The LA River Revitalization Master Plan

[redspork02]

Few parks, but L.A. is sitting on pile of green

The city has $77 million in unspent developers fees for grassy venues. Report angers builders.

By Steve Hymon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 20, 2007

In a city widely acknowledged to be woefully short of parks, Los Angeles has about $77.5 million in fees it has collected from developers for outdoor improvements but has yet to spend, a city report says.

The report, issued by city parks chief Jon Kirk Mukri, contains noteworthy passages despite its bureaucratic prose:

"While . . . fee collections have grown rapidly, the necessary Department staff and infrastructure for the proper accounting, tracking, and distribution of these funds have never been acquired," wrote Mukri.

Nor, he added, does the city have a comprehensive plan for matching the money with the needs around the city.

The parks issue came to a head recently, with some downtown developers expressing anger over the city's proposed elimination of a fee discount. The so-called Quimby fees, named for the 1975 law that created them, range from about $3,000 to $10,000 per new residential unit.

Developers who have been wanting to know how the city accounts for and spends those fees are particularly peeved by Mukri's acknowledgment that his department doesn't have the answers.

"In a city that cries poverty every 20 minutes, it's amazing there's that kind of money waiting to be spent on the thing that people want the most," said Tom Gilmore, who has been developing apartments and lofts downtown for the last decade.

"I'm not complaining about paying the fees, I'm just saying, 'Show me some results,' " he added. "I want to see green space -- and not just the green space outside City Hall."

Gilmore has filed an appeal to the proposed elimination of the discount. He said he may drop it if the city can demonstrate where the Quimby fees are going.

Carl Schatz, president of the Central City Assn., which represents downtown developers, was more scathing. "The report from the city was just one excuse after another. We've yet to see one blade of grass from this."

City Controller Laura Chick has said that she will audit how the Quimby fees are tracked.

The report also shows that some council districts have significant sums of unspent money.

Councilman Bill Rosendahl's district, on the city's far west side, has nearly $12 million yet to be earmarked. And the council district in the southwestern San Fernando Valley represented by Councilman Dennis Zine has $11.3 million.

Zine said Friday he knew of the money, much of which was collected in the last two years. The problem, he said, is that Quimby fees must be spent within two miles of the development that generates them, and it's often hard to find available land.

However, downtown Councilwoman Jan Perry said she hadn't been aware of how much money was available for her district. "And we had to beat the stuffing out of [Mukri] just to get this report," Perry said.

Residential construction in Perry's district has generated $15.8 million in park fees over the last five years. About $3.3 million has been spent and $8.8 million may soon be spent on acquiring three parcels for parks in downtown -- one in the arts district, one near the Los Angeles River and another in South Park.

Park costs vary widely. The recently opened, one-fifth-acre Marson Park with a small playground, in Panorama City, cost $650,000, while the tab for rebuilding the gym at Van Ness Recreation Center in South Los Angeles was $3.5 million.

Mukri said in an interview Friday that every council office has been informed of how much Quimby money it had and that it takes time to find effective ways to spend the money. He said the city plans to build 35 parks over the next five years across Los Angeles and is trying to acquire land in downtown for park space.

Although acknowledging that the city's Quimby tracking system isn't up to date, Mukri said a new computer mapping system is in the works. That should make it easier to track money and find where it can be spent, he said.

Mukri dismissed complaints from developers about the fees.

"The fees are typically less than 1% of the price the developers are charging for some of these projects," he said. "We do need park land downtown, and we have a plan."

steve.hymon@latimes.com

[VZN]

^ Wonder why that Kukri guy is sitting on the money?

[redspork02]

Nov 8, 2007 1:02 pm US/Pacific

Victory! Los Angeles Leaders Applaud River Funding
(CBS)
LOS ANGELES Congress on Thursday overrode President Bush’s veto of a water infrastructure bill, and one of the projects that will now benefit is The Los Angeles River Revitalization plan, according to Southland officials.


