Category Archives: City of Los Angeles

City of Los Angeles, Community, Hollywood

Thinking BIG About the Hollywood Sign

508 Comments

This past summer our family visited Switzerland and northern Italy. During the trip, we had numerous opportunities to ride their amazing transit systems, including several aerial trams. Because of the interest in building an aerial tram to the Hollywood Sign, I was particularly interested in how these facilities operated, and I was impressed. Not only were these aerial trams able to move a large number of people quickly to otherwise inaccessible spots, but they were able to do it with very little impact on the environment. Only a few towers to hold the cables were required, as well as stations at the beginning and end of each line. Despite moving a lot of people, the areas surrounding the stations were also well maintained with little obvious impact from the visitors to the area.

We have searched for years to find a solution for the neighborhoods below the Hollywood Sign that have been inundated with tourists since the advent of automobile navigation systems and Waze. It is my belief that if tourists were offered an attractive alternative way to reach the Hollywood Sign, they would take it. An aerial tram offers an experience that I believe would have a real impact on reducing traffic in those neighborhoods.

The City seems to agree with my assessment. A report issued earlier this summer by the Chief Legislative Analyst and Recreation and Parks Department stated:
“Recreation and Parks strongly believes that this strategy would have the most impact on visitor behavior to both Griffith Park and the Hollywood Sign. If done correctly, this could potentially eliminate traffic from the western side of Griffith Park, areas that include Bronson Canyon, North Beachwood Canyon, Lake Hollywood Drive and Vermont Canyon.”

Although suggestions to install an aerial tram to the top of Mt. Lee date back as far as 1905, people never really considered it to be a serious option until recently. Many thought it was “pie-in-the sky” and could never be financially viable. Now, however, the City has received a concrete proposal from Warner Bros to access the Sign from their parking garage along Forest Lawn Drive, and we know that there are other people interested as well. This week, the L.A. Arts, Entertainment, Parks & River Committee approved and forwarded to the City Council a recommendation to begin a feasibility study of an aerial tram. Suddenly, what many thought was a pipedream looks like it really could become a reality. The City report stated: “Implementation of this option is feasible, but will require environmental clearances, the design and installation of a potentially complex transit system, identification of a vendor to operate the system, and the establishment of start and end points for the system.”

Here are a few things I discovered by surfing the internet. Aerial trams, which are technically known as aerial ropeways, have been around for centuries. In ancient India and Japan, the ropeways were used to cross rivers and were originally made of hemp or rawhide rope. Now they are made from steel cables and towers, but their function is not much different from these original ancient transportation systems. The first ropeways in the U.S. were used for transporting materials to and from mines in the West and were first introduced in 1868.

Today, most of the ropeways in the U.S. are ski lifts. They have rarely been used in urban settings. However, there are three successful applications that can be used as examples – in New York City, Portland, Oregon; and in Telluride, Colorado.

A study by West Virginia University (WVU) concluded that ropeways have seldom been used in urban settings, primarily because engineers are generally not familiar with ropeway technology and specifications. The study concluded that engineers tend to exclude aerial ropeways as an alternative even though there may be advantages in certain applications.

The Hollywood Sign may be one of those possible applications. Bringing an aerial tramway to the Sign is not going to happen overnight – and it shouldn’t. There needs to be a vetting process involving the community and neighborhoods, environmental interests and City departments, and that will take time. But isn’t it great to see that our leaders are thinking big to try and resolve some of the seemingly intractable issues concerning access to our City’s greatest landmark? Special congratulations to Councilmember David Ryu for his leadership on this effort. There is a real win-win opportunity here – solving neighborhood congestion issues, creating new jobs, and enhancing the visitor experience in Griffith Park. The Hollywood Sign will turn 100 in 2023. Wouldn’t it be nice if an aerial tramway could be in place (or at least approved) in time for the Sign’s centennial?

 ___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 26 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

 

Business, City of Los Angeles, Community, Competition, Customer Service, Hollywood Chamber, Trash

A Case Study on Why We Need Competition

150 Comments

In the 38 years that I have worked in the City of Los Angeles (at two chambers of commerce), I have never seen anything quite like the rollout of RecycLA. It is fair to say that it has been nothing short of a disaster.

Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez has had a field day skewering the program. The Wall Street Journal has editorialized against it. Some councilmembers are now calling for a study on how to kill the program, and there is even the threat of a citizens’ initiative to force the City to pull the plug.

Since July, the Times reports there have been more than 28,000 complaints of missed collections and poor service. Rates have skyrocketed. We have members who report their trash collection fees have more than tripled – and unfortunately this is not a rare occurrence. Ratepayers report sharp increases across the board from when they had control of their own trash services. The City Council has begun holding hearings to determine where things went wrong – time that they could be spending on other important matters if they didn’t have an unfolding debacle with which to deal.

