City Council Votes to Take Land for Motorpool

Lilli Muller is the artist behind the rendering. I asked her to help us create it so we could present it at the City Council meeting.

The news about MJ Higgins really breaks my heart. I was there from the very beginning helping Kjell build that spot when it was called Inshallah and it's too bad there's nothing left to do to save it.

It's a shame, the City Council did not look deep enough into alternative locations to build this carplex. The old Parker Center didn't need all this did they?

The Carwash can be in a separate location a couple blocks away, right ?

This could kill off any potential for street activity in the area.

Parker Center has 'The Erector Set', a three-story girder parking structure as well as two surface lots, a gas island, several mechanic's bays with hydrallic lifts and, yes, a car wash (probably the smallest footprint of all the above but the one everyone seems fixated upon).

Command staff, detectives and crime scene investigators need immediate access, 24/7/365, to vehicles in order to provide emergency service to America's second largest city -- which, unfortunately, has the lowest officer to square mile covered of any major city in the nation.

I don't think anyone is happy about this but given the already City owns land on that block...

The nearby shelters and all the homeless people, or certainly the aggressive panhandlers, probably will continue to have far more of a negative effect on that area than anything associated with a police parking structure.

Regardless, look on the bright side: maybe the sight of a lot of squad cars around 3rd and Main Sts will give visitors who are checking out the shops, restaurants and theaters in the various restored buildings around there a greater sense of security.

Michele, what is is with people like you who see all of downtown as one single, festering sore filled with homeless? Please, be specific, name the shelters you are describing, the specific streets that you claim are filled with homeless and aggressive panhandlers, and how exactly that has anything do do with the city's decision to eradicate the building in which a significant part of the rebirth of downtown was conceived?

I guess you must be one of those downtown bashers who would rather see it downtrodden and abandoned than revitalized.

Hi Michele, Kjell Hagen started Inshallah Gallery in 1997 and believe me, Downtown was entirely a diferent story way back then. I was there almost every day.

Now - just on that 1 Main Street block between 3rd and 2nd, let me list all the adjacent businesses that opened since Kjell was there first: The Higgins Building, de Soto, 2nd Street, Pitfire Pizza, Lofty Dog, Edison, Imaginasian Center, Little Tokyo Library, Vibiana's Place, Groundwork, and that new Asian restaurant inside The Higgins. Am I missing anything?

If a person can't feel safe with all those businesses within a one block area, then that person won't feel safe anywhere.

Yeah, Michelle's comment comes across as quite paranoid. Funny, it is kind of how I feel when I find myself in the hyper-cometitive conformist uber-enclaves of posturing posers who seem to think that the pinnacle of human achievement and growth is the amassing of overpriced meaningless stuff culminating in a one second "wow" from someone who acts like a friend but really only wants to find the angle to separate you from some of your worthless stuff.

Downtown freaks a lot of people out because it tends to be a little more real than those accustomed to more contrived locales are comfortable with. That's fine, there's plenty of places for the "perfect people" to hang out. For some reason it reminds me of the story of the frog in the pot of water who won't jump out when the water heats up because he cannot recognize the change. Eventually he boils. It is places like Downtown where the real growth in society is happening. To lose the MJ Higgins and the adjacent places is a travesty and a tragedy. Put the damn facility on a parking lot. And they say we don't live in a police state... it sure is feeling more and more like it all the time. The new police hq building instead of a park, now the police car facility, the jails and courthouse buildings, hey - am I seeing something here? Well, I'll stop here... though I could go on.

Ugh. Me no like.

What are they going to do with Parker Center anyway? Why couldn't they build the facility there? I heard that it was earthquake damaged, and that's why they need a new building. So doesn't that mean they're forced to tear down Parker Center? And if so, why couldn't they put the motorpool there? It's just as far away from the new HQ as this other location would be.

Police state?

Because the nation's second largest City needs a modern headquaters building, and additional facility space, while still providing continous service on cases like counterterrorism, homicide, rape and kidnapping?

Because more jails need built to house more violent offenders for the duration of their sentences instead of early release and revolving door booking for crimes under a certain level of heinous?

More courts because there are more civil cases?

I don't follow the comparison.

