LA Live! Groundbreaking Gives Kotkin Another Chance to Badmouth Downtown
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Lots of new coverage on the LA Live groundbreaking. The Downtown News runs a piece, while the LA Times yesterday wrote that ESPN will have a studio as a part of the project. My favorite bit of coverage, though, is in the Daily Breeze, who gives some ink to the always entertaining Joel Kotkin.
Calling the project's concept "more appropriate to Cincinnati," urban analyst Joel Kotkin questioned the wisdom of imposing a single megacomplex on a largely blank urban canvas.
Kotkin is a nut. Normally I'd think the reporter from the Breeze just put a few words in his mouth for that last part, but Kotkin's shown me no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't even want to take the time to give a full response. So all I'll say is: a) LA Live! is merely one of many large development districts going on in town, and one of two Downtown; b) Downtown is hardly a blank canvas. Just look at Elleven, Luma, or any one of the other loft/condo projects in the area.
David Kennedy on September 19, 2005, at 12:03PM – #1
I think it is unfair to describe Kotkin as a nut. He is a serious scholar of cities. His interest is in how cities thrive and why and how this has changed through history. One of his larger contentions is that the way cities work has changed greatly in the past generation. He's written about how downtown Los Angeles has succeeded in the past generation essentially by benign neglect. The various business districts like the Fashion, Jewelry, Toy and Broadway have grown and prospered without much intervention or interest by city government. He is skeptical of the ability of the city to transform large portions of the downtown area though singular efforts. He thinks a thousand smaller efforts in concert are more effective in the long-run. However, I think because L.A. Live is part of a larger vision of the ownership of Staples Center, I'm confident it will ultimately succeed because it will create a unique destination for the region (i.e. only the Laker play there or the Emmys are broadcast from there, etc.). It will also be very attuned to the market.
I think it is more prudent to label him a skeptic, which is something we (i.e. downtowners) need to hear. Remember, we want things to go right and succeed. And, I think, it is fair to say this is a very happy time for downtown. Basically, everything is going right for us. Just wait until the economy turns, interest rates go up, residential demand drops, the market gets overbuilt, crime goes up, there is a major disaster, or the urban zeitgeist shifts. I think is is better to challenge Kotkin on the specifics of his arguments, rather than dismiss him or his ideas as unworthy of debate.
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on September 19, 2005, at 12:18PM – #2
I would go farther than saying he's a skeptic. I would say instead that he's a fullscale cynic. He ignores the data in favor of a vibrant Downtown in favor of his certain notion of what is occuring.
I've debated Kotkin's notions before, and I agree that it is dangerous to dismiss people and their contentions. Kotkin, though, keeps getting press with these outlandish assertions that defy rebuttal through their absurdity. Perhaps that's the fault of the newspaperman, but as I said I've seen him quoted with the same ideas too many times to believe that he's being taken out of context.
For instance, take Kotkin's assertion that LA Live! would be "more appropriate to Cincinnati." To me this statement stands in direction opposition to the rest of his quote. Certainly Cincinnati's urban canvas is less developed than that of Downtown's. Would not it then be even more inappropriate to assert a large single project there? The city of Los Angeles, if nothing else, has many different projects of this scale. Though LA Live! may seem to be a large project when you're standing right next to it, it's not even the biggest project Downtown and certainly fits the scope of other projects like the proposed development in Century City.
So sure, maybe saying he's a nut is going a little too far. But I'm very tired of his one-note dismissal of what's going on Downtown and in urban living in general. -e;
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on September 19, 2005, at 12:20PM – #3
As sort of a PS, David, I just wanted to thank you for your ongoing great comments. I really enjoy and get a lot out of your perspective, and I'm sure many others do as well. -e;
Millie S. on September 19, 2005, at 08:45PM – #4
Kotkin isn't a nut. He's really more of a dumb hayseed, which is quite apparent when he expresses satisfaction with a rinky dink center city that until now has boasted not much more than a garment, jewelry and Broadway district. Those areas, which I guess also includes the zones where toy and produce/flower businesses are located, are better than nothing, but by themselves they barely rate a big fuckin whoop. And I'm not even mentioning how very seedy they can be too.