Option A: “Memo to Metro: May We Survive?”


 

Mustangs, Etc.

 

DSCF1430
Simon Simonian, Progressive Art Stained Glass Studio
DSCF1407
Peter Scholz, owner, Showcase Cabinets.
DSCF1413
Craftsman at Showcase.

 

Yesterday, The San Fernando Valley Business Journal published an essay by Charles Crumpley, editor and publisher, concerning the scheme (“Option A) by Metro Los Angeles to destroy hundreds of small businesses near Kester and Oxnard for a proposed light rail repair center covering some 33 acres.

I am reprinting here for all to read. In it he castigates the insensitivity and deafness of local government, including Councilwoman Nury Martinez, who has seemingly stood by while hundreds of her constituents face financial ruin, dislocation and the upending of their businesses and economic security.  Prostitution and dumping cannot be the only constituencies that matter in City Council District 6.

If Metro is permitted to bulldoze the last vestige of small business in Van Nuys to make way for a Disneyland transportation scheme, already made redundant in the Uber/Lyft era, than we are all doomed.

Metro needs to find another site for its repair yard that does not destroy the lives, dreams, hopes and well-being of hard working entrepreneurs and working men and women in Van Nuys.


Memo to Metro: May We Survive?

By Charles Crumpley

Monday, October 16, 2017

 

The gulf between local government and the business community was on full display last week at the Van Nuys State Building Auditorium.

That’s where the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority held a meeting Oct. 10 to hear from businesses that stand to be evicted because Metro wants to clear land northeast of Oxnard Street and Kester Avenue to build a train maintenance yard to serve a new rail line.

The message from businesses seems simple and clear: Can’t you find a better place for your maintenance yard? Maybe one that doesn’t oust a train load of businesses – 186 of them, by one count.

The message from bureaucrats also seems simple and straightforward: Yawn.

Whether they know it or not, that’s the memo they sent to businesses. To Metro’s credit, it did hold the so-called informational meeting after it became clear that businesses were growing restive. On the other hand, Metro’s temper at the meeting was vaguely brusque and at times dismissive. To at least some of the businesspeople in attendance, it all came off as if Metro’s imperial overlords had been forced to travel to Van Nuys to sit through another dull meeting in which the plebian supplicants had to beg for their survival. (For more on businesses’ reaction, see the article on page 1.)

Here’s an example. The business group proposed an alternative site for the train yard. It seemed to make sense because it would only displace one business, an auto salvage yard, and a facility with some vacant land that’s owned by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, better known as the DWP.

But at the meeting last week, Metro Senior Executive Officer Manjeet Ranu announced: “Late this afternoon we got a letter from DWP that says they have specific plans and a construction timeline for use of that property.” So, no deal.

Well, excuse me, but are you seriously saying that DWP’s single plan is more important than the plans of 186 businesses?

Ranu did explain that eminent domain against a government entity like the DWP was difficult, you see.

Well, excuse me again, but isn’t this where we can count on our elected officials to step in and make the DWP yield? Maybe work out some compromise? Surely the DWP’s needs can be met while saving 186 businesses.

Alas, apparently not. The 186 businesses are in Councilwoman Nury Martinez’s district and she did not bother to attend the meeting. No representative from her office was announced at the beginning of the meeting, although her chief of staff said someone from the office later showed up.

The staffer sent me Martinez’s statement, which started by saying the new rail line, which will run from Oxnard Street to Sylmar, is needed and would bring economic revitalization to the area, which no one is arguing. She added this: “Metro indicates there will be some displacement due to the need for a maintenance facility, no matter which option is chosen. I will ensure that Metro continues to have an open and honest dialogue about the support, resources and assistance that will be available to these businesses, so they can plan for their short- and long-term future.”

Well, excuse me, but Martinez is missing the point. Some options for the train yard will have much less “displacement” than others. Focusing on the ones with less displacement is the point here. But I guess you’d have to actually talk to your business constituents to get that. And attend the meeting.

There’s a great gulf between local government and the business community here, and last week’s meeting displayed that.