How did this mess occur? Perhaps an explanation can be found in the City’s justification of the RecycLA program to “expand recycling, improve workers’ pay and conditions, and put cleaner burning refuse trucks on the street.” While those are worthwhile goals, what is obviously missing from the statement is any reference to improving service to the City’s customers – the businesses and residents’ groups forced to use this program. Somehow the City seems to have forgotten whom they serve.

Hearings on the proposed program began back in 2011. The City was under the gun to comply with a State directive for mandatory commercial recycling. At the time, the debate was whether to go with exclusive or nonexclusive franchise districts. The chief administrative officer (CAO) for the City recommended going with a non-exclusive system in order to preserve competition. Despite that recommendation, the City Council approved an exclusive system. Our chamber was represented at every hearing as were numerous other business organizations. We warned then that eliminating competition was a recipe for disaster – but hardly anyone listened. So now, with the debacle that has occurred, I think it wouldn’t hurt to refresh everyone’s memory on why competition is a good thing, and what happens when you grant exclusive franchise contracts.

If you google the word “competition” on the internet, you can find excellent material. Forbes, for example, has identified five reasons why competition is the best solution. Consider the following:

  1. Innovation – healthy competition encourages change and innovation, which leads to improvements and helping a company distinguish itself from the competition.
  2. Customer Service – competition forces a business to improve its service in order to compete for customers.
  3. Complacency – without competition, businesses become complacent. Competition forces a business to innovate.
  4. Understanding your core market – Competition moves a business to focus on its core audience and to figure out how to provide better service.
  5. Education – having competitors helps a business better understand what works and what doesn’t and can provide valuable insights.

These points illustrate why the City is going to have a difficult time reforming RecycLA to be effective. When you eliminate competition, you are headed for trouble. When you have an exclusive contract, what is the incentive to try and improve? You cannot legislate good service.

The Federal Trade Commission, which administers antitrust laws, has said that “competition in the marketplace is good for consumers and good for business. … When firms compete with each other, consumers get the best possible prices, quantity, and quality of goods and services.”

Yes, in certain instances, there can be justification for a monopoly, but by and large, that should only be a rare occasion, such as with certain utilities. And even with utilities, there is a debate on whether we would be better served with competition (remember the break-up of telecommunications? Somehow, we not only survived but prospered with the advent of competition).

I don’t know if the City can find a way to back out of a 10-year contract with the trash haulers holding these exclusive franchises. That part of this sad saga has yet to be written, but let’s hope that the City’s decisionmakers have learned why competition has been the basis of the U.S. economy for more than two centuries. It is one of the main reasons for our country’s success. I’ve always found it best not to mess with success.

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 25 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

 

California, City of Los Angeles, Community, Homeless

Finally, A Step in the Right Direction to Help Mentally-Ill Homeless

164 Comments

Recently, I have observed an upswing in the number of residents, businesses and tourists asking why the City and State allow obviously-mentally ill people to wander our streets, endangering both themselves and the public. It is a fair question, but there has been no acceptable answer to this question.

Finally, we are beginning to see some of our public officials address what is a deplorable situation. Plaudits go to our L.A. County Board of Supervisors for approving a motion last week asking the California State legislature to change how they define the words “grave disability”, which might have a positive impact on the current situation.

Under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act of 1967, a person is gravely disabled – and can be taken into custody and forcibly medicated – only if they are unable to meet basic needs for food, clothing or shelter. The county is requesting that the definition be expanded to include those who are unable to seek needed medical care, which would allow custody and compelled treatment of people who, in a court’s view, need medication but aren’t seeking it on their own.

Supervisors Kathryn Barger and Mark Ridley-Thomas co-sponsored the motion, and Barger noted that the county has to do better at getting people the healthcare they need. She’s right!

Only a year ago this week, a mentally-deranged homeless person entered the Jack-in-the Box restaurant on Sunset Blvd. at Cahuenga and stabbed three customers with a large knife before the LAPD shot him dead. Just this past Thanksgiving weekend, another mentally-ill person threatened people on Hollywood Blvd. with a screwdriver before grabbing a knife from a restaurant and stabbing a tourist.

These are not isolated cases. I hear frequently of other incidents involving homeless individuals who are mentally unstable. In my 25 years at the Chamber, I have never seen it as bad as it is today. The situation with the mentally ill has definitely deteriorated over that time period, which calls for a review of how they should be treated and a review of the civil rights argument.

We want to make this a walkable urban community, but that cannot happen if people are worried they will be attacked by the mentally ill. At some point, we will see an impact on jobs and our economy if these issues aren’t addressed. People will not visit or work in a community if they don’t feel safe.

