Seen on the Street

Posted on May 17, 2016 by cmaddren

Unknown Artist, Sunset west of Highland

Nothing against museums, but there’s something really cool about artists who put their work right out on the street. A, it’s free. B, it makes walking around the city so much more interesting. And C, the best street art engages you in a way that’s more immediate than the experience you get in a museum. You’re strolling down to the liquor store to get a six pack and bang, you run up against something somebody stuck on the side of a building. Or a chalk drawing on the sidewalk. Or a billboard towering overhead.

It’s interesting how people’s attitudes to street art have changed. Back in the 70s guys who went around blasting walls with spray paint were vandals. Ten years later a lot of those same guys were showing their stuff at the Whitney Biennial. You can still find artists who sneak around with an aerosol can in the dead of night, but you can also find artists doing large scale public projects with backing from a foundation.

Here’s a sampling of some stuff I’ve found roaming around LA….

People are constantly pasting stuff up all over Hollywood. A lot of it’s junk, but this caught my eye one morning as I walked past the Pacific Theatre.

Unknown Artist, Wilcox north of Hollywood

These images of bottles have been showing up in various places over the past year or so. Honestly, I can’t figure out what it’s about, but I think they’re kind of cool.

Unknown Artist, Beverly near Detroit

Unknown Artist, Cahuenga near Franklin

Is anything more tempting to guerilla artists than an abandoned structure? This building at the corner of Argyle and Yucca was demolished a while ago, but I got a few photos before it disappeared.

Unknown Artists, Yucca and Argyle

This is a shot of the same building from the freeway.

Unknown Artists, Yucca and Argyle

Some artists keep it simple and rough.

Unknown Artist, Wilcox north of Sunset

Others spend a lot of time and effort to make it as polished as possible.

D*Face, Santa Monica near Flemish Lane

The image above is by D*Face, a classic example of someone who started out doing his own thing on the street, and over time became an established professional. To see more of his work, check out his site.

D*Face

Sometimes it’s a political statement.

Unknown Artist, Wilcox near Hollywood

Unknown Artist, Wilcox near Franklin

Other times it’s just a statement.

Unknown Artist, Selma and Ivar

Unknown Artist, Sunset near Gardner

I was out in Boyle Heights a while ago and I saw these banners decorating a fence that surrounded a construction site.

A row of banners at a construction site, First and Boyle

Lesther Cabrales, First and Boyle

Izzy Jaquez and Diego Escamilla, First and Boyle

I was told that the project was put together by Self Help Graphics, a non-profit that’s been serving local communities for over forty years. Here’s the link.

Self Help Graphics & Art

Found this at a construction site in Downtown. Somehow it really seems to capture the vibe in LA right now.

Unknown Artist, Fifth west of Broadway

I think I saw this at a construction site on Hill. Honestly, I can’t remember exactly where it was.

Unknown Artist, Unknown Location

Obviously phone kiosks aren’t getting a lot of use these days. Local artists have come up with lots of different ways to transform them.

Unknown Artist, Hill near Fourth

I’d seen these giant faces peering down from walls around town, but I didn’t realize they were part of a project by this guy who calls himself JR. Follow the link below to find out more. There’s a video you can watch that gives the lowdown.

Wrinkles of the City at DesignBoom

JR, Fifth near Main

JR, Alameda and Traction, rear of building

The image above can be found in back of Angel City Brewery on Alameda. And the mural you see below is right next to it.

Dabs & Myla and How & Nosm, Alameda and Third, rear of building

Finally this billboard by Robert Montgomery on Broadway near the UA Theatre. Not much to say about this one. I’ll let the work speak for itself.

Robert Montgomery, Broadway near Ninth

Keeping the River Clean

Posted on April 25, 2016 by cmaddren

Yesterday I got up earlier than I usually do on a Saturday. It took some effort, but by nine o’ clock I’d made it to Marsh Park so I could take part in the annual LA River clean-up event organized by Friends of the Los Angeles River (FoLAR).

This stretch of the river is bordered by a mix of older stucco homes and industrial buildings. Marsh Park seems to wind its way through the neighborhood, I’m assuming because it was planned to take advantage of unused open space. It’s nicely landscaped, and has a cool play area for kids.

The entrance to Marsh Park.

A grassy expanse in the park.

There’s a cool play area for kids.

These yellow flowers caught my eye.

The gate that leads to the river.

A shot of the river with the freeway in the background.

You’ll find a mix of residential and industrial on the streets adjacent to the river.

An artist’s effort to beautify a wall.