The Los Angeles City Council signed off in May on the blueprint for rehabilitating 32 miles of the waterway, including 239 parks, open space, pedestrian and bicycle paths, bridges and channel modifications from Canoga Park in the San Fernando Valley to Boyle Heights on the Eastside.




The Water Resources Development Act of 2007, which includes $23 billion for some 900 water projects across the country, was vetoed by the president, who said the bill was too expensive.

The House of Representatives voted to override Tuesday, and on Thursday the Senate voted 79-14 today to override the president's veto, marking the first time Congress has overridden a Bush veto.

The measure includes $25 million for the city's plan to revamp 32 miles of the L.A. River.

"Enactment of the $25 million authorization for Los Angeles River projects ensures the long-term federal commitment to revitalize the blighted areas along the L.A. River and enables Congress to consider annual federal funding for new construction projects," said Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, D-Los Angeles.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said the money gives the city "the opportunity to revive the literal lifeblood of Los Angeles. Thanks to Congresswoman Roybal-Allard's vision and leadership, we will have the resources to revitalize the river and help make L.A. the cleanest and greenest big city in America."

The Los Angeles City Council signed off in May on the blueprint for rehabilitating 32 miles of the waterway, including 239 parks, open space, pedestrian and bicycle paths, bridges and channel modifications from Canoga Park in the San Fernando Valley to Boyle Heights on the Eastside.

The $2 billion plan, which also calls for housing, retail and office space along some parts of the river, will take 20 to 50 years to complete.

Councilman Ed Reyes proposed the major revitalization plan.

"The Los Angeles River, the birthplace of the city of Los Angeles, is a valuable resource to our city. Yet, most people cannot see it, let alone enjoy the opportunities the river presents," he said.

"This historic congressional override means that the people -- not just locally, but at a national level -- see how revitalizing the L.A. River with improved water quality, flood control and environmental restoration will benefit all."

[phattonez]

Wow, thanks, they gave us $25 million for a $2 billion project. Wow, that's 1.2% of what we need.

[cyguy]

yea, but invest that baby at 6% interest and 2 billion will be within reach in only 75 years! (Assume there's no inflation and that LA will be livable in 2082)

[phattonez]

So when does some of this construction start?

Is it all right if we add the Arroyo Seco Parkway Project in this too? It follows a river as well. What's been going on with that project?

[BEATSLIM]

assuming the earth still exist around 2080

[xXFallenXx]

at least it better than nothing, right?
and it's a step in the right direction.

[LAsam]

NIMBY - "But there are special rare bacterial colonies growing in the LA River! We can't mess with nature! Leave the river the way it is!"

[Fern~Fern*]

... oooooh zip it!

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by Ferneynism

... oooooh zip it!

NIMBY - Not to mention the fact that people will want to spend time at the river... increasing traffic! Plus, children may relax by the river and fall in... and drown. Stop making the river nice!

[milquetoast]

I can just see it now, in a report in the year 2013 read, of course, by Paul Moyer: "I'm Paul Moyer the big story today: The L. A. River- and the weather of course has made itself known to the area around the Griffith office construction site, not to mention the 134 freeway. The rain of the past couple of days was too much, but the estimated 4 inches received in the valley this afternoon put the finishing touches on what was once to be the Valley's largest contribution to the L. A. River Revitalization Project. Channel 4's Chuck Henry now at the remains of the site near Griffith Park, Chuck?" - "Thanks Paul, and you can see behind me, now that the sun is finally out, what's left of the massive construction site after the river was 'naturalized' here two years ago. No one was even injured as traffic was halted on the 134 freeway as well as this area of North Glendale being completely evacuated earlier this morning, but the devastation is almost complete. Even though it was predicted, no one could have foreseen the impact of the wall of water that moved through this section of the river today around 2:48 pm. The aerial video here shows where the water moved through the project, up into the office park that was still under construction and on past the Union Pacific tracks and over what used to be San Fernando Road, flooding the neighborhoods to the east. The water continued downriver and compromised the supporting structures for the Ventura freeway, causing the collapse that you see here. President Schwarzenegger has promised the state all the resources it needs for the immediate future, but everyone has seen what has been feared all along; That this project started 5 years ago cannot provide safe, or even adequate flood control, Paul?"- "Chuck, thank you. Well, Colleen, you hate to see this devastation"- Colleen: "Yes, I know. All those poor people and their homes... you really hate to see it..." Paul: "Yes. You really hate to see that happening at all......moving on! Paris Hilton today swore off her current diet, stating that...