I am encouraged that at the State level, Assemblymembers Laura Friedman and Miguel Santiago have just introduced AB1971, which would expand the definition of “gravely disabled”. As this measure is debated by the legislature, there will likely be a blistering attack from civil rights activists who believe that forcibly treating anyone will infringe on their civil rights.

It is time for the pendulum to swing back to the center. It is time for our representatives to recognize that the homeless man who was shot at the Jack-in the Box would have been better served if he had been forced into a treatment program. It is time for our representatives to recognize that the public also has a basic right to be able to walk in their community without fear that they will be attacked by someone who should be in treatment.

Voters approved Measures H and HHH to provide the funds to address our homeless crisis. If voters’ expectations are not met, then undoubtedly there will be political consequences. Providing housing and more funds for counseling and outreach will not do the job, unless the city and county also address getting the mentally-ill homeless into treatment. Congratulations to our Board of Supervisors for recognizing the problem and proposing a reasonable step, and thanks to Assemblymembers Friedman and Santiago for moving this forward.

Let’s hope the State legislature has the courage to adopt AB1971 and change the way the State defines “grave disabilities” to protect both the public and our homeless population. Solving a crisis today should not require relying on an outdated definition written over 50 years ago!

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 25 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

California, City of Los Angeles, Community, Economic Development, Hollywood, Hollywood Chamber, Revitalization

The Elephant in the Room

417 Comments

The legislative season is over, and we finally have begun to see our California legislature act on the housing crisis in this state. The Governor signed 15 bills that were intended to smooth the way to more housing being built.

Over the past year, you have heard me discuss the importance of addressing California’s housing crisis. So, I think it is appropriate to commend the legislature and the Governor for taking steps to start addressing what is an enormous problem.

Among the bills that were passed was a $4-billion bond measure to provide new affordable-housing units, a provision to streamline housing requirements in cities that aren’t building to state-mandated goals, incentives for cities to plan new neighborhoods, and prod local governments to get shovels into the ground, and giving the State the ability to review any action or failure to act by a city or county that it deems out of compliance with its housing element.

According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the State is currently falling about 100,000 units short each year in what it should be building to meet the demand. Under the best-case forecasts, the 15 new measures will only make a dent in the shortfall.

Our representatives admitted this is only a down payment on what is needed to really have an impact on the housing crisis. The fact is, the one way to resolve the housing shortfall in a big way is to spur the private sector to build more units. The only way to do that is to address the “elephant in the room” which is to reform the California Environmental Quality Act – more commonly referred to as CEQA.

Achieving CEQA reform is a monumental task because of the many special interest groups that have grown a cottage industry of using CEQA to squeeze developers for money, concessions, or to outright stop needed projects. The Hollywood Chamber was a part of a broad-based statewide coalition that worked for years to reform CEQA. A couple of years ago, we thought reform was finally doable. However, amendments were tacked on to the reform bills that would have ended up making CEQA compliance even worse, so the reform effort was dropped at that time.

Before that, in 2011, our Chamber convinced then-State Senator Curren Price to introduce SB735 for us. We thought we had the perfect solution – a measure that would strengthen the timelines for judicial consideration of CEQA cases. The idea was to require the courts to meet stricter administrative deadlines, enabling judges to decide cases as was originally the intent of the CEQA law.

However, our effort died when the State Judicial Council opposed our efforts, saying they did not have the wherewithal to speed up the process. Because we were just coming out of the Great Recession, there was no chance of providing the funding that they needed to expedite the process at that time.

So, when the Legislature takes this issue up again next year, I have a few suggestions. Why not provide more funding for judges to review CEQA cases and also to provide an expedited litigation schedule for resolution of an action and stricter timelines for appeal of a judgment for all projects? While we appreciate that the State extended an expedited schedule for court review of large Environmental Leadership Development Projects, this should apply to all projects – especially housing. Providing more funding for the courts review process might be the best investment the State could make in speeding up the construction of new housing.

This wouldn’t solve all CEQA-related problems, but it would be a start. While it wouldn’t please those whose goal is to delay and delay and delay, I believe the majority of Californians would support common-sense action that would still allow CEQA challenges but speed up the litigation.

And here is another suggestion. Rather than just encourage cities to meet their housing goals, why not add some teeth to hold cities accountable to meet the mandate of their housing goals? Just last month, the news media reported that the city of Redondo Beach approved a moratorium on new multifamily units even though they had only achieved 41 percent of their housing goals. If there are no penalties, cities will continue to consider meeting housing goals as a suggestion rather than a mandate.

There will be other suggestions made, but I thought I’d get a head-start out of the gate. Let’s encourage our legislature to take the hard steps to resolve the housing crisis.

