28 responses to “Why Isn’t this Prime Real Estate?”

1. 

   Andrew

   July 29, 2006

   Scott-
   You’re right. The rail line was built to BRING people to Van Nuys, and develop rural areas. Now we have the opposite problem. We have the people but we need to BRING them to the rail line.

   Andrew

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   Scott Mercer

   July 29, 2006

   Hey, everybody, guess what?

   Van Nuys Boulevard DID formerly have a rail line running down the middle of it!

   It was called the Pacific Electric and it ran throughout the valley.

   The line was put in around 1912, and is THE REASON why Van Nuys Blvd. is where it is, and why Van Nuys exists at all.

   The line came up from Hollywood and through the Cahuenga Pass. Stopped at “Lankershim” (now known as NoHo) where there was a combination PE/Southern Pacific station and turned west on Chandler Blvd. Yes, this is where the Orange Line goes today. The PE line followed Chandler all the way, while a Southern Pacific freight line curved to the North (the current Orange Line route near Valley College). This is why Chandler has the beautiful grassy median it does. In fact, many streets with medians throughout the Southland have these because PE trackage used to run there. Makes for easy tracing of the old routes.

   The route then turned right, going north on Van Nuys Blvd. It continued north to Sherman Way, where it turned west and went along Sherman Way all the way to “Owensmouth,” now known as Canoga Park. That’s why Sherman Way has a median!

   The portion along Sherman Way was removed in the 1930’s and cut back to Van Nuys/Sherman. The rest of the line was removed in 1954.

   This all goes to show that light rail could easily be installed again along this alignment.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   Wad

   July 26, 2006

   Pete and Carter, North L.A. County already has service to the Valley and Westside. Moreover, Santa Clarita provides reverse commute service, so you can go “the wrong way” as well. Santa Clarita lines 791 and 796 run to the West Valley, 792 and 797 to Westwood and Century City, and 793 and 798 to Van Nuys. Antelope Valley Transit Authority Line 786 serves much of the Westside and Line 787 serves the West Valley.

   This is where the 405 busway solution would come in handy. It would also help LADOT lines 573 (Century City to San Fernando) and 574 (El Segundo to Sylmar). The bulk of service would be provided by an all-stops Rapid. Assuming it would go to South Bay Galleria, stops would be at Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink, Devonshire Street, Plummer Street (Valley VA Hospital), Nordhoff Street, Roscoe Boulevard, Sherman Way, Sepulveda Orange Line station, Sherman Oaks Galleria, Skirball Center, Getty Center, Sunset Boulevard, Wilshire Boulevard, Santa Monica Boulevard, Pico Boulevard, Venice Boulevard, La Tijera Boulevard, Fox Hills Mall, Howard Hughes Center, LAX, Rosecrans Avenue and then exit at Hawthorne Boulevard to the Galleria.

   No feeder buses would be necessary, especially in the Westside, where bus service is very frequent and travels on the grid.

   The problem with getting the commuter destinations you described is that choice riders prefer as few transfers as possible. Trying to tailor bus routes to one-seat rides results in trips with low productivity.

   This is bad news for Ventura County commuters. The fix to this problem is to have LADOT lines 422 and 423 travel on surface streets from Sepulveda to the Encino Park & Ride and resume travel on the 101.

   Also, when you are pouring major money into a corridor, be it busway or rail, you have to think of off-peak ridership, not just the rush-hour commuters. This means interfacing stations with local buses without having to resort to special feeder buses. The 405 corridor already has high-frequency service in the Westside, and the Valley is beginning to get urban levels of service on east-west arterials.

   And Carter, never say never about at-grade service on Van Nuys. Valley residents, believe it or not, want mass transit, but if they don’t want it at-grade, they’d better be prepared for the sticker shock of subway (especially deep-bore tunneling) and the ugliness of elevated rail. Van Nuys has the width to accommodate tracks (and certainly has the ridership), and a safety buffer can be provided by mini-medians on the outside of the tracks and signal synchronization.

