Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Movin' On Up

Just when you thought LA was getting more dense than ever (and no I don't mean mentally) - the City serves up: more density! The City is dealing with a new state law that allows for added density despite zoning laws if a development includes a certain amount of affordable housing.

Now you know the old dead Republican mayor respects private property rights and that developers should be able to build what they want without silly affordable housing shell games. However if it helps increase inventory and hence dropping the prices for young adults seeking home ownership, all the more better. Now I know that most of you will knee jerk against that being deficient of the libertarian free thinking gene, but I will not hold that against you.



Anonymous Anonymous said:


August 30, 2007 5:34 AM  

Blogger Don Culo said:

A related story by the L.A. Weekly. I provided a few interesting quotes from the news story below.

I wonder if the Mayor and City Council members ride the bus?


Take This Car and Shove It
An Orwellian “100 percent parking reduction” rule quietly wends through City Hall


At an August 9 Planning Commission meeting, Rothmann rolled out his latest of 10 proposed changes to the Municipal Code to address traffic and parking problems. Under current city code, developers may petition the powerful but obscure city zoning administrator, Michael LoGrande, to be excused from constructing parking for commercial and industrial buildings if city-mandated employee parking is shown to be unnecessary, and if viable parking alternatives are demonstrated.

But now, Rothmann proposes a move into uncharted territory, by pushing to allow such parking waivers for residential buildings. Under his plan, developers could win a “100 percent parking reduction” at condos and apartments citywide.

If approved by the 15-member City Council (no date for a vote has been set) and signed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Rothmann's antiparking rule, the so-called Parking Reduction Amendment, would let developers erect high-density dwellings and not build a single parking space as long as LoGrande feels residents have enough access to bicycle racks, van pools, bus stops or other “alternatives” to their cars.

laweekly take-this-car-and-shove-it

August 30, 2007 5:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"...all those cars... all going somewhere... with people in them..."

August 30, 2007 5:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Libertarian thinking gene"?

Not worried about that at all, Mayor Sam.

It's clear you don't even have any "thinking gene," much less the "libertarian" one.


August 30, 2007 7:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You are a genius.
(do you work for the mayor? or wait since you're SOOOO smart you must work for that intellectual giant Tom LaBong!)

August 30, 2007 8:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

My dad always used to say, "It's self regulating."

All of this stuff will hit the wall eventually whether through 1) gridlock, 2) lack of water, 3) a massive environmental pollution (heavy on the diesel) dieoff that can no longer be ignored, 4) a continued real estate meltdown, or 5) all of the above.

Too bad we can't get out in front of this and fix it, but that's what passes for "planning" in good old LA.

August 30, 2007 9:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Boom of condo crash loudest in Miami

August 30, 2007 9:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen (removes hat and bows low with flourish):

Just this past Monday I was privy to a discussion held by a group of individuals at City Hall who were feeling like they had been caught between a rock and a hard place for, if you will, they had been counting upon several millions of dollars in transportation funding that unfortunately went somewhere else in the recent past as a means to create more auto-trans alternatives, savvy? And one clever sot said "Well, I would think that our position is now one of which comes first, the chicken or the egg as opposed to being between the rock and the hall..." (Whispers) That clever sot was not me. So sorry.

And while there was gnashing of teeth over this quandary that His Nibbs seems to have put these poor sots in (i.e., having to paint while blindfolded with one arm tied behind your back), there was also the comment raised that certain developers who have donated regularly to certain campaign, and who have been wined and dined on the City nickel are now clamouring for favours since it seems that the favour giver is starting to loose his touch.

But that's only part of the problem. It also appears that certain sots (who are more interested in lining their own pockets) are frantically waiving about that Supreme Court ruling that allows the taking of private single family homes to build private luxury condos. This is the same ruling that the state Legislature rushed to pass laws against. Rushing to grab the favours while them that grant the favours still have the power to do so, savvy?

So how does this help the young adults with the ability to purchase housing? From where we pirates sit, it doesn't. There really can't be anything done by any municipal agency to assist young adults with home purchases. No amount of legislation will make home prices drop. Home prices drop on their own. (Looks up and jumps out of the way as a house fall out of the sky and lands in spot where Jack was standing) Oh bugger, that was close! (Wipes brow)

It appears that the housing market is regulating itself with the rise of the foreclosure rate...which in reality is an ideal situation for a pirate type. One can either purchase the home while securing a COFI purchase money mortgage so at least half their arse is covered or one can work a deal with the poor fool who bit off more than they could chew who would do ANYTHING to free themselves from the pain of a monthly mortgage. Remember, pirates are all about cutting deals.

(Winks) Speaking of deals, I hear that a certain elected official in the State House is about to cut a deal to keep the FBI from their door. Let's see who gets thrown under the bus, savvy?

August 30, 2007 9:41 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If they scale back on parking spaces in downtown condos, values will take a hit.

August 30, 2007 9:58 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The car addicted cannot fathom that ANYONE could possible live without one. Sad.

August 30, 2007 10:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Captain Jack Bird Brain posting at 9:41 AM? Isn't Walter in exile in Paris?

