think that any building less than 5 stories should be torn down and replaced with something between 6 - 25 stories tall. We dont need those shitty buildings like the el pollo loco or some of the other shit that was built in the 60's- 90's.

Also, its amazing what can happen in a short period of time. For example, Spring street between 4th and 7th has changed dramatically in the last few years. same with 7th from Fig - Olive. it can happen, we just need the city to invest in landscaping, maintenance and implementation of design standards.

immillizy_854

August 31st, 2010, 03:14 PM

but being realistic what is something the City of LA might actually do with Broadway?? LA is too focused on other issues and i doubt anything big might happen in broadway for the next 10 yrs.... it sucks i aswell agree it should be improoved with more cleanliness and major renovations on the older buildings but i doubt it will be anything major enough for the city of LA..

They Need to change those ghetto stores that probably have 5 customers a day and change it into what would be Gucci, Prada, Coach, A/X, maybe even a Starbucks, and some nice restaurants all a bit more attractive but before we do all that it needs to clean up alot!!! and once they fix up the buildings and get the lighting together a few billboards here and there and just badd some neon lights for the fuck of it maybe and then you add the stores and restaurants and cafes, businesses, and i can almost promise you with my life it would be KNOWN much more and would definitely make more money than it obviously is now... we Dont have to even be anywhere near the times square look at all or anything too tacky but i have to agree that some neon lights and billboards will definitely attract alot of people but Broadway is definitely going to be unique from alot of other places.

and now that you have seen both Broadway pics you come to realize the first one is BEYOND depressing compared to the second where you see the potential it has.. i♥broadway but the City needs to do something about it already

Broadway needs more than Gucci, Prada, and Coach. Broadway needs class and elegance. Something that matches the architecture on Broadway. Los Angeles has the largest collection of pre war buildings in the US. Something other than stores that you can find at any mall in the US is warranted. I'd reach higher: Bograds, Van Clef and Arples, Tiffany, Barney's, numerous high class restaurants and clubs. Not to mention preforming arts centers, a museum (Broadway would strike GOLD if there was a museum devoted to the history of Los Angeles), and event centers. Cultural events, concerts and those sort of events could very easily happen on Broadway.

I think that Spring Street is fast turning into a haven for hipsters.

The current and even emerging demographics wouldn't fit the stores, nor would anybody commute to Broadway when Rodeo Drive is closer, assuming the commuters are from the suburbs. If anything, upscale stores would enter downtown as part of the Grand Avenue Project, a reinvention comparable with Michigan Avenue in Chicago, while Broadway is like State Street.

This is a map of Downtown in its heyday.

http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/newdowntownmap.jpg

soup or man

August 31st, 2010, 04:53 PM

Also, its amazing what can happen in a short period of time. For example, Spring street between 4th and 7th has changed dramatically in the last few years. same with 7th from Fig - Olive. it can happen, we just need the city to invest in landscaping, maintenance and implementation of design standards.

I don't know what it is but Spring Street feels totally different than any other part of downtown. It almost feels like the East Village. I really like Spring Street and it's overall feel (plus it looks nice) and I hope other parts of downtown will start to feel that way too.

And this needs to be said: NO MALLS ON BROADWAY!!!!

OneMetropolis

August 31st, 2010, 08:47 PM

soup or man

August 31st, 2010, 08:53 PM

Why is the city of LA so scared of gentrifiying Broadway and the surrounding area? Why cant they just revitailize it already. San Diego downtown made the Gaslamp and before it was a craphole, but the city implemented this plan to clean up the area and now we have a lively active dowton thats not shitty, whats taking downtown LA forever?

Easy answer: The stores on Broadway now are largely catered towards Latinos. If you were to run out Maria's House of Tacos and in it's place put in a Gucci or Prada or whatever else (read: a store for rich white people can shop), then they are going to get bombarded by all sorts of civil rights lawsuits and all that jazz. Broadway is much larger than the Gaslamp and to be quite honest, has more potential than the Gaslamp. The Gaslamp is nice but doesn't feel real. It's more catered towards frat boys and girls with no asses. Basically the Hooters crowd.

Mr.Hollywood

September 1st, 2010, 12:18 AM

The current and even emerging demographics wouldn't fit the stores, nor would anybody commute to Broadway when Rodeo Drive is closer, assuming the commuters are from the suburbs. If anything, upscale stores would enter downtown as part of the Grand Avenue Project, a reinvention comparable with Michigan Avenue in Chicago, while Broadway is like State Street.