Dozens of people had made it there ahead of me. I got a pair of gloves and a trash bag, and after a brief orientation they set us loose on the river. The guy who gave us the ground rules said that twenty seven years ago, when FoLAR started doing these annual clean-ups, they came across all kinds of things in the river bed. In the early days they’d be hauling out mattresses, shopping carts, and even cars. These days, he went on to say, it was mostly a matter of picking up plastic bags.

A quick orientation before we got started.

Heading out to tackle the trash.

Exploring the river bed.

Looking high and low for trash.

When the bags were full, we left them along the bike path.

And this guy threw them in the back of a truck.

FoLAR has been taking care of this long-neglected natural treasure for thirty years. Unlike the Los Angeles River Revitalization Corporation, a latecomer with a pro-development agenda, FoLAR’s members have been trying for decades to realize the river’s tremendous potential as a public resource. Back when most of us were making jokes about this massive concrete channel that wound its way through the landscape, Lewis MacAdams and his cohorts saw what the river had once been and could be again. They’ve been working diligently since the eighties to protect and restore the LA River, and to educate the rest of us about its past and possible future.

Developers have realized that there’s money to be made by building along the banks.

One of the river’s current residents.

The Griffith Observatory was visible off in the distance.

Standing under the freeway you could hear the steady din of the cars above.

I spent a while collecting trash, and then I wandered off to take pictures. I’d never walked along the river bed before. It was pretty cool. I don’t know about you, but for most of my life I barely noticed the LA River. Encased in concete, bounded by industrial parks and rail lines, running beneath dozens of bridges, it’s as if the river has been buried by the city. We’re only starting to dig it out now. It will be many years before we uncover its real potential.

I’m so glad I made the effort to be there for the clean-up. It was a great day. And it’s just one of many events that FoLAR holds throughout the year. Check out their web site for more info.

FoLAR

How Will Communities Stay Connected?

Posted on April 20, 2016 by cmaddren

Rafu Shimpo staff circa 1920.

Recently a friend sent me a link to a story about the Rafu Shimpo, a Los Angeles-based newspaper that serves the Japanese-American community. Publisher Michael Komai released an open letter explaining that the paper has been losing money for years and is in danger of closing. Not a big surprise, but still sad news. Newspapers everywhere have been struggling to survive in a world awash in new media options. Technology offers more ways for people to get their news than over before, although I’m often surprised at what folks call “news” these days.

Newspapers may not disappear altogether, but they’re going to occupy much less space in our culture than they did thirty years ago. LA’s major English-language papers, the Times and the Daily News, have seen their circulation and their staff shrink drastically. Our Spanish-language daily, La Opinión, is a shadow of what it used to be. Many of the smaller publications that serve specific communities or cultures have gone on-line or gone away.

The disappearance of these small community papers is troubling. It seems to me we’re losing something important here. These little, independent publications came into being to give a voice to people who didn’t have one. They covered events and issues that were often underreported or completely ignored by the mainstream media. And even with stories that got lots of play in the media, these papers sometimes offered perspectives that weren’t being heard anywhere else.

No question, the internet also gives people a chance to make their voice heard, sometimes far beyond the boundaries of their community. But even though you can reach a huge audience through social media, sometimes it’s hard to figure out who you’re talking to. Two of the key factors that used to bind groups together were place and race. The internet can render both of those things meaningless, or at least effectively obscure their meaning. Is this a good thing? Nowadays people can create their own cyber communities based on the music they like, their sexual orientation, or TV shows they watched as children. You can make friends with people on the other side of the planet, and you don’t even need to speak the same language.

All of that’s great, but every once in a while we have to drag ourselves away from the net and get back to our lives in the physical world. Even if we’re not crazy about the place we live or the people we live with, we still need to deal with that reality. You may be able to fly in cyberspace, but if the sidewalks on your block are buckling, you could fall flat on your face when you go for a stroll. There are a zillion amazing musicians to be found on the net, but the musician who plays at the local bar, who may even be your neighbor, would probably really appreciate your support. And if your community is threatened by neglect or crime or overdevelopment, your only hope of turning the tide is by connecting with the people next door.

The internet can help with that. It’s one more tool we can use to create connections. But small papers like the Rafu Shimpo exist to keep people connected to what’s happening in their own community. Their whole purpose is to bring people together. It may be that advances in technology and market dynamics will slowly bury them. But we will be losing an important resource. Don’t kid yourself that social media is going to fill the void. Sharing kitty videos with a million strangers may be loads of fun, but in the long run you’ll be better off if you take the time to learn what’s happening in your own neighborhood.