Ben:

I'm not saying it IS a police state, just that it seems more and more so as time goes past. When CA alone has over 200 thousand people incarcerated and several times that number on parole or in some sort of "community service" or monitoring program, it makes me wonder. Compound that with the large number of people in prison for drug offenses (which, in my personal opinion, represents a political prisoner situation when violence is not involved), and you might see where my comment came from. We have an absolutely gigantic law enforcement system, and because of the way we have set up our society, it is woefully inadequate to deal with the problem. When a society insists on criminalizing all the things that we put people in jail for, it becomes a slippery slope where the "prison system" perpetuates itself both through the political arena (obtaining funding to expand, for example) and in the streets (by turning out large numbers of people hardened within the labyrinth).

I never said "don't build the police car facility or hq building", I said "Put the damn facility on a parking lot". In spite of my above reply and semi-rant, I do believe we need the facilities... just not as currently planned.

Have you ever looked to see what percentage of prisoners are what you label as non-violent drug offenses?

Do you agree that there are cases where possession of large quantities of narcotics is the best prosecutors can do to get a large dealer off the street (in toher words, people charged with what they are caught with while not being able to charge distribution or criminal enterprise)?

Do you believe that there are people who are second or third generation criminals who don't, and never will, engage in the same rules of society the rest of us do?

I know there are problems in our society which need addressed in order to correct people from turning to crime -- role models and education being top of my list -- but based upon the belief you never hear about the crimes someone thought about committing but didn't, a strong criminal justice system is needed as a strong deterent.

"Yeah, Michelle's comment comes across as quite paranoid."

Then quite a few people, like it or not, are "paranoid." For instance, I notice in the photo of the new Rite-Aid, a few people can be seen loitering around the store's front door. If you think most people, regardless of their idealism, wouldn't look at that situation and hesitate to be there, then you're living in a non-reality.

And, again, the purpose of my raising the point about homeless people and crowded shelters (and I didn't even mention problems with rampant drug and alcohol abuse, or sidewalks dressed with urine and excrement) is that I see that being and continuing to be, by far, the biggest dilemma for downtown, and not whether a parcel of land is or isn't being turned over to a police motor pool.

I think, Michele, what most people perceive about Downtown is far from the reality but it is often outside the artificial comfort level of people "Kenarch" describes well.

If you look at crime statistics, Downtown Los Angeles is actually very safe.

In fact, there was one day last month in which there were no reported crimes (zero, zilch, none). In short, a Westsider is more likely to be the victim of a home invasion than a Downtowner is the victim of mugging by a drug-addicted or drunk homeless person.

Skid Row is a regional humanitarian issue. The criminal cases against mega-hospitals may very likely prove once and for all the culpability for 'dumping' people Downtown stretches far beyond Downtown proper.

What I think areas outside of Downtown are seeing now is that their decades of sweeping their homeless to Skid Row is over and that homelessness is a community problem every community must address rather than transfer. The number of people sleeping on the street Downtown is now measured in hundreds, not thousands.

Narcotics is another issue. While I wish I could say no one living Downtown buys or sells drugs, what I can say is that bulk of the gangs behind the street dealing and the bulk of the customers both come from outside of Downtown to create a narcotics marketplace on borrowed turf.

I think this is changing and large busts like the recent one of the '5th and Hill' gang show the level of organization and volume of narcotics involved are greater than most people might suspect. Hopefully busts like this one will discourage other gangs in the area now or considering moving into the area to practice their criminal enterprise.

One final hope, that once the organized criminal narcotics are thwarted it will be easier for the homeless services already concentrated in the area to help people who want it make their transition back to sustainable housing.

The Downtown you describe took decades of neglect to create, the responses you are hearing are from the people who hope to reverse those decades of neglect in a matter of years.

Again, Michelle, I challenge you to name the particular streets you are describing as "sidewalks dressed with urine and excrement." Please, do you ever walk around downtown, are you even aware of the different neighborhoods?

The Historic Core is not Skid Row, nor is it Little Tokyo, South Park, or the Artist's District. Each area has its particular character, yet you just lump it all together as some urine-soaked, dangerous "downtown" that you disdain.

When I lived in Los Feliz there were homeless people everywhere, in the alleys, along the back streets. Many of my neighbors were not aware of it, as most of them never walked anywhere. This is true of much of the west side as well, the problems there are masked by the complete lack of pedestrian culture, relegating the poor and homeless to the status of invisible. Yet somehow when it comes to downtown, you have reversed that equation, so that you only see the poor and homeless, and nothing else.

Hello Michelle...