   As for incursions, like you have seen with the Orange Line, remember that in nearly every case it’s always the car or pedestrian that is at fault in an accident. It’s not the MTA that’s operating in a dangerous manner, and MTA should be focused on providing transit and not having to slap common sense into every moron that thinks they can beat the bus or train.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   carter

   July 26, 2006

   Wad – you will never get a light rail vehicle line on Van Nuys Blvd., as the Orange line has already proven that on-grade rail or bus is difficult.
   Extending the red line west under the orange line and looping it south along Sepulveda, with a station to allow all northerly commuters a place to catch it, then a stop at Ventura Blvd. to connect with both the #750 buses along it, as well as serve the employment center there, then continue it on to VA where the westside station would be located which would also create a transfer station for the red line eventually heading west on Wilshire to create the loop. Then extend it south to around Howard Hughes Pkwy area, then on to LAX adjacent to service that need.
   Number of stops – one at VA, one at HHughes area, one near LAX, one at Ventura Blvd., and the one at Sepulveda near Oxnard where the Orange line intersects, and one at Valley College, and then the existing one at Lankershim.

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Pete

   July 26, 2006

   Actually, Sepulveda would be appropriate for rail from Nordhoff north, as it has a huge median and runs through one of the Valley’s most densely populated areas, eastern North Hills. It smoothly connects to the median along Parthenia through Panorama City, which could accommodate an elevated rail line (it’s currently a drainage channel). This median in turn smoothly connects to Van Nuys Boulevard not far north of Roscoe. I’m not sure if it’s former PERR right-of-way or what, but the density and traffic congestion are there to provide decent ridership. With stops at the Sylmar-San Fernando and Van Nuys Metrolink stations, such a line would be–like carter said–the feeder from Ventura County and the Santa Clarita and Antelope Valleys to the job centers of the Westside.

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. 

   Wad

   July 25, 2006

   Carter wrote:
   Sepulveda also has these new double red buses running on it like Van Nuys does, and carries major traffic, just to a different destination.
   I rode 734 on the first day. Andrew even links to it from this blog.

   It did not take on its debut. It’s still at the bare minimum Rapid level of service (20 minutes off-peak). It’s too early to say that it has done well. In one case, a Rapid line runs almost empty throughout the day (Line 705 on La Cienega Boulevard and Vernon Avenue). Rapid service does not imply high ridership, especially in cases like Sepulveda Boulevard, which never had a limited before.

   Bottom line, the 405 corridor should get a rail or busway depending on the traffic the line should carry. If there will be more than 50,000 riders, it needs to be a subway. The most expensive and most effective option is grade-separated rail along Van Nuys and Westwood Boulevards. Van Nuys because it is far busier than Sepulveda and Westwood because the buses are more productive than Sepulveda in the Westside. For something in the middle, it can be light rail on Van Nuys with freeway running on the 405. For 20,000 or less, an all-405 busway would be appropriate. Sepulveda is not an appropriate choice in the Valley or the Westside because of lower ridership and narrow streets to handle bus-only or train-only traffic.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   carter

   July 25, 2006

   The subway under Sepulveda and under the 405 would be created to get MAJOR traffic off the 405, and buses have proven they do not do the job the way a subway does. Van Nuys bus riders can get to it via either the Orange line or the Ventura Blvd. routes. Sepulveda also has these new double red buses running on it like Van Nuys does, and carries major traffic, just to a different destination.
   But the subway on Sepulveda could become the feeder location for the entire West Valley, the Conejo Valley, etc., plus the Santa Clarita and Antelope Valley markets to the Westside terminal at the VA site where eventually the Wilshire Blvd red line would tie in and create a loop effect that would really be beneficial to ALL, regardless of location of residence.
   Personally, I wish they would continue the red line under the Orange line as far as Sepulveda and then turn it south per above to create that loop effect, with an eventual extension out to Warner Center as well.

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. 

   Wad

   July 24, 2006

   Carter, if the project is going to be a rail line, the ridership prospects warrant it to be on Van Nuys Boulevard, not Sepulveda Boulevard.

   If it has to be bus-based, it should be on the 405 freeway because that’s the only place the buses can use carpool lanes. Also, commuter services can use the lanes.

   Buses will not get their own lanes, especially not in the Valley. And limited-stop service is not a viable alternative.