Here’s a link to the letter from Michael Komai.

Open Letter from the Publisher of the Rafu Shimpo

The Broad

Posted on April 2, 2016 by cmaddren

Last week I finally made it down to The Broad. I lucked out because some friends had an extra ticket and invited me along. I really recommend making a reservation. The lines for visitors who don’t have one are still super long.

The front of the building on Grand Ave.

Riding up the escalator to the galleries.

I got there a little early and spent some time just checking out the building’s exterior. It’s gorgeous. The two design firms that worked on the project, Diller Scofidio + Rensler and Gensler, worked from a concept they call “vault and veil”. The vault is where the museum stores its collection, and instead of trying to hide it, which is the standard approach, they allowed the structure of the vault to play a major role in shaping the space. The veil is the building’s outer layer, a porous sheath that lets natural light filter into the galleries.

Jeff Koons, Tulips

A room full of Warhol.

Mark Bradford, Corner of Desire and Piety

Mark Tansey, Forward Retreat

Chris Burden, Bateau de Guerre

Looking at the works in Broad’s collection, it’s clear that the guy’s got a keen eye and an open mind. Unlike the super rich predators who’ve crowded into the art market looking for status symbols and investment opportunities, Broad is passionately interested in the ways that artists express themselves and interact with the world around them. Wandering through the galleries, I was struck by the depth and diversity of the works on view, but I was even more impressed by how engaging this innaugural show is. It can be tough just getting the general public to take a look at contemporary art. Believe it or not, some people don’t get excited about looking at massive hunks of sheet metal or walking into galleries filled with rotting vegetables. But the wide variety of pieces in this first show offer a range of experiences, and there’s something for everybody. If you’re an art scenester looking for challenging conceptual stuff, Mark Bradford takes over a wall to talk about post-Katrina economic realities in New Orleans. And if you’re a teen-age pop culture freak, you’ll probably want to whip out your phone and snap a few shots of Takashi Murakami’s giant psychedelic mushrooms. With works on display by Kara Walker, Joseph Beuys, Susan Rothenberg, Chris Burden, Ed Ruscha, Yayoi Kusama, Mark Tansey, Cady Noland and dozens of others, you’re sure to find something that will grab your attention.

Thomas Struth, Audience II (Galleria dell’Accademia) Florenz

Art you can read, from John Baldessari and Ed Ruscha.

Charles Ray, Fall ’91

I’m really grateful to Eli Broad for pulling this whole thing together. Aside from the thrill of seeing so much amazing art gathered together in one place, I was excited to see crowds of visitors milling through the galleries. And these people weren’t just passively strolling from one room to the next. They were posing with the art, laughing at the art, and talking about the art. This really is a museum for the people.

If you haven’t gone yet, what are you waiting for?

The Broad

Park located at the side of the building.

Who Are the Real Criminals?

Posted on March 27, 2016 by cmaddren

East Los Angeles Courthouse

Last week the trial of a group of Black Lives Matter activists ended in a hung jury. The seven defendants had participated in an act of civil disobedience that involved stopping traffic on the Hollywood Freeway. They were charged with two misdemeanors, obstructing a thoroughfare and refusal to comply with a police order. The protest was one of many that occurred nationwide after a Missouri grand jury decided not to indict a police officer in connection with the shooting death of Michael Brown.

The question I’m asking is, Why the hell did the City bother with this? Why did they waste the court’s time and the taxpayers’ money in an attempt to convict non-violent protesters of two misdemeanors? Does City Attorney Mike Feuer have nothing better to do with his time?

Before I go any further, I should mention that I know one of the defendants, so you can certainly question my objectivity. But did this trial serve any real purpose? I know that the Black Lives Matter movement is controversial. You may not agree with their statements. You may not approve of their actions. That’s fine. But by engaging in a non-violent act of civil disobedience, these people were continuing a tradition that goes back to this country’s origins. In arguing the case, prosecutor Jennifer Wexler is reported to have said, “Voice your opinion, but do it legally.” That’s interesting. Would she have given the same advice to Susan B. Anthony, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez?

But I suspect the justification for this idiotic waste of time and money has nothing to do with upholding the law. A friend told me that the defendants were offered a plea deal in advance of the trial, and one of the conditions was that they’d refrain from protesting for two years. Sounds to me like the City’s real goal was to quash dissent.