Government officials see the need for a new train line and therefore a new train maintenance yard and that means some businesses will be evicted and that’s just the way it is. The affected businesses will complain, and part of the job is to yawn through some dull meetings and listen to them whine and patiently explain to them why their alternative proposals won’t work.

Business operators also see a need for a new train line and therefore a new train maintenance yard and that means some businesses will be evicted. But they don’t understand why government can’t be more judicious in selecting a site that is the least disruptive. They don’t understand why government officials can’t seem to see that it is not easy to relocate and could be permanently harmful, even fatal, to the businesses. They don’t understand why elected officials like Nury Martinez fail to come to their defense. They don’t understand why, if their alternative ideas don’t work, the government officials won’t help them come up with ones that do.

Surely there are other sites out there that would be less disruptive. Panorama City actually wants the train yard.

Let’s hope Metro and city officials look harder to come up with a new site that works well for the new train system without wrecking a swath of businesses.

 

Charles Crumpley is editor and publisher of the Business Journal. He can be reached at ccrumpley@sfvbj.com.

Day of the Bulldozer


dscf0486
6500 N. Sepulveda

On N. Sepulveda Blvd., between Victory and Vanowen, three apartment projects are now underway.

At 6500 N. Sepulveda, the former site of the notorious Voyager Motel is completely cleared. It was a crack-y whorehouse of ill repute. But also a patriotically, quadrennially decorated neighborhood-voting place. It burned in a gratifyingly appropriate fire earlier this year.

The 53,382 square foot parcel is now void of anything natural or man-made. It is simply flat, vast and magnificently empty. It emulates Van Nuys, as it might have been in the late 1940s, when tracts of orange and walnut groves were bulldozed to make way for ticky-tacky houses and shopping centers.

An apartment is planned for this site. I don’t remember its design, but if it follows any of the other projects in Van Nuys it will come by way of big and boxy, designed by big and boxy men, near architects who also moonlight as junior builders, and amateur bankers. It will be three or four stories tall and cover every square inch of land. Parking will be provided in excess of what is needed because the most important feature of any project in Los Angeles is how many parking spaces are provided. We need more parking. And just a reminder: Please make sure there is parking. Everywhere.

dscf0484
6500 N. Sepulveda

At 6536 N. Sepulveda, on 28,146 square feet, another apartment is going up. This is on that charming stretch of the street where new hookers walk and old couches come to die. Nightly helicopter patrols and pounding rap music enliven the air. A house was recently bulldozed here and gargantuan sized orange bulldozers now occupy the parcel.

dscf0491
6536 N. Sepulveda

 

At 6725 N. Sepulveda Blvd, on 30,647 square feet, between Archwood and Lemay, another flat and modern multi-family is planned. This was the site of the low self-esteem Ridge Motel, whose police reports and trashy clientele attested to a level of service usually seen only in jails.

4-28-16b
6725 N. Sepulveda 4/28/16
4-28-16
6725 N. Sepulveda 4/28/16

 

dscf0498
6725 N. Sepulveda 10/24/16

The Ridge Motel, still a menace in its dying days, was kept behind security fencing, like King Kong in captivity. Its campy, catapulting roofline was somehow not in the sights of the LA Conservancy, whose members work tirelessly to preserve other historical buildings such as bowling alleys  in the San Gabriel Valley.

The rose-bushed, picket-fenced hood of working moms and worked-out fathers bordering these three Sepulveda Blvd. properties are relieved that some badness (and discarded condoms) has departed. Some see the Day of the Bulldozer as Saul saw Jesus. Sin cleansed by salvation.

teardown-2
14827 Victory Blvd. 6/14/15 DEMOLISHED
teardown-1
Vintage Auto Repair 6200 N. Kester Ave. 7/9/15 DEMOLISHED
581092427_9a5f27e470_o
The oldest house in Van Nuys, once owned by the original developer, WIlliam Paul Whitsett, is cleared for condominiums. 6/7/07 DEMOLISHED

Bulldozers are like angels in Van Nuys. They are sent by the Good Lord to flatten and knock down anything standing in the way of new banality. Even when they are used to destroy history, they have a mission. They will bring, don’t you know, “jobs” and “opportunities” and “housing” to the San Fernando Valley.