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. 

   carter

   July 23, 2006

   Wad – The bus traffic on Van Nuys Blvd. going downtown LA, now changes at either Ventura Blvd. or the Orange Line, and either way hits the red line, and thus no train on Van Nuys would be needed.
   One down Sepulveda that headed for the west side might be of interest, however, and people could access it via the Orange Line or other feeder bus routes, and there is plenty of area there to construct parking facilities, major station, etc. One more stop on the southbound direction would be Ventura Blvd. and then head for the VA property on the west side for its Wilshire, San Vicente, etc. connection. where all the buses would turn around and go their respective directions, and then just wait until the red line down Wilshire comes to the ocean, assuming it will some decade, which would replace the need for some of those buses.
   Also, the Sepulveda route can go north to connect with the Santa Clarita Valley area and eventually the Metro Link station on San Fernando Road near the 14 Fwy.

   LikeLike

   Reply
10. 

    Wad

    July 23, 2006

    MillardM wrote:
    I think you underestimate the eyesight of the average person. Even most Joe and Mary Six-Packs can tell (if not also appreciate) the difference between between Compton and Brentwood, or Van Nuys and Pacific Palisades, or Hawthorne and Beverly Hills. And in LA there are way too many Comptons, Van Nuys and Hawthornes instead of Brentwoods, Pacific Palisades and Beverly Hills.
    The difference is the crime rates in those communities and the people who live there, not the housing stock.

    Echo Park, West Adams, Country Club Park and even northeast L.A. communities have charming and stately homes despite being in dangerous, low-income environs.

    The polar opposite is the McMansion.

    Pete wrote:
    Wad, I don’t think Zev would be all that big on a 405 busway as compared to his proposed cocktail-napkin Van Nuys Boulevard and Canoga Avenue busways.

    The 405 busway would be tougher because it requires the cooperation of Caltrans, which has an absymal reputation of transit development (Harbor Transitway, Green Line).

    The 110 busway has been a dismal failure despite running almost entirely through particularly transit-dependent areas.

    Worse, that dog won’t hunt. Even the Gold Line has East L.A. as a saving grace. MTA has tried its hardest to get people to use the busway, even trying a fare amnesty for a year where all buses have a local fare. (Bizarrely, MTA imposes express zone charges on Transitway buses because they run on a freeway, but the zones apply to an express bus that runs more than 4 miles nonstop).

    The fact that there’s a Rapid bus on Broadway paralleling the freeway is the nail in the coffin.

    While the safety issue isn’t as present with the areas through which the 405 runs as it is with the 110, the areas around most 405 bus stations would still have the problem of being highly pedestrian-unfriendly–narrow sidewalks, no streetwall, etc. Even if a 405 busway could attract decent ridership, it would be impossible to build in-line freeway bus stations without acquiring some of the world’s most expensive right-of-way.

    What the 405 has going for it is no fast parallel services, reasonably good development near the freeway and frequent bus connections

    The 110 failed because the Blue Line is in close proximity (it’s only a 5-10 minute bus ride east to the train), the express zone charges deterred riders, there is no security presence and the municipal carriers do not want to utilize the freeway stops. It’s not the freeway per se.

    The El Monte Busway carries about 45,000 a day despite only having two freeway stops (spread among 20 routes), and the Green Line carries an impressive 33,000 despite having so many strikes against it.

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. 

    MillardM

    July 22, 2006

    Wad: “Only a small, educated, well-to-do segment of the population knows enough about architecture and design to comprehend what is nice or ugly.”

    I think you underestimate the eyesight of the average person. Even most Joe and Mary Six-Packs can tell (if not also appreciate) the difference between between Compton and Brentwood, or Van Nuys and Pacific Palisades, or Hawthorne and Beverly Hills. And in LA there are way too many Comptons, Van Nuys and Hawthornes instead of Brentwoods, Pacific Palisades and Beverly Hills.

    People can enter and exit the decent-looking portions of areas like Hollywood, Van Nuys, Culver City or downtown LA in just a few seconds. And when approaching areas like Santa Monica or Beverly Hills, by way of either the freeway or surface streets, they can see a lot of obsolete, sloppily developed environments. And unless those people are visually impaired, they can tell the nice parts of Los Angeles (not to mention older segments of Orange County too) are too far and few between, weighed down by many more streets and nabes that look like they were built by and for people with Coke-bottle-thick eyeglasses. Or just very bad and now very obsolete taste.

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. 