Was this trial really necessary? There are so many other people that deserve to be prosecuted for acts that have done real damage. We could start with Mayor Eric Garcetti, who took thousands of dollars in campaign cash from a lawn replacement company and gave them a plug in his State of the City speech. The company went on to suck up millions in rebates from the MWD, even though it did substandard work which may have actually done mare harm than good. Or maybe we could go after Ex-Councilmember Tom LaBonge, who attempted to destroy pretty much every document contained in his offices before stepping down. Among the thousands of records destroyed were files pertaining to major development projects and the disbursement of discretionary funds.

Instead the City Attorney goes after seven people who engaged in a non-violent protest, trying to convict them of two misdemeanors. I will be keeping this in mind when Mike Feuer is up for re-election.

Glendale Municipal Services Building

Posted on March 21, 2016 by cmaddren

LA has a remarkable architectural history. For decades writers and photographers have been documenting our homes and hotels, coffee shops and car washes, but there are still plenty of buildings that haven’t gotten nearly the attention they deserve. A prime example is the Glendale Municipal Services Building. It’s kind of surprising, given that the GMSB sits right out in the open at the corner of Glendale and Broadway, and that one of LA’s best known architectural firms was involved in the design.

The side of the building facing Broadway.

Northwest corner of the building.

Probably part of the reason for its neglect is that it’s in Glendale. When most people think about LA architecture, they think of Downtown or Hollywood or the West Side. Generally speaking, the Valley isn’t seen as a hotbed of innovation in design, though it does have its share of interesting structures. No question, the GMSB is one of them.

The building is lifted above street level by pylons of steel and concrete.

A close-up of one of the pylons.

Stairway leading to the first level.

The fountain at the center of the courtyard.

Another shot of the stairway.

In surfing the net, I didn’t come up with a lot of information about the GMSB. Every web site I’ve been to mentions both Merrill Baird and the A.C. Martin firm. Baird is pretty obscure. It seems not much is known about him. The only other examples of his work I could uncover were a few homes, all in pretty traditional styles. Based on what I’ve seen, his involvement in a cutting-edge modern structure like the GMSB is pretty surprising. It seems he had more to offer than his previous work suggests. The Los Angeles Conservancy’s web site credits Baird with revealing the supporting pylons by removing decorative columns that were originally part of the GMSB’s design. Click on the link below to read more.

Municipal Services Building from LA Conservancy

All offices open onto the central atrium.

A decorative pattern is worked into the railing.

There are three stories of offices, but the building is lifted off the ground at its base by concrete supports. To enter the GMSB, you walk down into the central courtyard, and then use the stairs or the elevator to get to the upper floors. All the offices open onto the central atrium, and there are plenty of windows allowing workers to enjoy natural light. Even though traffic is constantly flowing on the surrounding streets, the space at the center of the building is quiet and peaceful.

A shot of the fountain from above.

And a shot of the stairway from above.

Walkway on the third level.

The Conservancy’s web site describes the building as brutalist. While some of its features connect it to that school, it doesn’t have the heavy, blunt appearance of other brutalist structures. Generally the apartment blocks and office buildings built in that style tend to dominate the landscape. But not this one. It has a totally different vibe. It illuminates the landscape.

Death by a Thousand Cuts

Posted on March 13, 2016 by cmaddren

Not too long ago I was riding the bus and saw a pamphlet on display. The title was Public Hearing on Proposed Service Changes. Even before I picked it up, I more or less knew what it was about. The “service changes” are mostly service cuts, yet another round of reductions by the MTA.

This isn’t surprising. Last I checked, the MTA was running an operating deficit of over $30 million a year, and that deficit will continue to grow. One solution would be to raise fares, but the last time they did that there was a decline in ridership. Of course, ridership has been going down for a while now. Some argue that the decline may be reversable, and point to the rail extensions that are currently under construction. New rail stops will bring new riders, but they will also increase operating costs. And actually, fares don’t nearly cover what it takes to run the system. I really doubt that increased ridership from these extensions will make a serious difference in the budget picture.

There’s no simple solution here. While I’m not happy about further cutbacks, I know Metro is probably doing the best they can to balance their budget under challenging circumstances. But I’ve gotta say, it’s getting harder and harder to get around LA on public transit. A number of the lines I use regularly run only once an hour. The Rapid busses, which were great to start with, don’t run as often as they used to. I don’t read when I ride the bus, but I’ve started taking a book with me when I’m going somewhere because I never know how long I’ll be waiting to make a connection.