Yes, I did say your comments seemed paranoid. The mere fact that people might be "loitering" on a sidewalk somewhere doesn't make me feel threatened. Actually, "neighborhoods" that are devoid of people and have a feeling of hyper-security, particularly when they are ensconced behind gates and watched by cameras, well, those sorts of places give me the creeps. I have absolutely no problem walking down any street Downtown at any hour - yes, even midnight - and have never felt threatened or harassed. Sure, I am a big strong man, but my point is that a person's level of fear or discomfort is almost always something they bring within themselves. Nobody feels secure in a war zone, but Downtown, as Benjamin succintly put it, is no war zone. What we have here is a community that doesn't need to be "in quotes"... people tend to connect with each other, we generally say hello on the street and in coffee houses, we also tend to find ourselves more active in community than most of us were before (at least those of us, like myself, who lived in the 'burbs for a loing time).

Ignoring the debate about the dangerousness of downtown, is there something people can do to save this historic and cultural building?

I already have enough disdain that the LAPD is building a superstation and forming a virtual wall between Grand Ave and Little Tokyo on a parcel that many residents wanted to be a park. Tearing down one of our historic core buildings from the 1800s, and one that houses a museum, and one that carries such relevance to the revitalization of Downtown, however, and all to build a damn private car wash?!

They could have easily found a useless industrial parcel in Skid Row, Chinatown, or near the River, and instead they're going after a cultural institution for convenience's sake?

Every citizen of Los Angeles should be outraged over this no matter what their impressions of Downtown are; a car wash is being given priority over a cultural institution and landmark. Would any Downtown-hating Westsiders abide by a plan to tear down LACMA to build a police car wash?

Maybe they'll let us wash our cars there if we ask nicely.

jaa

Where is the Los Angeles Conservatory when you need them to save the M J Higgins buidling?

Tommy:

I don't think you get that the LAPD's Motor Transport Division building will be more than just a "car wash" (if you doubt this go take a look at the parking and MTD facilities behind Parker Center now).

While I am certain there will be a car wash in the new MTD facility, if it is similar to the one under City Hall East or behind Parker Center now, it will likely be only slightly larger than a parking space. Also, only fleet vehicles can use the car wash -- personal vehicles are not allowed.

Also, what you call "a superstation" is actually going to be Police Headquarters for the second largest city in our nation.

Everyone wants a 21st Century police force for our City to fight 21st century issues (like counter-terrorism), that means replacing facilities which were never designed for the capacities and services they must provide today.

BTW, my understanding from the Los Angeles Times is that both the gallery and restaurant have been encouraged to occupy the retail spaces on the street in the new facility.

Oversimplifying the planned facilities undermines the events here for both sides.

This project is a done deal. At this point it will not be stopped. Unfortunately, it got sealed just about the same time that the residential loft buildings started to become occupied, but there was not yet a strong community organized at that time to help to shape it.

The Motor Pool project is much more than a car wash. It is the parking structure for the employees and brass of the LAPD HQ, and includes a car wash and a gas station for those vehicles. It is primarily a parking facility with amenities.

The community meetings that introduced the design of the building were held more than a year ago, at which time the community was told that the eminent domain route would be taken to secure the site. In exchange, the designers agreed to try and preserve the pedestrian nature of the streetscape by placing retail store frontage on the Main Street side of the project. The Historic Core community was almost unanimously opposed to the project, but the Little Tokyo community members were in favor, because the concession that was given to them when the project was moved from Little Tokyo was to give them a long-promised gymnasium on the Los Angeles Street side of this project.

In a previous incarnation, this project was proposed for 1st & Alameda, and Little Tokyo organized against it. This site was chosen at that time.

"Without order there can be no justice, without justice no peace."

Isn't that what we all want for downtown L.A.? A revitalized community secured by order, justice and peace where all of L.A. can call home? I don't think Michele's point was altogether off base; that although downtown has seen great growth and recent improvements there are still issues that must be addressed by continued vigilant law enforcement and community cooperation.

As sad as it would be to loose the Higgins building the balance must be struck between individual needs and the greater goals of the community. A modern police department must have modern facilities and resources.

"Yes, I did say your comments seemed paranoid."

Again, a lot of people must be "paranoid." And, by the way, I don't say that with joy or smugness.

For example, I just read this in the LA Weekly, not exactly a tabloid written by and for cautious oldsters, but one instead supposedly geared for hip, progressive, devil-may-care Angelenos:

"It's still too sketchy for us to live in, but downtown definitely beats Hollywood for going out: less traffic, less moolah, less velvet-rope burn."