August 30, 2007 10:39 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If "affordable" units were PERMANENTLY designated as such, that would be one thing.... but they are not.

If the percentage of affordable units was of any signifigance, that would be another, but it isnt.

The affordable housing bonus is simply a way to increase density(profit) at the expense of having to delay the revenue for a period of time.

August 30, 2007 11:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


No, I cannot fathom that you jerk. I have a job and a family and a life beyond the corner carniceria.

August 30, 2007 11:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anonymous said...
The car addicted cannot fathom that ANYONE could possible live without one. Sad.


And the politicos can not fathom that thousands of people who work in downtown Los Angels have kids and would never force them to live in a 30 story concrete and glass box.

And that we DO NOT have subways and high speed trains servicing all of Southern California.

August 30, 2007 11:33 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I wonder how many illegal aliens are going to be working on the additional massive construction projects. Go visit any of the construction sites in downtown and you see thousands of illegal working. The Mayor knows he is getting good construction jobs for his beloved illegal aliens.

And now they can drive to work without worries about getting their vehicles impounded.

Deport the Mayor and his illegal alien criminals.

August 30, 2007 11:48 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

11:33 AM

Haven't you noticed how they work? It is NOT about what is best for the CITIZENS, it s NOT about what is best for the city, state or country, it is about them forcing their agenda down your throat...

When they have finally raped and pillaged the economy and the country as much as they can, leaving all in ruin and societal warfare, they mistakenly think they are going to spirit themselves away to safe enclaves, secure from the wrath of the people ... they are wrong.

August 30, 2007 12:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Robert Moses was hated for what he was doing to New York nearly fifty years ago. And I agree that his duplicitous demeanour and dreadful tricks (such as making Freeway overpasses a few inches too short so as to not allow busloads of urban youths to vacation in the Rockaways, Hamptons, et al) separated thousands of families. However, not everyone is gonna be happy. (And trust me, I lament the sudden elimination of Skid Row, over which I usta live at 6th and Spring; the sterilised version of Spring Street, with its grant-subsidised "art" galleries and west-side invasion of lofties, is reprehensible not to mention artless in every way.)
But a dearth of parking will possibly force a few things: lofties to flee, buses to be better, and a 24-hour subway.
I am sure I will receive complaints about my own bad attitude toward the new lofties. They desrve a sound padding, so let them fly. After all, when lingerie-clad, seemingly clean-cut cretins complain about an adult video store at the base of their building (such as was reported with a photograph of said cretins in L.A. Downtown news); when the morons who owe so much to being able to afford the over-priced, formerly vacant lofts, bitch about teh very industry who have for decades made it difficult to sleep (unless one was a crackhead); and when all the flavour of a formerly fascinating bit of an otherwise drab "metropolis" is so quickly bleached out, all I can state is: "Bring on the 100% parking reduction measures."

August 30, 2007 1:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


You are right, the only ones who will really benefit by all this construction boom is the poor illegal aliens who come here for a good job and send the money back to mexico without paying taxes.

Come on people wake-up we have an invasion of illegal aliens right here in America and that idiot Bush is over in Iraq.

Bush bring our solders home and put them to work at the border, transfer them to the National Guard and stop the invasion of illegal mexicans.

The mexicans are bankrupting our schools and hospitals and Bush is over in Iraq. The LAUSD is the biggest cost to the city of Los Angeles, why are we paying to educate illegal mexicans.

August 30, 2007 2:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If condos don't have parking included it will become an extra to pay for, like in New York, Tokyo etc. People pay a fortune just for a spot there, often not even in their own buildings but wherever it's close and cheaper.
That will happen here. Having parking will be an added value to those who need it, and those who don't can get some price reduction.

August 30, 2007 2:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Just what we need,more Illegal Alien
job magnets for our midget mecha
mayor's people.

August 30, 2007 2:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There are two ways to create more affordable housing in LA.

One, curb demand by shutting off the tidal wave of illegal aliens from Mexico into this country and of course, City.

Two, zero tolerance enforcement of laws in places where affordable single family homes exist and need only improvement, i.e. South Central.

South Central LA is on good land, close to downtown, with the Freeway and the Blue Line providing easy access to downtown office. The land is flat, making single family dwellings easy to build or improve. Heck many houses are architecturally interesting (Craftsman, etc) and have no issues with runoff, wildfires, and other natural disasters associated with outer suburbs/cities where white and asian folks flee to (away from minority crime).

Obviously, the residents of South Central are not stupid. They prefer their neighborhood integrity over the gains they could make from selling out to gentrifying pioneers. Hence the support for crime, gangs, and opposition to any police measures, more police, etc.

A combination of these two: national action to close the borders and a properly sized police force to provide public safety (instead of rule by Gangs in South Central) would make housing prices drop considerably.

Of course developers want high prices and a low supply of affordable housing. So don't expect any anti-Crime measures or measures against Illegal Aliens any time soon.

August 30, 2007 2:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:58: Wishing for a collapse of home prices presumably so you can maybe hope to buy, is really great planning for the city as a whole. Brilliant.

August 30, 2007 3:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:18, that is nuts.