What I’m leading up to here, is that I’m really starting to question the MTA’s long term strategy. For years now we’ve been told that we need to invest in rail to solve our transit problems. Well, we’ve built a lot of rail, and things don’t seem to be getting any better. Looking at the budget issues and the trend in ridership, I don’t believe the rail we’re building now is going to make a huge difference. At some point we have to ask ourselves if this approach is working.

That brings us to Measure R2, the ballot initiative we’ll be voting on in November, which will increase the sales tax to raise billions for transit. About 40% of the projected revenue will go to rail projects, and looking at the results we’ve gotten from rail so far, I’m increasingly skeptical about whether this is the right way to go. Trains are great if you’re travelling in a straight line from point A to point B, but as soon as you get away from that straight line, things start getting complicated. Rail works great in New York, where the system is centered on a very dense urban core. LA is much more spread out, and even though Downtown is attracting more residents and businesses, it doesn’t function as the City’s center the way Manhattan does. There are those who argue we need to build high density hubs along transit lines, which sounds good, but City Hall has been pushing that policy for years and it’s not producing the promised results. Transit ridership is down. If our leaders had pursued a policy of building affordable housing that would make job centers easily accessible by rail, it might be a different story. But renting near rail stops is pretty pricey. A studio at Noho Commons goes for $1,777. Digs at the Jefferson in Hollywood start at $2,238. And I don’t know what they’ll be charging at the Wilshire Grand, but I’m pretty sure it’ll be more than the average transit rider can afford.

Measure R2 will deliver other things besides rail, and I don’t want to say I’m opposed to it, but at this point I can’t say I’ll vote yes. It seems like there are others who have doubts as well. This post on StreetsBlog breaks down the MTA’s 2016 budget, and raises some important issues. The comments are worth reading, too.

A Preview of Metro’s $5.6 Billion Fiscal Year 2016 Budget from StreetsBlog LA

I also came across this article in the Daily News that talks about how the Valley has gotten less than its share of transit infrastructure in the past, and how leaders on that side of town are worried about getting shortchanged again with R2. One of the points the author makes is that with big infrastructure projects, the longer they’re delayed, the more expensive they become.

What the Valley Would Get, and Not Get, in New Transportation Tax from Daily News

LA County is promoting R2 in order to fund a massive expansion of our rail network. Basically I’m asking if rail is really worth the money, time and trouble. Busses are much cheaper and much more flexible. Also, investing in busses won’t saddle the MTA with a huge debt load the way these infrastructure projects will. Debt service already accounts for a significant portion of the agency’s budget, and expanding the rail lines will make that burden even heavier.

You’re going to be hearing a lot about R2 in the coming months. City, County and State officials are already making an aggressive push to promote it. Again, I’m not saying I oppose it, but as you listen to our elected officials give their spiel, ask yourself if our public transit policy is taking us in the right direction. And if not, is it time to change course?

You Can’t Drink Paper Water

Posted on March 6, 2016 by cmaddren

Why should you care what the DWP’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan says?

You should care because city officials will use the UWMP when making decisions about future development in LA. They will be relying on the plan’s absurdly optimistic projections regarding future water resources to justify approving projects that could burden our dwindling water supply with unsustainable demands.

But first, let’s put this discussion in the right context. People talk about how we’re in the fourth year of the drought, and the assumption is that even if things are really bad now, eventually the drought will end and we’ll be back to normal. This is a big mistake. Everybody has their fingers crossed, hoping that this year’s heavy precipitation in the Sierras will restore the snowpack and we’ll be okay again. Actually, the snowpacks have been declining for decades, and there’s no reason to believe that trend will reverse itself in the near future. If you’re skeptical about this claim, check out these links.

Snowpack in California’s Sierra Nevada Lowest in 500 Years from NY Times

Declining Snowpacks May Cut Many Nations’ Water from Columbia University

This isn’t just a matter of toughing it out through a few dry years. For the foreseeable future, we’re going to have to use a lot less water than we’re used to. And this is not just a matter of taking shorter showers or getting rid of your lawn. We have to change the way we think about water in LA.

But in spite of the fact that we’re playing a whole new game, the people who run this city are determined to cling to the same old rules. Los Angeles was built largely on real estate speculation. For decades developers kept pushing the City’s boundaries outward, and this was only possible because the people who ran LA kept extending the reach of our water infrastructure. Local groundwater only supplies about 10% to 15% of what we need. The rest comes from sources far beyond the city limits.

We’ve gotten so used to living beyond our means that we still haven’t come to terms with the reality of our shrinking water resources. And in spite of all the rhetoric from City Hall about conservation, when it comes to planning for growth, our elected officials are determined to deliver everything the developers ask for.