And I'll excuse your or anyone else's idealistic approach to downtown life if you're willing to put up with the "sketchy" aspects of it. However, too many people who sound the way you do (some of the lawyers of the American Civil Liberties Union, perhaps?) often expouse their fearlessness from the comfort of a secure, snug location, perhaps an apartment or house in Santa Monica or Silver Lake, or even Laguna Beach.

I believe the LAPD facility proposed for First and Alameda was going to be the new Metro Bomb Squad building (not the new PAB Motor Transport Facility). I believe the new Metro Bomb Squad building will instead now be built where Parker Center stands.

As for "sketchy", compare statistics (COMPSTAT). It is safe to say there have been more homicides so far this year in the division covering Silverlake than in the division covering Downtown. Downtown's homicide and rape rates rival the best Westside enclaves.

Personally, my wife and I were nearly ready to move out of our loft Thursday night when a well-to-do Los Feliz couple responded to learning where we lived that "I hear that's the new 'in' place to be". (Like Los Feliz was before the Coffee Bean and Starbucks started to appear.)

I hope the LA Weekly article scares people off and Downtown can continue to be free of the antisepctics whose only risk in life is dressing edgy.

"Oversimplifying the planned facilities undermines the events here for both sides."

Moreover, it's not like the current, existing environment is so wonderful, with eye candy for everyone in all directions.

Yes, there are things to grouse about, but the addition of a structure for the police doesn't sound like one of them, even more so if it ends up housing an art gallery.

"However, too many people who sound the way you do (some of the lawyers of the American Civil Liberties Union, perhaps?) often expouse their fearlessness from the comfort of a secure, snug location, perhaps an apartment or house in Santa Monica or Silver Lake, or even Laguna Beach."

Hi Michele - I read your comment. It doesn't work on me. I'm one of those people being that I have a very idealized conceit about Downtown. I can assure you, I do not live in a house in Santa Monica, Silverlake, or Laguna Beach. I have a studio next to MacArthur Park.

Nobody wins these arguments. If you vote for the police motor-pool, you're labeled anti-art. If you vote against it, you're labeled anti-police. The only thing I've read here that makes any kind of sense at all comes from Urban Bruin who writes : "as sad as it would be to loose the Higgins building the balance must be struck between individual needs and the greater goals of the community."

That statement is very true.

My best friend and business partner leases the Higgins building to MJ and he will lose everything once the building is demolished and he won't receive one penny from the City. Kjell is the most generous people I know. Kjell built the gallery where the community met weekly for years. None of this would have been remotely possible w/o Kjell's dedication to Downtown and his personal willingness to donate his gallery space time after time, year after year, to make this dream come true... He started that gallery in 97. He was the first to spend his own money to create Gallery Row to make it a reality so on an “individual” note, it sucks that the guy who played a huge part in creating it will lose his source of income. That was my point from the very beginning.

Forgive me for thinking about my friend and how this will affect him because as far as I know, Kjell, MJ, and those garment workers are the only ones losing their jobs because of this while the rest of the community complains about how ugly it looks and how it's misplaced. People will lose their livelihoods and get nothing in return so whatever you say, right or wrong, is out of line and frankly, very unsympathetic.

Because everything Bert says is all true, the fact of the matter is it's too late to do anything so everything written here is enormous posturing of “what-could’ve been” and “I wish it happened this way” yadda yadda. The only way to combat this is to think about how you want Downtown to look 3 years from now and get to work today. By then, Parker Center and the motor pool will be complete, so think around the box.

Thank you for listening to my rant. I am very upset about this. Kjell and I gave the City the proposal for Gallery Row. Nearly four years later, the City takes away Kjell's gallery space. Apologizes for making this about my friend and about “individual need, but Gallery Row was Kjell’s idea, hands down. Anybody who says any different is a poseur. He is owed better than this, but definitely not for the reasons I laid out. The simply doesn’t make sense to put the motor pool there… but it’s too late now.

Michelle, you say that people "expouse their fearlessness from the comfort of a secure, snug location, perhaps an apartment or house in Santa Monica or Silver Lake, or even Laguna Beach."

I disagree. What I always hear from people writing from those, safe, remote locations is exactly what you say, that downtown is smelly, dangerous, and sketchy. It's the people in downtown who argue the opposite, because they are here, and they know the truth. You are one of those people writing from a safe distance, with no knowledge of what you describe.

Let's state the obvious! Downtown is at times and locations "smelly, dangerous, and sketchy," but that does not completely define it. Downtown is at other times and at other locations vibrant, sophisticated and safe. If you live in the city and want it to improve it then be realistic with the issues so we can find useful solutions.