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 25 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

 

Business, City of Los Angeles, Community, Employment, Hollywood, Hotels, Jobs

New Hotels Enrich Hollywood and Los Angeles

3,069 Comments

Two new hotels opened in Hollywood last month – the Kimpton Everly with 216 rooms and the Hampton Inn Hollywood with 112 rooms. Together with the Dream Hotel that opened in July, we have added more than 500 rooms to the Hollywood market this year. This is a 15-percent increase in the number of hotel rooms in Hollywood, bringing our total rooms to 3,926 in 51 properties.

By my count, there are another 15 hotels proposed for Hollywood. I’m sure some people are asking if we can support all of these hotels. One important thing to remember is that the hotels do not all come online at once. It is a long-way from a hotel being proposed to under construction. There is no guarantee that all the proposed venues will be built. The marketplace will be the final determinant of what is actually built. The interest in building new hotels in Hollywood is a nice problem to have!

I recall back in the year 2000 when our chair-of-the board, Oscar Arslanian, and I trekked to Beverly Hills to meet with a representative of Hilton Hotels to convince them that they should come to Hollywood. At the time, we had a boutique hotel task force and were trying to get new hotel construction in Hollywood. It had been 25 years since a significant hotel had opened in Hollywood. Hilton turned us down, saying that the timing wasn’t right for a hotel in Hollywood. We were ahead of our time.

It was a frustrating period for us. Hollywood was the top tourist draw in Los Angeles County, and yet no new hotels were coming to our community. They were locating in neighboring cities, which meant transient occupancy taxes (TOT) collected by those hotels were also going to other communities. TOT taxes can be an important component of a city’s budget, so this was potentially a huge loss for Los Angeles. In L.A. during its last fiscal year, the city received $230.8-million in TOT taxes and another $27.5-million from short-term rental taxes. With Los Angeles facing a budget gap of over $200-million, finding new sources of revenue are key to its survival and maintaining services. Each new hotel that opens in the city helps fill the budget shortfall.

Aside from providing tax revenue to a city, there are numerous other benefits that new hotels bring to the community – one of which is jobs. The Dream Hotel and its associated restaurants employ about 800 people. The Everly Hotel has a staff of 125 and the Hampton Inn employs another 40. These are all new jobs, on sites where there were few jobs before. To be able to add this many jobs to our employment base is exciting. Yes, many of these jobs are entry level positions, but in this community with all income levels, we need both entry level and executive positions.

New hotels also add to the ambiance of a neighborhood. Infill development helps to activate the street. The areas around the Dream Hotel and Everly were previously “dead” as far as pedestrians. There was no reason for anyone to walk there. Now, you see people walking to and from these venues, which creates more interest but also makes the neighborhood safer. It is impressive to now see people walking in Hollywood, not just on the major thoroughfares, but also on the side streets. Hollywood is a model for the entire City on how to activate a neighborhood.

And hotels also are great public gathering spaces for locals – with lobbies, restaurants, meeting rooms, and in some cases, rooftop terraces that overlook the Hollywood Hills and urban L.A. As we all know, Hollywood has the unfortunate distinction of having little park and open space. This makes it even more important to have places where people can gather. The general manager of the Everly Hotel related to me that they are positioning their hotel as one that is serving the local neighborhood. Since this new hotel lies in close proximity to many of our hillside neighborhoods, it only makes sense.

The fact is new hotels enrich a community in many ways. Downtown Hollywood is becoming an even more attractive urban neighborhood by having these hotels to complement the residential, retail and office components that are coming online. The Hollywood hotel boom is a very good thing for our community and for the City as a whole.

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 24 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

 

Business, City of Los Angeles, Community, Economic Development, Employment, Hollywood, Jobs

Does the Middle Class Have a Future in Los Angeles?

19 Comments

Recently I read Richard Florida’s book, The New Urban Crisis. Among the critical issues he identifies is the decline of the middle class in our urban centers. What his research found was that the middle class is the smallest in the most economically vibrant places, in particular, what he defines as “superstar cities” and tech hubs. Los Angeles was identified as one of these urban areas where the middle class is the smallest.

At a meeting we held last week with Mayor Eric Garcetti, he voiced what is undoubtedly one of the most challenging issue facing Los Angeles – will our children be able to stay here and enjoy the prosperous community that has been built over the last generation. “We need a middle class and not just a service class,” said the Mayor, emphasizing that it is essential that the middle class not be squeezed out. The Mayor was right in highlighting this challenge.

If we cannot provide an opportunity for our children to remain here, what kind of a legacy have we provided? It does not matter if Los Angeles is able to provide middle-class jobs, if the cost of living is such that they cannot get ahead. I think each of us know of young people who have left the state as it has become increasingly unaffordable. I have two nieces, third-generation Angelenos, who moved to Colorado, in order to be able to purchase a home. I’m sure you can name a few.