Okay so Maybe Large Stores Might not be the Best Idea for broadway but all those little stores crammed in next to eachother can tear the walls down and make bigger space and and its right on how all those rich stores like gucci prada and what not may not want to replace the ghettos and thats exactly what i meant by having to first renovate the buildings and the whole area into something more classy and close down Marias tacos and Such hahah and then once the place has its act together then add the good stores..... Broadway does Have ALOT of Potential.. damn i wish there was a freakin way we could convince the city of LA to Clean Up Broadway... LETS ALL GO ON STRIKE HAHAH! :wtf::omg::cheer::cheer::speech::baaa::soapbox::gunz:

croyboy

September 1st, 2010, 06:35 AM

there's still a lot of parking lots on the north and south ends of broadway. high density shopping developments can be built there for the centralized stores to spread out into while the buildings between 3rd and 9th gets renovated and cleaned up.

there really needs to be a full blown arcade between 5th and 6th so that there is more to do than just shop. there needs to be more hangout places on broadway.

Calsonic

September 1st, 2010, 07:58 AM

I totally agree with the arcade :D

soup or man

September 1st, 2010, 05:23 PM

OneMetropolis

September 1st, 2010, 07:09 PM

Easy answer: The stores on Broadway now are largely catered towards Latinos. If you were to run out Maria's House of Tacos and in it's place put in a Gucci or Prada or whatever else (read: a store for rich white people can shop), then they are going to get bombarded by all sorts of civil rights lawsuits and all that jazz. Broadway is much larger than the Gaslamp and to be quite honest, has more potential than the Gaslamp. The Gaslamp is nice but doesn't feel real. It's more catered towards frat boys and girls with no asses. Basically the Hooters crowd.

Well isn't that part of community redevelpement? Why can't the latnio businesses realize they're in a urban area ripe for developement and just move? There should be some type of ordinance or something. And yeah the 'Gag-lamp' as i like to call it, could have done wayyy better. It's a place for conventioneers, and out-of-towners, nothing authentic for locals down there, but it works for san diego.

klamedia

September 2nd, 2010, 02:02 AM

Most don't realize that what is there on Broadway presently is thriving or was up until the crash. Property owners had been charging sq. ft Beverly Hills type rental prices for those supposedly "crappy" stores. Additionally Broadway has become a central merchandising strip for many Mexican and Central American businesses. With that said, Los Angeles has a very active "latino" population that is very sensitive to Broadway and the needs of "latinos" throughout the region. In fact LA has been comparably sensitive to the homeless population that resides downtown namely in the Skid Row area more than say the NYC's and Chicago's of the country. So what we are looking at is present day Los Angeles as the largest minority majority city in the US also having something of a proletariat bent to it would not politically just sweep poor "latinos" or homeless under the rug even if that's what it really wants to do. And I'd even go so far as to say that in the end it may just sweep them under the rug but it will be done with much more grace and strategy than a San Diego which is still deeply conservative, very much still politically white and not at center stage like a city like Los Angeles. Could you imagine the political fallout for Mayor V if he was yoked with the criticism that he got rid of a thriving Mexican and Central American thoroughfare for the likes of frat boys and the girls gone wild type that largely populate the Gaslamp on any given weekend? Two very different cities. Should be in two different states.

croyboy

September 2nd, 2010, 06:48 AM

i don't mind the businesses that are there... just that it would look more organized instead of 10 shops in one building (which is still fine) that are only divided by curtains for walls or just bright duct tape on the concrete floors... basically the indoor swapmeet feeling of our "glorious" broadway.

that is makes me want to see the businesses relocate (permanently or temperarely) until the historic structures are refurbished/renovated and reutilized.

jlee

September 2nd, 2010, 09:54 AM

http://i37.tinypic.com/2a7901d.jpg

Now... that looks classy. The street doesn't look polluted with signs but lively with people all over. It almost has a European feel to it.

Looks like San Francisco's Market St, but that's not a bad thing. A lively shopping area would be a welcome addition downtown.

immillizy_854

September 2nd, 2010, 05:28 PM

Well isn't that part of community redevelpement? Why can't the latnio businesses realize they're in a urban area ripe for developement and just move? There should be some type of ordinance or something. And yeah the 'Gag-lamp' as i like to call it, could have done wayyy better. It's a place for conventioneers, and out-of-towners, nothing authentic for locals down there, but it works for san diego.