Michele and all...

I echo Bert Green's comment above. I don't write from such places as you mentioned, I write from a loft in the gritty ol' Fashion District, where I walk at least twice a day for lunch and dinner plus an evening drink now and then... I walk all over Downtown and experince it from "street level" as opposed to flying through in a car or urban assault vehicle. Sure, this area can be creepy or even scary at times, especially to people not familiar with it. However, Downtown's bark is most definitely worse than it's bite.

I just spent the weekend in Santa Barbara, a city well known as a bastion of the rich & famous, and which has a beautiful downtown. There was that ubiquitous urine smell here and there, and even a particularly nasty human deposit right on a storefront on State Street... there were at least two dozen homeless people who had set up shop in a ten block area of the same street, and there were tents and other evidence of campsites in alleys and side streets in the evening. Santa Monica is much the same, Santa Cruz maybe more so. Those are all well loved and much visited beach cities in our fair state. My point is that we are not talking about a Disneyland environment here - this is the all too common situation in most urban areas in this country. Yes, there is a lot to be done. No, I do not agree with the ACLU approach... (and found it bizarre to be lumped in with their lawyers - if you'd read many of my posts, especially on this blog, you'd see how hard that made me laugh).

Downtown is an area in transition, and harkening back to the original point of this thread, destroying a building which houses a group of businesses vital to the continued evolution of Downtown is a shame... for any reason. Yes, it is a small building, and not particularly unique or even historic. The LA Conservancy probably looked at it and decided it wasn't a priority for them (anyone who knows, please comment). So we have a rather ponderous police facility which will dominate a block that could have continued to be an important thread in the fabric of this community. I am glad to hear that there will be street level sidewalk fronting retail... my hope is that if the MJ Higgins Gallery and other displaced businesses can locate in there, that the costs won't be prohibitively high.

Nic:

I don't understand how your business partner will not be compensated if he owns the building now and leases it to MJ Higgins?

I thought under eminent domain the government entity was obligated to pay fair market value for the land and structure plus any relocation costs incurred for the displaced parties?

According to the Council's actions it has "authorized payment for the acquisition" of the properties in question. Given the scarcity of Downtown real estate, I would think whomever owned that building is about to be a millionaire on the transaction.

Can you explain "he will lose everything once the building is demolished and he won't receive one penny from the City"? Was your partner subleasing to MJ? I'm confused and would appreciate your clarification here. Thank you.

Echo E's statement. No other explanation necessary to understand my frustration.

Thank you for the amplification.

I'm not discounting the contribution anyone has made to Downtown, including the LAPD.

But without knowing Kjell subleased to MJ Higgins, Nic's posting made it sound as if the building's owner (presumably Kjell from Nic's posting) was not going to get compensated for her or his property.

I'm saddened that the MJ Higgins Gallery lost the fight. Martha has been a great neighbor and a wonderful friend to local artists. I hope that Martha will be able to find a new space close to home.

And Michelle, shame on you for your prejudicial ignorance about our neighborhood. It's people with your attitude that move in to neighborhoods AFTER gentrification and claim it as your own, with your callus disregard for people that you will become neighbors with. Trust me, I lived through this in Venice Beach and I experienced it first hand.

Please do us all a favor and don't ever move to downtown. Even when it evolves to meet your comfort level. Stay in your safe suburb - we can gladly do without you.

"...that downtown is smelly, dangerous, and sketchy..."

I return to this conversation well after it has died down. However, it was seeing the comments from this person ---

http://blogdowntown.com/blog/2468#c8847

--- that made me shake my head and prompted me to post another message here.

To various respondents to this blog entry about the police garage, I have to say that I don't think the problems of downtown will be solved by everyone playing a game of deny and ignore. However, don't mistake my sniping at the community as an indication that I'm mocking and jeering it.

If anything, the faults of downtown, and turning it around, require that people who live or visit there start grumbling even louder at all those who've allowed the situation to become or remain so embarrassing. Start with the professional enablers, such as the Civil Liberties Union, and then move on down the list of all the other irresponsible groups, organizations and individuals---I include in that bunch a variety of elected officials or self-appointed activists who have been far too permissive towards those in society who are brazenly, wantonly and proudly homeless and dysfunctional.

Getting back to the subject of the police motor pool, my original point was that downtowners should be so lucky if the construction of that was the biggest problem facing them and their community.