Let me share a few statistics that I have seen over the last few months. The New York Times reported earlier this month that housing prices in L.A., San Francisco, San Jose, and San Diego have jumped as much as 75 percent over the past five years, making California the toughest market for first time home buyers. The median cost of a home in California is now over $500,000, twice the national average. California’s homeownership rate of 54 percent ranks last in the nation.

A recent article by Elijah Chiland noted that the real estate website Redfin reports that just 6.6 percent of homes listed in the greater L.A. region are considered affordable to residents making the median income. The problem is that while there have been significant increases in home values, wages in Los Angeles have risen less than half a percent since 2012.

On top of this, there is the issue of taxation. When you consider the compounding effect of the taxes levied at the state, county and local levels, it adds up to a huge disincentive for the middle class and young people to remain here. In an article published last month, Chris Nichols of Politifact, responding to the question of whether California taxes were really among the highest in the nation, provided the following facts: On a per capita basis, Californians pay $1,991 annually in state income taxes, which ranks fourth highest in the country. California has the highest-in-the nation sales tax rate of 7.25 per cent (and that is before local levies recently passed for such worthy causes as mass transit and homeless services). When the recently-approved 12-cent per gallon increase in the state gas tax goes into effect on November 1, 2017, it will make the California gas tax second highest in the nation.

Now, I am not arguing against the need for these new taxes and fees to address serious state and local problems. What I am saying is that the compounding effect of these taxes threatens our middle class.

Even property taxes, which we tout as low because of Proposition 13, create a heavy burden for those just starting out. Since median housing prices are twice the national average, the property taxes are still a hurdle, especially when compounded by additional parcel taxes and fees charged to property owners in a specific area to pay for special needs and public improvements.

The state legislature has introduced 130 housing measures this year to address the affordable housing issue. The City is considering linkage fees to fund affordable housing. The problem with many of these proposals is that it is impossible for government to solve the housing crisis with new fees to develop affordable housing. The amount of housing they could fund is only a drop in the bucket compared to what is needed.

Christopher Thornberg of Beacon Economics recently said that California would need to add between 800,000 and one-million additional residential units to move the state to national norms for housing stock and vacancy rates. In L.A., we would need a total of 180,000 to 200,000 residential units.

The only way to meet these type of numbers is to stimulate the private sector, which is now weighed down with government regulations that make it impossible for the free market to work the way it is supposed to. Our public officials are going to have to make some tough decisions if they really want to address the housing crisis.

Here are a few suggestions. At the State level, our representatives are going to finally need to reform the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to stop egregious abuses of this law that can kill or delay needed projects for years. They need to approve language that treats infill development in urban areas differently than pristine open space. State and city officials need to incentivize developers to build low and moderate income housing units. There are ways to do this, such as increasing density for targeted units or reducing parking requirements, which would bring down costs on a per unit basis. And the courts need to be directed to accelerate the review of legal challenges to housing projects.

It took a long time for this housing crisis to develop, and it may take a long time to work through a solution, but we cannot afford to delay. Our legislators need to start acting now to solve this problem. If they don’t, the California dream may be a thing of the past for our vanishing middle class.

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 24 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

 

City of Los Angeles, Economic Development, Entertainment, Filming, Hollywood, Jobs

Studio Purchase Is Good News for Jobs

55 Comments

Earlier this month, Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc. announced that it had finalized a $200-million acquisition of the historic Hollywood Center Studios. This is the third studio acquisition in Hollywood by Hudson Pacific. Based on their track record, it is very good news for Hollywood.

Hudson had previously acquired Sunset-Gower Studios and Sunset-Bronson Studios. They will now own a combined 1.2-million square feet of facilities at the three studios, including 35 soundstages on 41-acres. The acquisition makes Hudson Pacific the largest independent owner-operator of sound stages in the nation.

I first became acquainted with Hudson Pacific when they purchased Sunset-Gower Studios in 2007. They were in a competition against several other firms for the property. Theirs was the only proposal to keep Sunset-Gower as an independent studio. The other developers planned to replace the studio with housing.

While there certainly was the need for housing, I was very concerned about the potential loss of industrial space, especially since Hollywood only has about 200 acres zoned for industrial uses. It was a time when Hollywood’s future hung in the balance. Many entertainment-related firms had exited Hollywood in previous decades, including almost all of the television stations. We were very concerned that Hollywood might lose its historical role as a commercial center.

Fortunately, Hudson Pacific did get the property, and they followed up by investing in the infrastructure and revitalizing the studio. Technicolor moved into a new 115,000-sq.ft. building at Sunset-Gower, making it their North American headquarters. This was the first major entertainment firm to move into Hollywood in decades.

