Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Friday, February 29, 2008

Density Bonus

JM, Women Playing Lottery, Kopper Keg Liquor, Atwater, 2.29.08

One sentence leaps out of the Weekly article chronicling the rise of the Avenues in Glassell Park:

Then, starting in the 1960s, the city built apartments on its dead-end streets and avenues — and a bad element moved in, seeing the isolated little neighborhood as the perfect lair.

As Gail Goldberg permits condo after condo that doesn't quite make it to owner-occupied, you have to wonder what's going to happen to all our empty mixed-use developments.


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Some other interesting quotes from L.A. weekly article you posted. This is just another example of why we need to repeal SP-40 in Los Angeles, and start enforcing immigration laws. A perfect example of the effects of L.A. the sanctuary city, and L.A the "gang capital of the world" getting worse.


"Drew Street, with its long, straight rise, offered the perfect viewing base from which to espy approaching cop cars. It turned out to be just the thing for Maria "Chata" Leon, a young toughie from a rough, lawless Mexican village who settled there and gave birth to 13 children — a half-dozen of whom became criminals. With a new baby on her hip every year or two, Leon dealt drugs and staked her claim on Drew Street, in a Bleak House stocked with guns and explosives."

"Gang experts say that in recent years, longtime Avenues gangsters have begun to allow tough, illegal Mexican immigrants to join their ranks, with Drew Street drawing immigrants from a rough village in Mexico's Guerrero State — an area that has a reputation for extreme lawlessness. This new mix spells disaster, says one law-enforcement official, because, "Here is one group of people who already had a tremendously lawless culture, on top of another, existing violent gang. And the synergy of the two produced what we saw the other day."

March 01, 2008 10:31 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The L A Times article on this a few days ago, also quoted residents who said they wanted the "corrupt cops" out, and to leave the gangbangers alone, since the gangbangers could keep order on their own much better. This the day of the shooting of Salas, a former gang member who'd been in prison and was trying to get clean and out of the gang. (But was already a grandfather at 36, with lots of kids and stepkids, no job. Some 12 kids all in our public schools.)

These people then file complaints against the cops to discourage them from going in, leaving their slums even more of a gang haven. Which is how they want it. Reader blogs in the Times quotes others saying that sure, "we've got gang shootings at night," but blasting those who said it was awful to raise kids like that. "Our kids our just fine," she said, calling those who disagreed racists.

So the ideal would be to let them just have their hell, but wall it in -- let them get food deliveries, and have permits to come and go.

Since they're telling us they want to opt out of the civilized human race, let's stop the financial and emotional toll. Let them "take care of each other," kill each other if that's what they want.

There should be an opt-out for kids who don't want to grow up there, to go live with foster parents. When our nanny state takes kids away from middle class parents for spanking as "abuse," leaving kids with these pro-criminal parents who encourage gang membership is wrong.

Just make sure no more illegals from that charming Mexican town join them. And have huge penalties for those who aid and abet these criminals -- let Perry get all of them, including blacks like the Crips who shot up the busstop to "gain entry" to the gang, be declared urban terrorists, and go after them with all they've got.

But the feds want us to enforce the ICE laws to get their help -- just like Arizona is doing. (So their illegals are coming to Cal, too.)

Not that the Republicans have been any better -- Bush was all set to open the borders to Mexico even more until 9/11 hit. Republican business greed, leftist Democratic vote pandering for Hispanics, both must cease.

Reyes is quoted in Daily News saying he wants tougher penalties for first-time gangbangers, since they let some "newbie" wannabe take the rap, knowing he won't get much time. This makes sense, too. But Reyes insists the illegals are "our" kids and demands that illegals have "rights" of citizens.

Why won't at least Arnold have the guts to attack this two-faced logic?

March 01, 2008 1:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There's a controversial building in Sherman Oaks, Greuel's district, where the neighbors forced the builder to build more condos instead of the higher-density rentals he wanted. So Joe, it's not necessarily true that the city is pushing condos instead of rentals. Residents often prefer condo owners, who have a stake in the neighborhood, to renters.

March 01, 2008 2:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Maybe Don Quixoti the Cholo lover can move to Drew Street, I hear there are some nice apts. available there, and you don't need no stinking badges, they don't let the cops in, you've got the EME and nice gangbangers taking care of things for you. Adios Don Cholo, don't look back.

March 01, 2008 8:19 PM  

Blogger NorthValleyCowboy said:

When you want stability, build 2-4 bedroom apts, and market-priced RD-6 condos, no density bonus, and single family homes. The mixed-use stuff that purportedly reduces car-trips only works if you link the retail component to a residential unit. Work here, live here. Even make a few of the stacked condos into commercial lofts, for artists or architects. But Gail Goldbrick must have some goal or payoff in mind for ceding so readily to the developer-driven permit-processing department historical pattern of operation. She actually improved efficiency to remove the bottlenecks, before she was going to reform and improve the planning practices. HA! Nothing yet.

North Valley Cowboy

March 01, 2008 10:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

On the same thought…I’ve got a question for Gail Goldberg. When is the reorganization of the planning department going to happen? You’re been with the city for two years and the developers are still calling the shots. If anyone recalls, she was *suppose* to reorganize the place within the first six months. She hired a consulting firm to work it out and a lot of planners gave her ideas and a lot of committees talk here and there… it’s the same old, same old. So far, all the public got was a neato brochure with all kinds of clever words that says the city is going "do real planning.” Well, when is that exactly going to happen, hmmmm? Obviously she’s not up to the task she’s was hired to do. Unless a slickly made marketing brochure has any meaning with y’all.

March 12, 2008 9:31 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home