We see the stuccofied greatness of our environment every day, along Vanowen, Sepulveda, and Van Nuys Boulevard. Someone, somewhere is surely looking out over all this destruction and construction, making sure that the architecture and the design enhances our landscape.

Or perhaps nobody is in charge. And we live in a kind of roulette table of a city, spinning a wheel and hoping that the building that lands next to us is a winner.

First Lutheran Church 1925-2012 Van Nuys: all that remains







Greg, from the blog, West SFV, made his way over to our latest civic triumph in Van Nuys, the obliteration of the 1925 First Lutheran Church.

Historic Home Demoltion and a Developer’s Response.




Historic Home Demoltion., originally uploaded by Here in Van Nuys.

On June 20, 2007, the Daily News printed an article about the efforts of preservationists to save the oldest home in Van Nuys from destruction.

On the morning of June 21, 2007 I went to the site of the Whisett Home to take photos and found that a bulldozer had already done its work.

Here is an interesting comment I received today on this blog from the developer. The spelling is his:

“That is not true. Merabi & Sons was waiting for the permit to built 18 units APT building, with three affordable units for the elderly people.
The comment the writer has made on the above artic about Merabi and sons is unfair.We help comminutes, and bring prosperity to Van Nuys we would never abandon it .”

Kami A. Merabi

Destroying an Architectural Gem in Van Nuys.


Facade Engine Co 39.jpg
3948817675_8973867d92
Sylvan St. Van Nuys

At a MODCOM meeting last night, I learned that an Art Deco architectural gem in Van Nuys may be destroyed.

Engine Company No. 39 was built in 1939 and has all the dignity, solidity and beauty of governmental buildings from that era. It sits just across the street from the Valley Municipal Building and is a handsome civic structure.

An article in the Contra Costa Times quotes Councilman Tony Cardenas:

“Councilman Tony Cardenas said he appreciated the beauty of the building, which was built in the Art Moderne style, but added the time had come to replace it.

“Today, probably as much as ever, people can appreciate how important it is for us to have the best — the best equipped, best-manned fire department in the country,” Cardenas said.

“This is an opportunity for us to invest in the community of Van Nuys and to replace the 70-year old station,” he added. “Not that everything that is at least 70 years old needs to be replaced, but I think it’s important that we do our responsible duty when it comes to facilities.”

This quote, by Councilman Cardenas, shows a very short sighted and appalling ignorance of both history and community. While nobody would argue for the need to have the best fire protection available, why does this necessitate destroying a historically significant building?

During Mr. Cardenas’ tenure, the old Whitsett Home, built by the man who founded Van Nuys in 1911, was bulldozed and now there is an empty lot on the site. Now Mr. Cardenas wants to literally remove one of the finest examples of 1930’s streamline design in Van Nuys.

The secession of a neighborhood of Van Nuys which now calls itself “Sherman Oaks” was a recent embarrassment to Mr. Cardenas. But how and why would people want to live in Van Nuys, which remains, at least on its main thoroughfares, filthy and unspeakably ugly and wears its badge of shame without shame? Is Mr. Cardenas on a mission to bring down Van Nuys or build it up? One has to wonder….

Van Nuys was once the jewel of the San Fernando Valley. It’s civic pride was embodied in buildings like the Fire Station No. 39. Along with the old library, the old post office and the municipal building, these were walkable and civilized arrangements for conducting one’s daily business.

Are there not acres of empty parking lots, underutilized industrial lots, and vast acres of crappy broken down ugliness lining such streets as Sepulveda, Van Owen and Kester? You mean, Mr. Cardenas, that the only possible location for a new fire station is on the site of one that dates back to the administration of FDR?

Van Nuys is crying out for someone with a vision, and a sensitivity to beauty, and instead we are under the administration of a boor who would allow the destruction of one of the finest examples of streamline moderne architecture in Los Angeles.