In 2008, Hudson Pacific acquired the Sunset-Bronson lot. At that lot, they have built 423,000-sq.ft. of office space, all leased to Netflix. Their projects, along with others completed by Kilroy Realty and J.H.Snyder, have helped reestablish Hollywood as a commercial center. With 2,800 housing units under construction and another 7,200 in the pipeline in Hollywood, these projects will help us to maintain an important jobs-housing balance.

So the announcement that Hudson Pacific has acquired the historic Hollywood Center Studios bodes well for Hollywood. Hudson, in making the announcement of the purchase, also stated that they plan to move forward with a new 100,000-sq.ft. creative office building and a 350-space parking garage at the lot, which will be renamed Sunset Las Palmas.

For those not familiar with this lot, it is one of the most historic and oldest operating studios in Hollywood. It was founded in 1919 by a partnership formed by C.E. Toberman, John Jasper and C.W. Bradford. At the time, C.E. Toberman, who was the “Mr. Hollywood” of his day, had plans to convert Hollywood Blvd. (which was a mishmash of residential, retail and industrial uses) into a grand street and wanted to remove all industrial uses from the boulevard. The creation of the lot, christened Hollywood Studios, Inc., helped accomplish that goal. Over the years, the studio became home to iconic television shows like I Love Lucy, The Addams Family, Jeopardy, and legendary films like Hell’s Angels, When Harry Met Sally, and The Player.

Hudson Pacific has been responsible for bringing hundreds (if not thousands) of jobs to Hollywood. They have played a major role in the revitalization of Hollywood. On June 22nd, they will be honored with our Excellence in Economic Development Award at the annual Hollywood Economic Development Summit. The honors are well-deserved. On behalf of the Chamber, let me say that we appreciate having such great partners as Hudson Pacific in our community.

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 24 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

Business, City of Los Angeles, Community, Economic Development, Employment, Hollywood Chamber, Jobs, Real Estate, Target

Musings About a Target

76 Comments

By now, most people have heard the disappointing news that Superior Court Judge Richard L. Fruin, Jr. has once again sided with a very small group of plaintiffs to prevent Hollywood’s new Target from being completed. I thought it might be appropriate to offer of few of my own observations on this sad state of affairs.

Let me first offer a little background. It has now been nine years since Target first filed to build a store in Hollywood. When it was initially approved by the City and threatened with a lawsuit, Target decided to do a complete Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to strengthen its case against lawsuits. However, that later proved to be of little value.

At issue was a quirk in the Station Neighborhood Area Plan (SNAP) that governs development in that area. The SNAP ordinance allows projects that are strictly retail to only be 35 feet in height, but allows mixed-use projects to be up to 75 feet. The City Council and Planning Commission felt that the Target would be a benefit to the neighborhood and granted a variance to allow the project to be built at the 75-foot height.

The La Mirada Neighborhood Association, which is reputed to have only two or three members, sued. Judge Fruin ruled that the EIR was fine, but that the city erred in granting a variance and should have changed the zoning.

The City, in order to comply with the judge’s order, created a new Subarea F zoning category for big box retail centers. Once again, the La Mirada Neighborhood Association sued, saying that the City should have performed a new EIR to justify the new zoning designation. And once again, the judge agreed with the plaintiffs. It serves no purpose to rebut the judge’s rationale for his decision, but I would like to share my thoughts on what a loss it means for Hollywood.

Between 250 and 300 permanent jobs have been lost to the community now for several years because of these lawsuits. These are jobs that could have been filled by many of the low-income residents in the neighborhood close to the Target site. In addition, the Target would have provided expanded shopping opportunities for our entire Hollywood community, and would have been within walking distance for many low-income neighborhoods. It is only two blocks from the Hollywood/Western subway station and so is easily reachable from all areas of Hollywood. We haven’t had a department store since Sears closed its Hollywood store in 2008, so this would have been a wonderful addition to the community.

I get more questions about the status of the Target from both residents and businesses than any other subject. There is overwhelming support in Hollywood for this store. So the question is “What are the specific reasons why these few people are opposing the Target so vehemently?”

Robert Silverstein, the plaintiff’s attorney, usually responds that the plaintiffs aren’t against a Target – they just want them to follow the city’s rules. My objection to that answer is that rules set by a city are not cast in stone. Historically, cities have always had broad discretionary powers to determine land use within their bounds. The SNAP ordinance is not the U.S. Constitution. The City should have the right to make changes as circumstances warrant.

We live in an urban area. What value is achieved by limiting a retail center to one story? When we have attended past hearings on the Target, the main justification of the opponents for their position is that they want housing built in the neighborhood, not just retail centers. If developers wants added height, they have to provide housing as well, they say. They also have voiced concerns over views being blocked or a building built out-of-scale with the neighborhood.