    Pete

    July 22, 2006

    Wad, I don’t think Zev would be all that big on a 405 busway as compared to his proposed cocktail-napkin Van Nuys Boulevard and Canoga Avenue busways. The 110 busway has been a dismal failure despite running almost entirely through particularly transit-dependent areas. While the safety issue isn’t as present with the areas through which the 405 runs as it is with the 110, the areas around most 405 bus stations would still have the problem of being highly pedestrian-unfriendly–narrow sidewalks, no streetwall, etc. Even if a 405 busway could attract decent ridership, it would be impossible to build in-line freeway bus stations without acquiring some of the world’s most expensive right-of-way.

    LikeLike

    Reply
13. 

    Wad

    July 22, 2006

    Carter, I disagree with your assessment of Van Nuys Boulevard not needing a train.

    Van Nuys is the most traveled bus route in the Valley, and its short distance (a trip from Sylmar to Ventura Boulevard is roughly a half hour if traffic cooperates) lends it to be a highly productive route. But not in isolation.

    A rail line on Van Nuys needs to be tied into one of two corridors: downtown L.A. via the Red Line or the South Bay via the Sepulveda Pass. The downtown L.A. route roughly emulates what was once Line 420, formerly L.A.’s busiest express line. (It was express in the sense that it took the freeway to Santa Monica Boulevard and would then travel locally via Santa Monica, Highland, the Cahuenga Pass, Lankershim, Burbank, Chandler and Van Nuys Boulevard.) The bus did about 15,000 through the pass; the subway now does 80,000. It could capture at least another 20,000 along Van Nuys Boulevard, bringing total Red Line ridership to 160,000.

    But, L.A. also needs relief for the 405 and a radial route, so riders could get around by avoiding downtown L.A. altogether. Van Nuys and the Westside would be where the bulk of ridership are. The gold-plated service would be grade-separated heavy rail along Van Nuys and Westwood boulevards, then south on Sepulveda Boulevard from Fox Hills Mall to LAX. Ideally, it could also assume the Green Line’s tracks south of Aviation Station and run to South Bay Galleria. This route would get around 50,000-60,000 boardings per weekday. The cheapest outcome, and smaller but still substantial ridership, would be to build a Harbor Freeway-style Transitway along the 405 freeway and run a Rapid bus service along the 405. Zev Yaroislavsky would be on this like a fly on feces, but you’d want to plan this if ridership won’t go higher than 20,000.

    And this does nothing for Van Nuys Boulevard, and might actually suck ridership off Line 761.

    LikeLike

    Reply
14. 

    Wad

    July 22, 2006

    I agree with Millard to a great extent. But even native-born Angelenos exhibit the same civic lethargy as the emigres.

    Neighborhood aesthetics have very little to do with disengagement. Only a small, educated, well-to-do segment of the population knows enough about architecture and design to comprehend what is nice or ugly.

    Plus, maybe it’s an East Coast thing, but you could have someone born and bred in the roughest neighborhoods in places like New York City and Boston and they’ll be fiercely patriotic about their burgs.

    And Fred, I admire that you are an industry worker, but you are an iconoclast. L.A. needs more people like you and Andrew, but you’re the exception and sadly, not the example. If you’ve seen “L.A. Story” or “Crash,” those movies are reality for much of the industry.

    LikeLike

    Reply
15. 

    andrew

    July 21, 2006

    Millard-
    Take a walk around the homes of Van Nuys north of Victory, west of Kester and you will find beautiful, well maintained houses that in some cases look nicer than those in Reseda, Tarzana or Chatsworth.

    There is an area west of Sepulveda, north of Victory (and south of Victory) along Orion St. where many commercials are filmed because the homes are “All American” with picket fences and roses.

    Andrew

    LikeLike

    Reply
16. 

    MillardM

    July 21, 2006

    People in Los Angeles, unlike those in certain other cities, have a reputation for being disconnected from their community, for lacking pride in place. Some of that is because many people here were born elsewhere. But I think quite a bit of that is also due to the surfeit of nabes in LA that are unremarkable, drab or even quite ugly. As such, people in LA find themselves wanting to hold the various environments all around them at arm’s length.

    For example, the residents of Van Nuys (or the Valley in general) probably would feel very different about their part of LA if most of the streets, houses and buildings they encountered on a daily basis were aesthetically pleasing instead of tacky, obsolete or shabby.

    LikeLike

    Reply
17. 