So what’s wrong with the 2015 UWMP? In broad terms it does a good job of outlining the challenges that the City faces. But when we get down to specifics, the authors manage to avoid spelling out the severity of the situation. And in talking about the future of our water resources, things get very vague.

You want some examples?

The plan does talk about the fact that we’ll be getting much less water from the LA Aqueduct than we have in the past. In order to mitigate severe environmental impacts to the Owens Valley and Mono Lake, the City has agreed to reduce the amount it imports from the area. In the 70s and 80s, the Aqueduct generally brought us over 400,000 acre feet per year (AFY). That number started to drop in the 90s, and while some years have been better than others, the average has continued to decline, especially in the last four years. In 2014/2015 we received only 53,500 AFY. Less than 14% of what we were getting thirty years ago. This is a record low.

Graph showing LA Aqueduct deliveries from the 2015 UWMP.

There’s another figure I’d like to cite in connection with the LA Aqueduct, and that’s the amount of water it delivered to us from April through September 2015.

Zero.

Last year the LA Aqueduct was closed for the first time in its history. A temporary dam was put in place so that the City of LA could fulfill its obligations to maintain the Owens Valley and Mono Lake. During this period, we received no water from the aqueduct. I can’t claim to have read the entire UWMP, but in the reading I have done I didn’t come across any references to this closure. Maybe that’s because it’s such a stark symbolic reminder of the gravity of our situation.

So how are we going to replace the water we used to get from the Aqueduct? Of course, there’s the usual talk about recycling and stormwater capture, both of which are certainly worthwhile, but it will be years before they start making a serious difference with regard to our water supply. And then there’s this section from the Executive Summary under the heading Water Transfers.

LADWP plans on acquiring water through transfers of up to 40,000 AFY to replace a portion of the Los Angeles Aqueduct (LAA) water used for environmental enhancements in the eastern Sierra Nevada. The City would purchase water when available and economically beneficial for storage or delivery to LADWP’s transmission and distribution system.

Wow. That’s great. It’s so simple. We’ll can just suck up another 40,000 AFY through water transfers from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). But the problem here is that they’re assuming MWD will reliably have access to that much water. The UWMP mentions transfers of water originally intended for agriculture in the Central Valley. What? Have they seen the photos of landscapes collapsing due to overpumping? In order to justify the claim that we can rely on these water transfers, the UWMP bases its calculations on the historic average of water supplies going back to the 20s. They offer a chart titled “MWD Forecast Supplies of Groundwater Storage and Transfers in 2040, Average Year (1922 – 2004 Hydrology) “. In other words, they’re basing their calculations on conditions that existed well before the current crisis began. And they’re using those figures to project water supplies 25 years into the future.

But what about groundwater? Right now the supplies we get from aquifers within city limits provide between 10% and 15% of what we use annually. But in the Executive Summary under the heading Water Supply Reliability the DWP offers this startling prediction.

The exhibits show that the City’s locally-developed supplies will increase from 14 percent to 49 percent in dry years or to 47 percent in average years.

What a relief! Using purified wastewater and captured stormwater we’re going to more than triple our groundwater resources! But wait. It gets even better.

These local supplies are not influenced by variability in hydrology, and will become the cornerstone of LA’s future water supplies.

This is really amazing. Our local supplies are not influenced by variability in hydrology! In other words, the same factors that affect water resources everywhere all over the world will not affect the groundwater in LA. Though they don’t provide much in the way of explanation, it seems that the folks at the DWP have somehow cast a magic spell over the City. No matter how hot it gets or how little it rains, we can rest assured that our aquifers will soon be supplying us with almost half of the water we need.

I wonder if that same magic spell protects us from toxic chemicals. Because most of our groundwater comes from wells in the San Fernando Valley, and about half of those wells are closed right now because of industrial pollution. The DWP does have a plan to build two treatment plants that will purify the water from these sources, but it could be years before they break ground. At this point they don’t even have the funding lined up.

But rather than subjecting you to more of my ranting, let me turn this over to somebody who knows a lot more about this stuff than I do and who does a way better job of breaking it down. DroughtMath is a blog that digs deep into water issues, and you can find a detailed breakdown of the 2015 UWMP there. I recommend starting with this post, which clearly lays out how the DWP uses “paper water” to pretend that they’ll have no problem supplying the City with everything it needs. What is paper water? It’s water that “utilities claim they have access to, but is difficult or impossible to access for various reasons.” But go ahead and check out what DroughtMath has to say on the subject.