[phattonez]

Parks will be built but it will still provide flood control. Taking that away wouldn't be allowed by one group or another.

[redspork02]

Artists are sharply divided over project near L.A. River

Supporters see a boon to the arts district in the proposed complex of housing, shops and gallery space. Foes see an out-of-place, outsize 'wall.'



By Ari B. Bloomekatz, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 9, 2007
The proposed building sprawls across three city blocks and reaches 70 feet high. To some, One Santa Fe would sweeten the gritty streets that run along the Los Angeles River east of downtown. To others, the $140-million project is a monstrosity.

Along this stretch of Santa Fe Avenue, between the bridges on East 1st and 4th streets, chain-link fences topped with razor-wire enclose Metro Rail car repair depots and an employee parking lot. The river is barely visible, and delivery trucks pass noisily along.


Map
"To me, this is visual blight I'm looking at," said Father Spencer T. Kezios, a city planning commissioner. "We have lemons and we're getting lemonade."

But the massive, 500,000-square-foot development has divided local residents, pitting artist against artist -- with violin-makers, architects, designers and painters choosing sides.

At stake, many residents say, is the fate of the arts district, an area that was once a beacon for artists who needed affordable living and work space.

Opponents cannot stomach "the great wall" and argue that One Santa Fe is a byproduct of a sweeping downtown gentrification that is rapidly changing the complexion of local communities.

"This is something that we're going to regret in a decade," said Jeremiah Axelrod, an area resident and history professor who started an opposition website, www.onesantafe.org.

"My big objection is to the scale of the project," he said. "It's going to be an eyesore."

But supporters say builders have compromised with community groups, and would bring vital additions to a neighborhood that has been struggling in recent years. Several neighborhood organizations have signed on to the project; they include the Historic Cultural Neighborhood Council, the Los Angeles River Artist and Business Assn. and the adjacent Southern California Institute of Architecture.

"It's going to provide a lot of neighborhood amenities that have been desperately needed for years," said Tim Keating, 58, who has lived in the district for over two decades.

One of those amenities is a 5,000-square-foot arts community center that developer McGregor Co would lease to Keating's own neighborhood arts organization for $1 a year. The center would provide gallery space, show films and host a variety of cultural activities.

Other plans include 439 rental units, 50,000 square feet of retail space, parking and improvements to the streetscape, such as dozens of trees. Developers hope to break ground next summer. World-renowned architect Michael Maltzan's designs for One Santa Fe are built around the existing Metro structures, and drawings show a narrow series of buildings rising six stories.

But despite Maltzan's prestige, his designs for One Santa Fe look to opponents like nothing short of a large wall.

Foes have described the development as "aircraft carrier-sized." They also say that it lacks affordable housing for young artists and that the complexion of the district will change as One Santa Fe fills up with people who can afford the market rates of luxury lofts.

Julie Rasnussen, who has lived in the arts district about four years, said she would support the project only if it were used exclusively for community art space or to house artists.

She called the design a "weird, mammoth, monster building."

The arts district emerged around the 1970s when young artists illegally moved into abandoned buildings in the area and used the large spaces to both work and live in. The city passed an ordinance in 1981 that legalized artists' dwellings in the abandoned industrial buildings.

Once a major hub in L.A.'s art world, with an array of galleries buzzing each weekend, the area in recent years has not been the flourishing arts community that many residents had hoped for. The One Santa Fe project reflects the differences in opinions about how to move forward.