Angelenos are not New Yorkers. Condos will sit empty before people will shell out $20K/yr. for a parking space.

August 30, 2007 3:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Too bloody right!

Someone said this weekend, "Words are for discussion, bullets are for change."

August 30, 2007 4:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:15 PM

Beware people who have nothing left to lose... and who are really, really pissed off...

August 30, 2007 4:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Who said that this weekend?

August 30, 2007 4:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


August 30, 2007 10:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This goes on all over the districts where the illegal aliens have invaded our city. Even Huizar and Molina both built on their properties without getting proper permits so why didn't they get sentenced to go to jail?

The Daily Breeze article about a Rolling Hills Estates resident sentenced to six months in county jail Monday for building on his property without permits has sparked a fierce backlash and a tidal wave of national and media attention.

August 31, 2007 6:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:40 PM

Actually, a friend of my wife's just threw it out during the standard political discussions. You know, Iraq, Katrina, LAUSD, Diesel Death Zone, massive development with no corresponding infrastructure improvements, just the standard stuff.

Come to find out, it is a quote from somebody named Stan Sikorski. Having googled the name, and looked at the website VNN which came up, he seems a bit problematic, but the quote does describe a lot of people's state of mind.

4:29 nailed it exactly.

August 31, 2007 9:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:49: Don't know what national outrage you're trying to suggest, but if it's an anti-Mexican thing again, you should know the guy in Rolling Hills is a Cuban and his wife also a Hispanic. Their fence encroached on city property, cutting the bridle path down from what it was. Their dispute with the courts went on for a long time, he was told to adjust the fence many times. So it's more a contempt of court thing. Jail still seems stupid and wrong, though.

August 31, 2007 10:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Micheal LoGrande, the chief ZA, is the lackey of Gail Goldberg, who is the lackey of the mayor who is beholden to the developers for a lot of quid pro quos to allow massive density, (it's going to get MUCH worse with the talk around the planning department and what they are working on), in order to get money later when the mayor runs for govenor.
Mr LoGrande is clueless and was put there because he pleases the developers and not by his knowlege of the intricacies of the code. Ms. Goldberg is put there to make sure the vision of the mayor (if one calls it that) is fufilled, i.e. ,increase density at all levels at the expense of sound infratstructure capacity, qualify of life issues, increasing air and noise pollution etc..

BTW, Ms Goldberg borrows heavily (or steals is the better word) planning marketing terms already in use such as Mayor Brown in San Jose phase of " elegant denisty." WTF is that?! Can anyone REALLY explain this to me? Then we have another term she uses that is so absolutely meaningless in substance to be laughable -"do real planning" My guess is one man's "real planning" is another man's disaster! Can anyone disguinsish what the city has done in the last two years with the mayor and new planning director that is "real planning?" Does she think Angelenos are that freakin' STUPID? As a great musican once said about freedom being "nothing left to lose" "real planing" means nothing left to lose.

So when LA politicals embrace massive development to be hidden behind slick with marketing phrases? You're not selling cookies here, bubba. What you ARE DOIING, Mayor Villar, when you finish with your work in LA is leave US in the metaphorical highrise of your legacy.

If you want to protest these ideas, go Pete's Bar and Cafe located on 400 S. Main after working hours where you'll see Ms. Gailberg and LoGrande canoddling together and devisng more sophistry against the dissenting public to better push ever more high density projects.

August 31, 2007 6:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

National Center for Policy Analysis ^ | 8/24/2007 | Randal O'Toole

Posted on 08/24/2007 3:15:29 PM PDT by bruinbirdman

Though many people consider Portland, Ore., a model of 21st-century urban planning, the region's integrated land-use and transportation plans have greatly reduced the area's livability. To halt urban sprawl and reduce people's dependence on the automobile, Portland's plans use an urban-growth boundary to greatly increase the area's population density, spend most of the region's transportation funds on various rail transit projects, and promote construction of scores of high-density, mixed-use developments, says Randal O'Toole, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute.

When judged by the results rather than the intentions, the costs of Portland's planning far outweigh the benefits, explains O'Toole:

-- Planners made housing unaffordable to force more people to live in multifamily housing or in homes on tiny lots.

--They allowed congestion to increase to near-gridlock levels to force more people to ride the region's expensive rail transit lines.

-- They diverted billions of dollars of taxes from schools, fire, public health, and other essential services to subsidize the construction of transit and high-density housing projects.

Those high costs have not produced the utopia planners promised.

-- Far from curbing sprawl, high housing prices led tens of thousands of families to move to Vancouver, Washington, and other cities outside the region's authority.

-- Far from reducing driving, rail transit has actually reduced the share of travel using transit from what it was in 1980.

-- And developers have found that so-called transit-oriented developments only work when they include plenty of parking.

These problems are all the predictable result of a process that gives a few people enormous power over an entire urban area. Portland should dismantle its planning programs, and other cities that want to maintain their livability would do well to study Portland as an example of how not to plan, says O'Toole.

Source: Randal O'Toole, "Debunking Portland: The City That Doesn't Work," Cato Institute, Policy Analysis No. 596, July 9, 2007.

August 31, 2007 9:09 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home