LADWP’s Paper Water Leverages on MWD Supplies from DroughtMath

He also gives a good overview of the UWMP and its many flaws in this post.

Thoughts on the 2015 Draft UWMP from DroughtMath

I want to wrap up by saying that in spite of the anger and sarcasm in my tone, I do not see the DWP as the bad guy here. While the agency has had its share of scandals, the men and women who work there mostly do an amazing job of making sure that we almost always get the water we need. When you think about the fact that the DWP serves an area of about 400 square miles, and that we have little in the way of local resources, it’s remarkable that they have built and maintained a system that reliably brings us water for bathing, washing, cooking, and cleaning with few disruptions.

The bad guys are the developers and politicians who refuse to recognize that there are very real limits to our water resources. The bad guys are those people who are so blinded by greed and ego that they don’t want the citizens of LA to know how seriously compromised those resources are. The UWMP may seem like just another boring technical report, but it has huge consequences for the City’s future growth.

I am not saying we should stop growth. I’m saying we need to have a realistic picture of how much growth we can support. We can only make decisions about future development if we have an accurate picture of our water resources. The draft 2015 UWMP does not provide that.

If you’re as concerned as I am, I urge you to make your voice heard. The first step is to take a look at the UWMP. I know, I know, it’s a lengthy, intricate technical document and probably nobody’s idea of a good read. But you don’t have to go through the whole thing. Just take a look at the Executive Summary, which provides an overview of the contents and conclusions.

2015 UWMP at LADWP

The first public hearing is already past, but there’s a second one on March 9 from 6 pm to 8 pm at the Sepulveda Garden Center, 16633 Magnolia Blvd., in Encino.

If you can’t make it to the meeting, you can still submit comments by e-mail. The deadline is March 16. Here’s the address.

uwmp@ladwp.com

If you’re concerned about development, or if you just care about the city you live in, please let the DWP know your feelings on this issue. If the DWP Board adopts the current version of the 2015 UWMP, it will be one more instance of our city officials placing the needs of developers with deep pockets over the needs of the people of Los Angeles.

Creating Community

Posted on February 25, 2016 by cmaddren

New development in Boyle Heights, right next to the historic Mariachi Hotel.

I’ve heard people complain that Angelenos don’t know their neighbors. To a large degree that’s true. We tend to build our own little self-contained worlds, and get nervous when outsiders try to invade. In order to make it through the day, I try to keep interaction with strangers to an absolute minimum. In part, this is because I’ve found that some strangers want way more than I’m willing to give. Living in the city, you have to be at least a little wary.

But the downside is that there are very few places in LA where you can find a real sense of community. You might find a scene where you can hang out with people who share your passions, but chances are they’re coming from all over the city. You don’t find too many neighborhoods where everybody knows each other. And because of that, we don’t know our neighborhoods. The tenants in the building next to ours could be getting evicted for a condo conversion, and we might not be aware of it until the construction crews show up. Even when we find out what’s going on, we’re likely so wrapped up in ourselves that we don’t start worrying until the eviction notice shows up in our own mailbox.

So I was really intrigued when I heard about Union de Vecinos (UV), which could be translated as Neighbors United. It’s a grassroots group that’s been working in Boyle Heights for twenty years. They got their start back in 1996 when public housing in Pico Aliso was threatened with demolition, and they worked to protect renters threatened by displacement. But UV isn’t just reactive. They’re also creative. Starting with neighborhood committees, they work within the community for positive change. This is from their web site.

[Union de Vecinos promotes] economic and environmental justice, civic engagement, preservation of housing, and building healthy and stable community neighborhoods. We do this through community organizing, popular education and direct action. In our model, solutions to a problem are developed by those most affected – community – this is what drives us and is at the heart of our work.

The part of this paragraph that jumps out at me is, “solutions to a problem are developed by those most affected.” So often in the City of LA we have elected officials meeting behind closed doors with bureaucrats and business interests to devise plans that really don’t address the needs of the citizens. When they do hold public meetings and ask for input, it’s generally just for show. They’ve already decided what they want to do, and the meeting is really about selling their own agenda.

Banner on fence at a construction site on First Street. Art by Gabriella Claro, Salma Sosa, and Tatei Torres Thomas.

So the idea of a neighborhood group that sets its own priorities and creates its own agenda sounded really good to me. I went to Boyle Heights to talk to UV members Leonardo Vilchis and Elizabeth Blaney about the challenges the Boyle Heights community is facing these days. A lot of it has to do with development, and the related problem of gentrification.