Bringing Back Broadway is actually backed by all these businesses, rather than stuck the middle. Who is in the middle is the hipster art gallery crowd which sparked the boom but couldn't keep up with the increasing rents.

immillizy_854

September 2nd, 2010, 05:30 PM

klamedia

September 3rd, 2010, 02:45 AM

With the exception that SF is not deeply conservative.

immillizy_854

September 3rd, 2010, 04:11 AM

With the exception that SF is not deeply conservative.

Yeah, definately not. But I would call San Diego a swing. Apart from its naval base, it doesn't look conservative at street level.

Imperfect Ending

September 3rd, 2010, 09:14 AM

San Francisco people are hella bitchy though

klamedia

September 3rd, 2010, 06:56 PM

Yeah they seem to have the Boston complex.

ElOhEl

September 21st, 2010, 12:53 AM

Awesome thread.
I was just around Broadway (well the entire historic core) this past Saturday; the area's abuzz with activity. Amazing potential.

pesto

September 21st, 2010, 05:08 PM

from a BringingBackBroadway "Media Announcement" I got:

After generations of ownership by the Clinton family, stewardship of Clifton’s Cafeteria at 648 S. Broadway is changing hands. Andrew Meieran, proprieter of The Edison in Downtown Los Angeles, is taking the reins.

Meieran will join Councilmember José Huizar, Robert Clinton of the Clifton family, community leaders and project partners to discuss details of his plans for the iconic cafeteria on Tuesday Sept. 21 at 9 a.m. Meieran’s intention is for the business to bring activity to Broadway both daytime and during evening hours as a contributor to the Bringing Back Broadway revitalization initiative. He hopes to retain the cafeteria’s current 65 employees and add 100 or more new jobs. Meieran will partner with Midnight Mission’s restaurant training and job placement program to recruit new employees for the business.

Plans, which will be discussed with the public, include a continued community focus for the operation of the business, numerous interior and exterior preservation projects to celebrate the historic ambiance that makes Clifton’s so special, maintaining the business’ cafeteria-style service, adding sit-down restaurant and bar service in the upper floors and reactivating the historic Clifton’s Bakery.

This looks like another step in the right direction. It's got some tourist appeal, with its history and quirkiness, but it also sounds like it will deal with the new residents of the area as well.

tanzirian

September 22nd, 2010, 05:06 AM

http://i37.tinypic.com/2a7901d.jpg

Hope this becomes a reality. Revitalization of Broadway + completion of the park in front of City Hall + demolition of some of the hideous concrete boxes built from the 50s to the 70s - are my main hopes for downtown for the next decade or two. A greener Pershing Square and a new skyscraper or two wouldn't be bad either :)

fengleiying

October 24th, 2010, 10:30 AM

Very nice post. This will help possible client to get a quality person.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i am playing runescape and have a runescape accounts level 63cheap uggs (http://www.cheap-uggclassicboots.com) and uggs boots (http://branduggbootsuk.com) and uggs on sale (http://www.myuggsonsale.com) and wedding dresses (http://www.weddingdressebay.com) and cheap nfl jerseys (http://www.veryverycheap.us)

Israfel

December 30th, 2010, 09:24 PM

Hi, new to the place, but I felt like sharing this article I recently came across. Hope it sparks up something in this discussion. Feel free to go to the link.

http://www.intersectionssouthla.org/index.php/story/activists_seek_new_life_for_downtown_l.a._theatre_district/

Activists seek new life for Downtown L.A. Theatre District
Catherine Cloutier | 12-29-2010 |

The large electric sign that rose above Clune’s Broadway once read “The Time, the Place.”

Opened in 1910, Clune’s Broadway was one of the first two theatres built on Broadway in Downtown Los Angeles.

The Los Angeles Times described the theatre as “handsome” and “elaborate” upon its opening. Clune’s Broadway, which was also known as the Cameo Theatre, was built to be a “picture playhouse,” and that was what it remained during its 81-year-run as an operating movie theatre.

Today, Clune’s Broadway is no longer the “time” or the “place.” In fact, it is no longer a theatre. The seats are removed, the molding crumbled and the interior littered with boxes and unsold electronics.

