Sensibility enters the picture
I can't begin to state how enthused I am about this Breeze story about the Port's decision to scale back the amount of development in the LA Waterfront project. I still think that Harbor Boulevard should be widened (and a better 110 N on ramp devised - I'm more interested in Harbor as a road used by residents than as one used by visitors) and the story is exremely vague about what's going to happen at Ports 'O Call (they use the word reconstruction - I'd like to see the term "raze" used instead), but I can live with what they're doing.
There's the mention of parking garages in the Port's plans - I'm wondering exactly where those are going to be - we need a public garage downtown, and badly. I know it's out of their territory, but I dream of someone buying up the Numero Uno market on 5th and Pacific and building a multi-story garage on top of it that could serve both the Downtown and the parking hungry Warner Grand Theatre. If they could leave the market intact, it would be a double fantasy come true - it's a great market with an excellent meat counter.
My primary interest is the future use of the Berths and Warehouse One, which I'd like to see developed for a cultural or community use, and which would make excellent multi-use facilities for the Port's proposed bienalle concept. I wonder if the Port still intends to phase out those facilities as part of the plan or if we're stuck with them in the downsizing.
There's some great quotes in the article from Both Geraldine Knatz and I'm gonna put a bunch of them here, since they're so darn good at laying out what her thinking on the project is.
"You don't block views of the waterfront with tall buildings along the edge."
David Freeman's also got a great quote, and although I largely agree with him - I think the Port needs to be more involved in the community and that they need to "think outside the box" (sorry) about what they do with their land.
"I'm glad we're not flirting with people about building hotels," said commission President S. David Freeman. "We have no money or ability to build hotels. You've brought some realism and candor into this discussion. ... It's not the port's job to get into the hotel or shopping center business."
I'm sure that this change will arouse the ire of those who have advocated, shilled and pushed for the bogus "Maximum Development Alternative", and make smug bastards out of those who have tried to roadblock this vital project with a mix of genuine concerns and a healthy dose of NIMBYism. New EIR meetings are going to be scheduled soon, and we'll all get the chance to shout and claw at each other all over agian.
There's the mention of parking garages in the Port's plans - I'm wondering exactly where those are going to be - we need a public garage downtown, and badly. I know it's out of their territory, but I dream of someone buying up the Numero Uno market on 5th and Pacific and building a multi-story garage on top of it that could serve both the Downtown and the parking hungry Warner Grand Theatre. If they could leave the market intact, it would be a double fantasy come true - it's a great market with an excellent meat counter.
My primary interest is the future use of the Berths and Warehouse One, which I'd like to see developed for a cultural or community use, and which would make excellent multi-use facilities for the Port's proposed bienalle concept. I wonder if the Port still intends to phase out those facilities as part of the plan or if we're stuck with them in the downsizing.
There's some great quotes in the article from Both Geraldine Knatz and I'm gonna put a bunch of them here, since they're so darn good at laying out what her thinking on the project is.
"You don't block views of the waterfront with tall buildings along the edge."
Knatz said the port would look to San Diego rather than neighboring Long Beach to take its cues for how to re-create the waterfront.
Ocean Boulevard in Long Beach, Knatz said, has proved to be "a physical and sometimes a psychological barrier" for pedestrians wanting to cross to reach the Pike on the waterfront.
I'm glad that the former Executive Director of the Port of Long Beach realises what a mistake it was to high-rise Ocean Boulevard there. I think that's a huge concern for a lot of us in Pedro - I'm not going to live here if I feel cut off from the waterfront - it would suck the magic right out of the town. I'm glad they're looking toward San Diego. My devotion to nerddom carries me there on an annual pilgrimage to Comic-Con and although it's too yuppie for my taste it seems like a very "liveable" city with good walking neighborhoods and a mix of development styles.David Freeman's also got a great quote, and although I largely agree with him - I think the Port needs to be more involved in the community and that they need to "think outside the box" (sorry) about what they do with their land.
"I'm glad we're not flirting with people about building hotels," said commission President S. David Freeman. "We have no money or ability to build hotels. You've brought some realism and candor into this discussion. ... It's not the port's job to get into the hotel or shopping center business."
I'm sure that this change will arouse the ire of those who have advocated, shilled and pushed for the bogus "Maximum Development Alternative", and make smug bastards out of those who have tried to roadblock this vital project with a mix of genuine concerns and a healthy dose of NIMBYism. New EIR meetings are going to be scheduled soon, and we'll all get the chance to shout and claw at each other all over agian.
3 Comments:
This is good news. Sounds like the port has bowed to the community's wishes and finally backed off the prior regime's inane plans to widen Harbor Blvd, build an Expo bldg, and cram hotels and retail development along the waterfront. I agree that Ports O' Call should be razed -- save the fine restaurant -- but raze the rest.
Why destroy Ports O' Call? It was once a great draw back in its day. With the right changes it could be again like Seaport Village down in San Diego. I see no reason why it couldn't.
I think Ports O' Call could be so much more than it is or ever was, and the restaurant and fish market are the only two assets that continue to draw visitors. I spent every childhood summer in San Diego (my parents were cheap vacationers), I've never really enjoyed Seaport Village. Even after the re-do, it still strikes me as a pretty boring tourist trap. I'd rather see development at Ports O' Call that primarily serves regional residents. I don't see Pedro as ever having the tourist or visitor trade that San Diego does.
My real reason for wanting to see it razed is that the buildings are incapable of serving the needs of retail, the lack of employee bathrooms, back offices, storage space and the limitations placed upon the display of merchandise due to their design is a hurdle. What commercial tenants want is a concrete walled, relatively windowless box that they can customise the interior to serve their needs - it's built like a theme park (the designer also did Main Street at Disneyland), but it doesn't have the management or audience that a theme park would have, the spaces are far to idisyncratic, making them difficult to use.
Not to mention the design of the buildings - they're designed to look like a New England sea town. We are not a New England sea town, we are a modern contemporary city, originally settled by the Spanish. I'd rather see something that speaks to our collective cultural heritage, rather than borrows a foreign one because it's quaint. It would be great if they re-did the whole thing in two story brick buildings, like the bars and other buildings that no longer exist in Pedro. They would get the "box effect" that retailers want and it would at the same time look appropriately local and historical.
Post a Comment
<< Home