In early 2015, the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) announced plans for a project to be built on Mariachi Plaza. Unfortunately, the MTA didn’t bother to ask the community how they felt about it. There was a huge public outcry, and Union de Vecinos was one of the groups that raised their voices in protest. The MTA shelved the project for the time being, but they’re planning to come back with another version. I asked Leonardo if he thought the public would have more of a voice this time.

“They said they’d reach out to us, but it’s really just pro forma,” he said. “The MTA sets up these meetings with focus groups, where you have to be invited.” He didn’t seem optimistic about the process. “They have these meetings, but they don’t really seem to be seeking input.”

Elizabeth spoke about UV’s engagement with the East LA Community Corporation, one of the developers building on and around MTA land. ELACC is working on creating affordable housing in Boyle Heights, but displacement of low-income families is still an issue. “We want affordable housing for the 7,000 families that make less than $25,000 in our community,” she explained, “but if they’re demolishing existing units, we have to make sure that those tenants will be welcome in the new project.” Recently UV negotiated a deal with ELACC to ease some restrictions to allow displaced tenants the right of return.

I asked what kind of projects UV was working on in the neighborhood.

“Garcetti talks about his Great Streets Initiative…,” Leonardo said with a smile, “but we’ve been doing great streets here in Boyle Heights for years.” When local alleys were attracting criminal activity, UV got residents involved in finding a solution. Elizabeth spoke with pride about the way the community turned the situation around. “We held movie nights and swap meets to reactivate these spaces. Residents went on to build street furniture, paint murals and install solar-powered lighting. Before people had been afraid to walk down these alleys, and now they’re gathering places for the community.”

What a concept. People taking responsibility for their neighborhood and working together to make it better. It’s not a new idea, but it’s something many of us who live in LA have forgotten how to do. Maybe we could learn a few things by following Union de Vecinos’ example.

If you want to learn more about what they’re up to, here’s the link to their web site.

Union de Vecinos

Leonardo Vilchis and Elizabeth Blaney of Union de Vecinos.

Remaking the May Co.

Posted on February 20, 2016 by cmaddren

Construction of the new Academy Museum has begun.

A while ago I was at LACMA, and as I walked down a flight of stairs on the west side of the campus I looked over at the May Co.. It had a big hole in it. Construction had started on the new museum for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences.

May Co. building with a section removed.

Looking through the May Co. to Fairfax.

It’s taken a long time to get to this point. The project has been hampered by controversy, ranging from construction impacts on the community to issues with the design. Hopefully all that’s been resolved. At any rate, the May Co. is being taken apart so that it can be put back together again, this time with a massive annex that will contain a state of the art theatre.

A view of the site facing Fairfax.

The rear of the building.

The original May Co. building was designed by Albert C. Martin and Samuel Marx and it opened in 1939. For decades it was a major department store, but as malls began to draw more shoppers it went into decline. LACMA took it over 1994, but it seemed like they never used it much. In 2014 the Academy made a deal to lease the property with the goal of building a museum. After a long search, Renzo Piano was brought on as architect.

A view of the site facing Wilshire.

A view of the empty structure.

And a closer view of the interior.

I’m glad things are moving forward. People have been talking for years about how LA should have a museum devoted to film, and it’s high time somebody made this happen. According to the Academy web site, “The Museum will provide interactive, immersive, and engaging exhibitions that will pull back the curtain on moviemaking and highlight the history and future of the arts and sciences of film.” Sounds good to me.

Heavy machinery and piles of debris.

Check out the Academy’s web site to learn more.

Academy Museum

They’ve also got a cool timeline for the May Co., showing photos of the building through the years.

May Co. Building Timeline

I know it hasn’t been easy for the Academy to deal with all the challenges of creating a new museum, but it looks like they’re on their way. Let’s hope it’s smooth sailing from here on.

The corner of the building at Wilshire and Fairfax.

	noemailaddressaccoun… on Vigil in Altadena One Year aft…
	Alan Dowsett on Oki Dog Is Gone
	noemailaddressaccoun… on Thousands Protest in Downtown…
	cmaddren on Oki Dog Is Gone
	Margaret Wynn on Oki Dog Is Gone

The Horizon and the Skyline

A blog about Los Angeles

Author Archives: cmaddren

Seen on the Street

Keeping the River Clean

How Will Communities Stay Connected?

The Broad

Who Are the Real Criminals?

Glendale Municipal Services Building

Death by a Thousand Cuts

You Can’t Drink Paper Water

Creating Community

Remaking the May Co.