Clune’s Broadway stands in the heart of Los Angeles’ historic Theatre District. The district is home to 12 theaters, many of which are shells of their former selves. The majestic buildings once awaited hoards of theatre-goers. Now, they prove mere interruptions to a landscape of magazine vendors, second-hand watch stores and lingerie shops.

The Theatre District on Prezi

“Broadway’s been a neglected corridor for many years,” said Jessica Wethington Mclean, the coordinator for Bringing Back Broadway.

For that reason, both the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Conservancy passed initiatives to “bring back Broadway.”

In 2008, Los Angeles City Councilmember José Huizar enacted the 10-year Bringing Back Broadway plan, which seeks to repair broken sidewalks, increase parking options and attract more private business to the district. Seeing the Theatre District—often referred to as the “birthplace of entertainment”—in disuse and disrepair, Huizar felt strongly that city-sponsored preservation and revitalization efforts were necessary.

“He spent a lot of time there as a kid and he remembers how important Broadway is to the city,” said Mclean. “He really wants to do everything he can to make sure the corridor gets the attention it needs to make sure his children and their children can enjoy it.”

While vendors occupy several of the storefronts along Broadway—though Mclean said there is a 20 percent vacancy rate on the ground level—1 to 2 million square feet of commercial space on the upper floors are vacant. The goal of Bringing Back Broadway is to fill that space.

“Once the city steps in and really pays attention to the corridor, making it nice, making it viable in the public right of way, when that all starts to really work, it makes private investment make a whole lot more sense,” said Mclean.

The plan, which Mclean emphasized requires public and private partnerships, also applies to the street’s theatres. Mclean said the owners of the Los Angeles and the Palace theatres have issued letters of intent to restore the theatres as entertainment venues if the city complies in providing more parking and loading zones.

imageWhile the City of Los Angeles has focused its efforts on making the district appealing to investors, the Los Angeles Conservancy has worked to promote the restoration of its 12 theatres.

In 1999, the Conservancy set its preservation sights on Broadway.

“It was still a vibrant area—there was a big vibrant shopping district in the 90s—by day, but at night it was totally shuttered,” said Cindy Olnick, the director of Communications at the Los Angeles Conservancy. “So, we thought what could we do to bring Broadway back to the vibrant 24-hour urban community that it was in the day.”

As part of the Broadway initiative, the Conservancy began hosting and advertising entertainment programs in the theatres on Broadway. One of its series, the weeklong classic movie festival Last Remaining Seats is sold out every year.

“Once people see the theatres for themselves, they can’t help but want to preserve them,” said Olnick. “We want to create the constituency and the awareness that the theatres are still there, they are still viable and they just need some programming to get them started.”

The Broadway initiative also drafted construction guidelines for the historic buildings in the Theatre District.

Both the Broadway initiative and Bringing Back Broadway promote the use of the theatres for other purposes—while maintaining their original structures, of course.

Loew’s State, once the most profitable theatre on Broadway, is now a Spanish-language church. The Warner Bros. Theatre now houses a jewelry mart.

“In a perfect world, it would be great to have these things used for their intended purpose,” said Olnick. “But the fact is that times change, people’s needs change and the needs of the community change.”

John Ghini, a docent on the Conservancy’s Theatre District tour, said that he hoped that, with the efforts of the city and the Conservancy, the Theatre District would achieve its former glory in the next decade.

“In its height there were 17,000 people in the theatres, if the theatres were full, there were dance halls, there were restaurants,” said Ghini. “This place was really alive. It had vibrance, and these theatres helped do that.”

While vibrance is the long-term goal, Broadway activists are now working on filling the vacant, fixing the broken and preserving the old.

“Whatever keeps the theatres standing is what we’re for,” said Olnick. “Whatever keeps them standing and well cared for and preserved.”

shtoopid

December 31st, 2010, 01:36 AM

Well isn't that part of community redevelpement? Why can't the latnio businesses realize they're in a urban area ripe for developement and just move? There should be some type of ordinance or something. And yeah the 'Gag-lamp' as i like to call it, could have done wayyy better. It's a place for conventioneers, and out-of-towners, nothing authentic for locals down there, but it works for san diego.