I could understand these arguments eight years ago, but circumstances have changed dramatically since that time and the rationale for those positions no longer applies. In the interim, three projects have been announced and are in the entitlement phase across the street from the Target that will provide 1,293 housing units. These projects will all be as high, or higher, than the Target. So what purpose is to be achieved by forcing the Target to be torn down and rebuilt at one story? My answer would be “Absolutely none.”

The opponents can bask in their latest court victory, but in my view, they should be asking themselves if they are really serving the greater good for Hollywood? If Target pulls out because they are tired of fighting this small group of naysayers, have the interests of Hollywood really been served? Does the loss of these needed jobs and shopping opportunities mean anything to the opponents?

Being with the Chamber of Commerce, I am an eternal optimist. We have been through some difficult times in Hollywood, and despite setbacks, the community’s revitalization continues to move forward. I remain hopeful that a solution can be found so that the Target can be completed. Meanwhile, I would urge everyone who is supportive of having the Target finished, to not be silent. Let the La Mirada Neighborhood Association know how you feel.

___________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 24 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

City of Los Angeles, Economic Development, Jobs, Measure S

A Post Mortem on Measure S

135 Comments

In the aftermath of Measure S, it seems everyone is offering their post mortem observations about this giant struggle over land-use and development in Los Angeles. I’d like to add my “two cents”.

First, the voters made the right choice in sinking Measure S.  We can breathe a sigh of relief that a blanket moratorium did not go into effect that would have vaporized thousands of construction jobs and wreaked havoc on our economy. Now we can continue to address the serious shortfall in housing in our region.

Second, although the voters rejected Measure S, it was not a vote of support for the status quo. Far from it. Both residents and businesses made it clear that the current system is broken and needs to be fixed.

Third, the Mayor and City Council need to follow through on the reforms that were promised, among which were to update community plans in a timely fashion and to have the Planning Department select the consultants performing environmental impact reports.

Fourth, once community plans are updated, “spot zoning” (changing land-use rules to accommodate specific projects) should become the exception rather than the rule in approving projects. It would be helpful if criteria could be drawn up that explains when it is appropriate to grant an exception.

Fifth, greater transparency should occur throughout the entire process, so that trust can be established with the public. One particular area that needs improvement is with community benefits packages. The Planning Department and councilmembers now negotiate these packages, sometimes extracting millions of dollars from developers for projects that will benefit L.A. This process needs to be revised so that the public has more of an opportunity to provide suggestions on things that would benefit the impacted neighborhoods. And once a package is finalized and the developer hands over to the City mitigation funds, there needs to be accountability so that the public knows to which department the funds went and that they were spent according to the plan.

An example may help. When the Hollywood & Highland complex was built back in 1988, the City negotiated a contribution from the developer for more than $9-million to be spent on traffic improvements, etc. Years afterward, when I tried to find out if the money had been spent, I could get no answer. Yet, more than 10 years after the project was completed, I saw a motion before the City Council approving the expenditure of some of the mitigation money from that project. I am not implying that anything was done incorrectly. What I am saying is that the system was not set up for transparency with the public.

With today’s technology, there is no reason that a tracking system cannot be set up on a City website that easily allows the public to see what the community benefits packages are for each project and to track the expenditures of those funds as they occur. This is an issue of trust. If the public can see that these funds are truly going to benefit them and are actually being spent on the purposes intended, it will help to instill trust in the system.

Finally, in my conversations with neighborhood councils, one of their largest concerns is with evictions that are taking place to make way for some new projects. Most of these evictions are occurring with rent-controlled buildings and by-right projects. With the affordable housing crisis, some tenants are losing their homes with no place to go. The city needs to review its current policy to strike a balance between property rights and fairness for those being evicted. It is a complicated issue with no easy answers because of conflicting state and local laws, but the conversation needs to occur.

The voters have indicated by large margins in the last two elections that they understand the need to “densify” our City rather than to continue expanding outward. That is the proper course of action, but it is not easy to achieve. The Hollywood Community Plan update will be coming back later this year for reconsideration. Stakeholders will have ample opportunity for public input into the process. With all of the development and changes occurring in Hollywood, we really need to have an updated plan rather than operating under one that dates back to 1988. Let’s have the discussion necessary to adopt a plan that will move this community forward and which will help to reestablish trust in our land-use process.

_____________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 24 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.

 

Business, City of Los Angeles, Economic Development, Hollywood, Infrasctructure, Measure S

A Few Observations about Measure S

450 Comments

 

With only two weeks to go until the election, there has been a lot of “ink” written on the topic of Measure S. You’ve heard the statistics about how this measure is going to cost our economy $1.9-billion and 12,000 jobs for each year it is in place. You’ve heard about its devastating impact on affordable housing, especially in light of the passage of Measure HHH to build permanent supportive housing that Measure S would make difficult to build. And you have heard the claims of the proponents that only five percent of the proposed construction within the City will be impacted.