    Fred Camino

    July 21, 2006

    Well Wad, as far as I know there are many facets to the entertainment industry, and many jobs (maybe not million dollar jobs, or jobs that get your pictures seen across the globe, but jobs that give regular people fine lifestyles), and many people that work those jobs that live in many places from Santa Monica to Pasadena to Van Nuys to Long Beach. As far as I know, many of the movie studios are located in the San Fernando Valley. There’s also studios in Hollywood, Downtown, and elsewhere. I guess I just don’t understand why you think the entertainment industry is different from any other industry… people go where the money and the jobs are. Tell me what industry puts the city first and not the job, what industry people WON’T follow when it leaves? And where is the entertainment industry going? The entertianment industry is one of the few industries that does have a very limited geographical area: Los Angeles, New York, and to a tiny extent in cities like Atlanta. The rest is outsourcing of talent to say India or Canada, but that’s a different story, and doesn’t involve industry people jumping ship from the city.

    I only say all this because I work in a segment of the “industry” (a “back-end” worker if you will) as do many of my peers, and what you are saying just doesn’t gel with the reality of my life. I work in Hollywood, live in Downtown, never go to the Westside (no train goes there, and the bus ride is long and crowded and hit or miss), don’t own a car, pay city taxes, shop at local stores, eat at local restaurants, could care less about celebrities, blog locally, read local blogs… I mean what else do I have to do to be considered a decent citizen of this city? Sure, I guess if I got offered a better job in NYC I might consider it (the call of great public tranist), but it would have to be much better pay since it costs 40% more to live in New York and the weather sucks. But I think this is a dilema any professional would face, regardless the industry. People are either born into cities, or come to them to live and work, and just by being their they are invested in the city. it then becomes a personal choice whether they want to care about the future of the city or not. I know most people I talk to who grew up here cannot wait to get out, but many people who have come here from elsewhere to work love it and want it to get better.

    LikeLike

    Reply
18. 

    Carter

    July 21, 2006

    Wad – the car dealers would never allow a rail line on Van Nuys Blvd. as that area is where they offload their vehicles, and that has been the reason it has never been landscaped, beautified, etc. Also, it is not needed since the best bus line in the Valley is already serving that need.
    Better density development could surely be possible, but until the past few years of high priced housing, no one wanted to do anything north of Magnolia or Burbank Blvd., yet now you can go up to Sherman Way. The Van Nuys Blvd. frontage lots have sufficient depth, yet have so many different property owners that cannot/will not agree on anything. I wish the area north of Vanowen would be the first place to start, and then let market forces dictate what happens thereafter.

    LikeLike

    Reply
19. 

    jason

    July 21, 2006

    I am not sure if Wad and Fred are entirely in disagreement; are you? I mean, there are folks who are in the “industry” who will need to follow their jobs, but whose heart may remain loyal to the place they have come to live.
    Do you not find those who are supposedly “native” to the region but never have thoughts, understanding or passion about their “town” in fact all the more irritating to say the least?

    LikeLike

    Reply
20. 

    Mike

    July 21, 2006

    When the entertainment industry leaves LA, will they take the porn industry with them, or are we stuck with that?

    LikeLike

    Reply
21. 

    Wad

    July 20, 2006

    Fred, you mean the same industry types that established a sort of caste system based on the farthest they go east? The lowest of the caste do not go east of La Brea Avenue, the middle do not go east of Century City and the Brahmins never have to venture east of the 405 freeway.

    The industry changes the back-end workers as well, as they are close enough to celebrity that they identify more with them than the rest of Los Angeles.

    And if you say these people care for L.A., I can tell you that once the entertainment industry begins to leave Southern California wholesale, they will follow their jobs.

    LikeLike

    Reply
22. 

    Andrew

    July 20, 2006

    Wad’s love of buses is only exceeded by his dislike of SAG and AFTRA.

    LikeLike

    Reply
23. 

    Fred Camino

    July 20, 2006

    Wad, while I agree with much of what you say about the celebrity angle being simply a front and not true charity, I might disagree with your contention that “the entertainment industry is a tenant, not a citizen”. For the few rich “celebs” that define the image of the industry, the are tens of thousands of real jobs filled by real people who don’t live in those walled off houses in the hills or in New York City, but live in the apartments and houses in the neighborhoods of our city, ride the transit, are involved in the community, and care greatly for their found home thanks to the industry. Celebrity may be a tenant, but the invisible masses who make those celebrities shine are surely citizens.