At last month's Los Angeles Planning Commission meeting, artists gave radically different predictions of what effect the project would have on the community.

One woman speaking for the opposition called the project "the essential death of the arts district," while a supporter viewed it as a good thing because "it's an area that needs to be activated."

After more than three hours of discussion, the commission passed the first zoning changes necessary for the project to move forward. The City Council must still approve the development before builders break ground.

ari.bloomekatz@latimes.com

[phattonez]

Transforming wastewater

Thirsty L.A. should take a clue from Orange County.
December 5, 2007

The Orange County Water District's new $480-million Groundwater Replenishment System is set to launch operations Dec. 15. It will take treated wastewater -- a.k.a. sewage -- from an adjacent treatment plant, force it through state-of-the-art microfiltration, reverse-osmosis and ultraviolet-ray purification systems, and then dump the resulting 70 million gallons of purified water a day into a system of ponds in Anaheim, from which it will percolate slowly into an aquifer and into the county's drinking water supply.

When Los Angeles tried to do something like this a decade ago, constructing a $55-million wastewater reclamation plant in the eastern San Fernando Valley, citizens flew off the handle, fretting about the prospect of water flowing from "toilet to tap." Politicians who had supported the project reversed course in 2000 and shut it down.

But Orange County's Groundwater Replenishment System, the largest of its kind in the world, is getting nothing but kudos. Running at full capacity, it will provide enough water to satisfy 140,000 families each year, at a lower cost than relying on imported water from Northern California. It also will reduce the amount of sewage the county dumps into the Pacific Ocean, making beaches cleaner and safer.

On Monday, San Diego's City Council voted to study a water-reuse project of its own, overriding a veto from Mayor Jerry Sanders. And the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is once again considering plans to recycle wastewater.

As the discussions proceed, Angelenos should resist false notions about fecal matter spewing from kitchen faucets and accept the basic truth about, well, fecal matter spewing from kitchen faucets. Water molecules are water molecules are water molecules. The same limited number of them have been recycled continuously for billions of years. Treated sewage already flows into the Colorado River, the San Joaquin River and the Sacramento River -- all upstream sources of L.A.'s water. And that water, once cleaned, is perfectly safe.

With supplies from the Colorado River and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta increasingly unpredictable, regions need to do what they can to tap into local water resources. Wastewater reuse is a relatively cost-effective and environmentally friendly way to make that happen. Cheers to Orange County for outgrowing its potty-humor phase. It's time for Los Angeles to do the same.



Isn't this one of the main parts of the River Revitalization?

[Dimension]

Originally Posted by Ferneynism

... oooooh zip it!

YOUR A NIMBY???? Shame on you if you are.

project looks nice.

[ArchiTennis]

i say build the damn project next to Sci-Arc. stupid NIMBYs!! sci-arc needs a place to house it's students. and, they would get first dibs, from what i was told.

[TICONLA1]

Originally Posted by ArchiTennis

i say build the damn project next to Sci-Arc. stupid NIMBYs!! sci-arc needs a place to house it's students. and, they would get first dibs, from what i was told.

I agree, it will probably another 10 years before anything else (to the tune of 500,000 sq. ft.) is built in that area anyway....!!

[Westsidelife]

Visions of 'Chinatown North'

Planning Begins and Ideas Fly for Vast Expanse Near L.A. River

By Sam Hall Kaplan

When the city began talking about drafting a land-use plan to guide development beyond Chinatown, the area was simply referred to as Chinatown North.

Nothing besides its proximity to the conglomeration of Chinese restaurants and shops really distinguished the target area to the north and east bisected by Spring and Main streets; certainly not the scattered, fading industrial uses there and the spare pockets of modest housing tucked amidst solitary warehouses and barbed wire-wrapped bus and truck parking lots. It was truly nondescript.