With the debate drawing to a close, I would like to share a few of my final observations. Here are my thoughts:

  1. The idea for this initiative sprang from a small group of activists in Hollywood, who were not able to stop development here, and thought they would have a better chance by enacting a citywide moratorium. They have cloaked their real intent under the cover of popular terms such as “updating community plans” and “ending spot zoning”. They continue to minimize the impact of this measure (far below what real studies have shown). In reality, their goal is not to update community plans, but to stop all significant development that adds traffic near their homes.
  2. Almost everyone agrees that the City of Los Angeles project approval process leaves much to be desired and needs reform. The one positive result of the initiative is that it spurred the City Council to vote on February 8th to update L.A.’s 35 community plans every six years, which is realistically about as fast as the City can move in updating all of its plans. That vote has triggered creation of a new ordinance that will mandate these updates. If the ballot measure sponsors really cared about updating the plans, they would declare “victory” at this point and move on. The fact that they haven’t done so, tells you that they really have another agenda.
  3. The proponents of Measure S are disingenuous when they say that the moratorium will only last for two years. They know that it is impossible for the City to update all of its plans within that timeframe. They also know that there will be lawsuits challenging the approval of new updated community plans, which will prevent their implementation. It has now been five years since the Hollywood Community Plan Update was approved and then blocked by a lawsuit. We are still waiting for it to be reconsidered. This is a good example of what is in store if this measure passes. Voters need to understand that the moratorium likely will be in effect for years.
  4. In an ideal world, no exceptions would be granted to zoning rules. However, in the real world, that is not possible for various reasons. There are cases where spot zoning is needed, and where it demonstrably is a good thing. Probably the best example in Hollywood is our beautiful new Emerson College campus on Sunset Blvd., which has won numerous design awards. Under the previous zoning, about all that could have been built on the site was a hamburger stand. I don’t think anyone would argue that a hamburger stand was a better usage for that site. Until such time as community plans are updated to reflect today’s circumstances, there is a need to allow legislative bodies to exercise judgment to consider the issues in addressing development at specific locations. And, even after a plan is adopted, there is a need for flexibility. Changing circumstances, new opportunities that may never have been contemplated, or mistakes in classification require some flexibility in allowing exceptions. Granting exceptions to the rules should be infrequent, but blanket prohibitions of “spot zoning” without considering real life situations are not in the public’s best interests.
  5. Measure S is really a case of “the haves” versus “the have nots”. If you already own a home and don’t care about the larger community’s interests, then you may be inclined to vote for Measure S, but if you truly care about those who are just getting started in L.A. or who are forced to commute in from outlying regions, then this measure is not for you. Last fall I spoke with Councilmember Nury Martinez, who represents the 6th District, stretching from Van Nuys to Panorama City. She said it is a challenge to bring development into her district and that the Measure S moratorium would harm her efforts to do so. Her concerns are echoed in many communities across this great city. Other than Hollywood, Koreatown and Downtown L.A., most areas of L.A. are not seeing a great deal of new development. Many communities want and need development. As I have said before, developers are not the enemy. They are the ones who help to revitalize older neighborhoods. Our opponents forget how bad Hollywood was 20 years ago. It has been primarily through new development that we have been able to turn this historic film capital around. Where you see no new development is where you most often see communities in a state of decline. Measure S will perpetuate that problem and make it more difficult to revitalize communities.
  6. Measure S is about the future of Los Angeles. I remain convinced that one of the main goals of the proponents of this measure is to stop the addition of density near mass transit centers. The Palladium Residences project that seems to have been the genesis of Measure S (at least for the largest contributor to their campaign), is only one block from a subway station. Opponents of that project do not want density near transit centers, and yet they have suggested no alternative. The horizontal city model with connecting freeways may have worked when we had three million residents in this county, but it does not work when we have 10 million residents. In city after city, we have successful models on how development has been focused along mass transit lines in order to avoid increasing congestion elsewhere. That has also been the plan for Los Angeles. With the passage of Measure M last November, we have an opportunity to truly accommodate growth and new residents in a logical fashion. To not allow density where it makes the most sense will create future chaos for this region. It will result in a lot of housing and businesses moving outside Los Angeles, and it will force many new residents into peripheral areas, only worsening commute times. We cannot go back to the 1950s.

I add my voice to those who say that Measure S is the wrong remedy for Los Angeles. Now that the City Council has committed to regularly updating community plans, our energy would be much better spent on seeing that we get visionary, well-thought out plans adopted for each area of our city. Let’s work to see that good developments are added along future and existing mass transit lines, and that they contribute to making this a more livable city. That way, we will all be winners.

_____________________________

Leron Gubler has been serving as the President and CEO of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce for the past 24 years. His tenure since 1992 continues to oversee the great comeback story of Hollywood.