    LikeLike

    Reply
24. 

    Wad

    July 20, 2006

    Andrew wrote:
    The celebrity angle is not entirely illogical. Remember that LA lives and shops and dines based on proximity to the famous. Or drinks coffee with the idea that one could be discovered sipping latte.

    The celebrity angle is not so much illogical as it is a millstone around L.A.’s neck.

    Every kid from back east who buys a one-way Greyhound ticket hoping to be discovered sipping latte today is a homeless heroin junkie tomorrow.

    And there are millions of us — most of us, in fact — Angelenos who can live our lives independent of the industry, which has always been an absentee tenant. Most of us natives also know that celebrities make us feel unwelcome, by not only where they live (the hills and homes behind tall walls and massive gates) and how they rent out entire businesses to prevent them mixing with their public.

    LikeLike

    Reply
25. 

    Pete

    July 19, 2006

    As far as a rail line goes, it wouldn’t necessarily bring economic development. Highland Park’s booming as a residential real estate market, but the Figueroa strip there is as run-down as ever. Chicago built miles and miles of heavy rail in the ’60s through neighborhoods that have stagnated ever since because their local factories shut down. The Del Mar station development in Pasadena wouldn’t be happening if downtown Pasadena weren’t already a hot market.

    Rail lines can be a catalyst for development, but like any catalyst they have a specific set of requirements that must be met before they spark a reaction. Better to view them as a filling a transportation need. It just so happens that Van Nuys Boulevard is part of a north-south corridor in the Valley that is sufficiently densely developed that it would make sense to build a rail line along it that connected over the Sepulveda Pass to a Westwood-LAX line.

    One more thing: street-level light rail running in a median arguably hurts an area’s pedestrian-friendliness, since it drastically reduces the number of street crossing points. A Van Nuys Boulevard rail line ought to be elevated, not at grade.

    LikeLike

    Reply
26. 

    Pete

    July 19, 2006

    I took a look at some parcels at Victory and Van Nuys on ZIMAS. The land’s zoned C2, so there’s not much there restricting development. I’m sure that parking requirements are a major drag, though. Most of those storefronts were built in the ’50s, when minimum parking requirements weren’t as high as they are today. You would think that the city could just build a couple of public parking garages to solve that problem, but I guess not.

    I think the main thing keeping out development is that the existing tenants, while butt-ugly, generate a lot of cash. It’s sorta like the K-Mart and the Ross Dress for Less over by The Grove: they stick out like sore thumbs in the area, but they’re actually incredible moneymakers. Also, thanks to Prop 13, long-time commercial property owners have very little incentive to bring in higher rents.

    I have some ideas about tax policy that could encourage mixed-use developments; I’ll blog them sometime in the next couple of weeks.

    LikeLike

    Reply
27. 

    Andrew

    July 19, 2006

    Wad-

    Exactly. The rail line is the missing component. If they had a rail line down the center, the street would immediately spring back to life.

    The celebrity angle is not entirely illogical. Remember that LA lives and shops and dines based on proximity to the famous. Or drinks coffee with the idea that one could be discovered sipping latte.

    LikeLike

    Reply
28. 

    Wad

    July 19, 2006

    What would really make Van Nuys Boulevard: a rail line.

    Van Nuys is wide enough for a light rail line down its median. It’s about as wide as Long Beach Boulevard, only Van Nuys is more vibrant. Long Beach, despite having the Blue Line, has never emerged out of its decline and is lined with used car lots.

    Van Nuys certainly has the ridership. Both local 233 and Rapid 761 combine to make Van Nuys the Valley’s busiest bus route.

    The rail line could be a surface extension of the Red Line from North Hollywood, or an even bolder proposition: a 405-freeway emulator than can use Van Nuys in the Valley and either the 405, Sepulveda Boulevard or Westwood Boulevard for a service that connects the Valley, UCLA, West L.A., Culver City LAX and the South Bay.

    And about the Brad Pitt thing, remember that celebrities glomming onto a cause is a fashion statement, not a charitable deed. The entertainment industry is a tenant, not a citizen.

    LikeLike

    Reply