Then came the 2003 opening of the Metro Gold Line serving the area with two stops. That was followed by this year's dedication of the Cornfield as a State Historic Park, and the completion of the L.A. River Revitalization Plan that identified the estimated 400-acre sprawl as a ripe "opportunity area."

As surely as carnivores follow the scent of raw meat, the promise of increased public investment in the area so close to an appreciating Downtown real estate market has prompted interest by a swarm of developers.

All these factors were noted at a Dec. 1 land-use workshop orchestrated by the city Planning Department. Nearly 100 community leaders, politicos and design professionals attended, an impressive turnout for an early morning gathering in a chilly warehouse.

Chinatown and its cultural and commercial identity hardly was mentioned as the diverse assemblage took up the larger and more weighty issue of the future use of what Claire Bowin of the Planning Department described as the city's most challenging and potentially most propitious planning effort.

"Just think of it, 400 mostly underdeveloped acres, a few miles from the Civic Center and Downtown," exclaimed Bowin, who deftly ran the workshop with the help of, among others, the Western Justice Center and the nonprofit Livable Places.

Like many in attendance, Bowin had been involved with the recent L.A. River planning initiative. She sees this effort along its banks north of Downtown as the logical next phase to the river's revitalization as a focus for the region's future public and private development.

"That's why we are not labeling the effort the Chinatown North Specific Plan, as first had been discussed, but rather the Cornfield/Arroyo Seco Specific Plan," commented Bowin. She added even that description was lacking, given the potential of the area, in particular the 150 or so acres between College Street and the river, which was simply identified as "Area A" for the purposes of the workshop.

The workshop participants generally agreed on the importance of the plot, at least as much as such a diverse group could. Working in small groups with land-use models, a more dense and urbane vision of the acreage emerged, overshadowing Chinatown as a focal point.

Most of the participants focused on the 32-acre Cornfield that is being planned as a permanent state park by a design team headed by the internationally renowned landscape firm Hargreaves Associates (currently only 12 acres of the site is utilized as parkland).

"The Cornfield should be thought of as an urban amenity, like New York's Central Park, edged by dense mixed-use developments," said architect Elizabeth Herron as she placed piles of colored disks the size of pennies, representing retail and residential uses, on a map of the area. Others proposed somehow linking the park with greenways extending to the east to a proposed pedestrian promenade and the hoped-for future development along the L.A. River.

Looking on and agreeing was Katherine Spitz, a Los Angeles landscape architect and a local member of the San Francisco-based Hargreaves team. She was among the many consultants attending the workshop. (In the interest of full disclosure, I have been advocating the intense development of the area for decades as part of the protracted L.A. River revitalization effort, and most recently as a consultant to Meruelo Maddux Properties, which owns several properties there.)

As the colored disks were stacked on the map, Jordann Turner of the Planning Department reminded the group of the need to retain existing jobs and generate new jobs in an area presently zoned for industrial and commercial use.

Some attendees responded that such uses are moving away from the area, and mostly what is left there now are distribution warehouses employing just a handful of people. "New jobs will come with the housing and commercial development," observed one participant.

In her summary, Herron declared that the plan needs to "get real," and suggested the city drop its dated industrial image of the area as well as its suburban image of the city, and instead encourage the emergence of a dense urban model of the future featuring flex space.

This made sense to me, and echoed what I and others had advocated while bantering over our study model spread out on a table in the warehouse.

But the model was one of six at the workshop. The city planning process indeed is a protracted affair, and how our recommendations will fare remains to be seen. City planners are weighing all the comments in preparation for the next workshop Feb. 9.

Meanwhile, the future of the Cornfield/Arroyo Seco area awaits its genesis, as does a more apt appellation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Los Angeles Downtown News

[BEATSLIM]

n her summary, Herron declared that the plan needs to "get real," and suggested the city drop its dated industrial image of the area as well as its suburban image of the city, and instead encourage the emergence of a dense urban model of the future featuring flex space.

im guessing she referring to all of LA?