:lol::lol::lol::ohno: you think it's that simple? if you've been working somewhere for years are you just gonna up and move because someone said your business was too "ghetto?"

pwright1

February 16th, 2011, 12:08 PM

pesto

February 16th, 2011, 05:44 PM

I've been living here for 6 months now and I am still mezmorized with this grand street. Sometimes I just walk up and down looking at what was and what Broadway could be. I see the old Bonds clothing store and the old Woolworth's 5&10, now just sitting vacant. What a shame.

The only difference between Rodeo Dr. or Park Ave and Broadway is people with a vision. Make it happen. Maybe it's your destiny.

saiholmes

November 23rd, 2011, 04:59 AM

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2011-11/66267885.jpg

L.A. movie palaces get starring role in period films
The downtown theaters, several of which have been renovated, provide authentic atmosphere in 'J. Edgar' and 'The Artist' and can double as nightclubs, casinos and hotel lobbies.
By Richard Verrier, Los Angeles Times
6:20 PM PST, November 22, 2011

The opulent picture palaces and vaudeville halls of downtown Los Angeles may be monuments to a bygone era, but they are still keeping their ties to Hollywood.

Theaters in the historic Broadway district, including the Orpheum, the Palace Theatre and the Los Angeles Theatre, are featured in several current and upcoming movies, including Walt Disney Pictures' "The Muppets," Warner Bros.' "J. Edgar" and "The Dark Knight Rises," and the Weinstein Co.'s "The Artist," the silent, black and white, period romance that opens in the U.S. this week.

The elegant structures are popular among location managers and set designers because of their rich and varied architecture, which ranges from Art Deco to French Baroque and Spanish Gothic — sometimes all in the same venue.

"These downtown L.A. theaters constitute a local treasure trove of historic and exotic show palace interiors and exteriors," said Harry Medved, co-author of the book "Location Filming in Los Angeles." "They can double as live theaters, nightclubs, casinos, hotel lobbies or music halls in London, New York, Detroit and Paris."

Another selling point: because they are no longer used to show first run-movies, the buildings are readily available for dressing up as movie sets.

"They are an incredibly valuable resource for filming in Los Angeles," said John Panzarella, location manager for "In Time," the recently released sci-fi thriller starring Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried. Panzarella booked the grand lobby of the Los Angeles Theatre to depict a European casino.

"In Time" is among more than a dozen movies that have filmed at the Broadway district landmark, which was designed by architect Charles Lee and opened in 1931 for the gala screening of Charlie Chaplin's "City Lights." The building, now listed with the National Register of Historic Places, was the last and most extravagant of the downtown movie palaces built between 1910 and 1931. Together, they formed the core of the city's entertainment district, which also hosted live performances by artists as diverse as Judy Garland and Duke Ellington.

Later, they hosted puppets. Producers of "The Muppets" also shot a scene in the same lobby, where Kermit the Frog makes his final speech on the grand staircase.

Most of the original 19 theaters have long since closed. A handful — including the Million Dollar Theater and the Palace — remain open for special events, screenings and concerts. (Loew's State Theatre, at 7th Street and Broadway, is a church.) Several rent their auditoriums, lobbies and ballrooms to film crews, which may be the reason they're still around.

"Their use as film locations is one of the main reasons they are still here and intact," said Hillsman Wright, co-founder of the Los Angeles Historic Theatre Foundation, which has been working to preserve the storied real estate. "They are very powerful buildings that were designed to take you away from the troubled world, particularly during the Depression era. They were built to inspire and they still have that quality."

Richard Middleton, executive producer of "The Artist," said the old movie houses are an asset to a city that has suffered from runaway production.

The Oscar contender is set in the 1920s and tells the story of a silent movie star struggling to adapt to the advent of the talkies. It was filmed on location in Los Angeles, at the Los Angeles Theatre and the Orpheum.

"It's pretty hard to find period-correct theaters that can give you the look from that time," Middleton said. "Luckily for us, these theaters are in good condition and have maintained their architecturally integrity."

In addition to "The Artist," several other movies have filmed at the Orpheum, including "Funny People" "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" and "Dreamgirls." The theater has also been a location for commercials, music videos, live concerts and even performances of "American Idol."

Owner Steve Needleman has invested more than $4 million in improvements to renovate the theater, which he heavily markets as a film location. He says that up to 60% of his business comes from film and TV productions, which pay as much as $10,000 a day to shoot there.

"We're offering a production value to them that you just can't get in other places," Needleman said. "It's getting back to that old- time look of Los Angeles."

Read More: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-onlocation-20111123,0,1638371.story