Waiting for Big Retail
blogdowntown
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — With fierce competition in the retail sector and a stubborn economy marked by high unemployment, stagnant wages and a tight business lending environment, times are tough for businesses in Downtown. In spite of those challenges, some entrepreneurs have made the choice to start up and make a go of it, targeting the needs of the area’s growing population. They’ve had an open market, since large retailers have yet to make a move on the central city.
Recent years have seen the arrival of a DVD rental shop, numerous bars and restaurants, two bookstores and an explosion of galleries. Still, many Downtown are left wondering when the second phase of the revitalization will come.
Some of those businesses have opened because of a need the owners felt through their own experience as Downtown residents. “Jim had wanted to open up something -- anything -- on Main Street for a long time,” remembers Celia Esguerra, who along with husband Jim Winstead and partner James Adams own art supply store Raw Materials in the Historic Core. Now nearing its two-year anniversary, the business has grown and added services to appeal to a larger audience, offering photo printing, custom framing and art classes for all skill levels. Each new residential building that opens adds to their client base. “Our growth has mirrored the growth of the neighborhood,” Esguerra says.
Others came because they saw their customer base here. Last November, Interior Illusions owner Mike Valles opened iSquared on Spring Street, offering furnishings catering to the modern loft aesthetic. He chose the location to meet the demand of clients who were traveling from Downtown to visit his West Hollywood and Santa Monica showrooms. Based on increased foot traffic over the summer, he considers the venture a success.
Even with these pioneers, what Downtown lacks is a retail core that offers the selection other city centers have, especially in the mid-range market segments, often anchored by a major retailer.
A survey conducted in 2008 by the Downtown Center Business Improvement District, a provider of marketing and safety services in a 65-block area covering the Financial and Jewelry districts, identified electronics retailers and discount department stores as the most sought-after types of businesses among residents and workers. Coming as no surprise, retailers Best Buy and Target were the top two brands mentioned by name, and grocer Trader Joe’s is frequently mentioned in social settings and online forums.
Target in particular has long been rumored to be close to making a move on Downtown, but the retailer continues to hold out.
Once it does sign, that move could be the catalyst needed to really boost Downtown retail. Derrick Moore with CB Richard Ellis believes that the arrival of a major retailer could create an effect similar to the renaissance of Santa Monica’s Third Street Promenade in the early ‘90s, boosting foot traffic to nearby stores and acting as a magnet for more businesses to feel comfortable making a move on Downtown.
Still, it is easy to overlook some of the retail treasures that are found in Downtown’s neighborhoods. Ross Cutlery, a knife and shaving store at 3rd and Broadway, has specialized in professional-quality cooking knives at the Bradbury Building for the better part of a century. Owner Allen Wattenberg and his brother bought the business nearly half a century ago, just as the neighborhood surrounding them began to see a long decline. “The mid-’80s was the low point,” he said, referring to the flight of his customer base to the Westside and suburban shopping centers.
But the thought of leaving Downtown had never occurred to the brothers, due to the multi-generational clientele that has come to rely on the family’s expertise. With business now on the upswing due in part to the company’s knife-sharpening services but also because of the increased livability of the area, Wattenberg mulls the idea of another ten years in Downtown. “I plan to be working here until I’m 80, until I can’t move behind the counter anymore.”
When asked what separates his business from online stores, he responds that his staff helps customers figure out the best product for their needs. “We’ve got a lot of knowledge because we’ve been here 48 years,” he says. “If you’re just looking online at a picture, how do you know if it’s what you need? It’s nice to be able to hold the knife in your hand before you buy it.” Sales even come with a short lesson on keeping new knives sharp at home.
If shuttered storefronts are a sign of a community in decline, then the move toward a more locally self-sufficient economy is partially a selfish one: A vibrant retail scene with a unique character helps to make a region more attractive to tourists and their money, and, by extension, that attracts even more retail.
It also generates money for local government.
The promise of untapped sales tax revenues is gaining traction with City Hall, which this year faced a budget deficit of $485 million. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa earlier this month unveiled the Shop LA program, pushing for Angelenos to keep their spending within city boundaries by making minor adjustments to their shopping habits.
Villaraigosa argues that if residents value the services provided by municipal government, paying a bit more attention to the meandering boundaries of the city of Los Angeles when shopping can have a big impact on government reserves. According to a press statement, sales taxes constitute the fifth-largest source of revenue in the city, with one out of every ten local sales tax dollars going to fund libraries, street repaving, parks and public safety.
The opening of Ralphs three years ago showed that the community around Downtown could support a grocery market: the location quickly jumped to the top 15 percent in sales for the Kroger chain.
As of yet, though, there has been no second big retail opening. There’s little question that one will come, the question is just when, and who will be first?
Guest on September 15, 2010, at 03:22PM – #1
Great article guys! It was needed. You're right, its just a matter of time and its going to be awesome for DT.
who is that pretty girl in the picture?
Guest on September 15, 2010, at 04:58PM – #2
i would hardly call interior illusions a pioneer... they have 3 different stores and the capital to back up a venture like this. they would hardly be called a mom and pop, plus they are notorious for bad attitude and poor customer service, something that doesn't fly well with the community.
what about the other retail like kimski, or flea? i realize that you can't really discuss all the retail that is here, but i personally know that more sacrifice was made by the owners of places like the newly opened, Gather, than the multi-million dollar interior illusions. or do they get a shout out over the rest because they advertise??
to put Raw Materials in the same catagory as isquared is almost insulting. i'd like to hear about the real pioneers, who took real risks to bring retail to downtown- not a paragraph dedicated to a company who barely took any.
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on September 15, 2010, at 05:40PM – #3
We just mentioned Gather in our Fashion's Night Out write-up from last week.
Are you making the case that Downtown is far enough along that someone opening retail now isn't a pioneer?
Guest on September 15, 2010, at 05:58PM – #4
not at all, but living downtown and knowing plenty of people that own businesses, i would hardly classify them as a "pioneer".
isquared wasn't even the first furniture store down here and with locations in weho, santa monica and palm springs, they are actually something of a chain. i just don't see how, with their spending power and capital, that they could be put in the same catagory as what i might consider true pioneers, like Raw Materials or Kimski, or Bliss or Gather. who cares if they already got a mention- they are all true pioneers.
it just seemed odd that a whole paragraph was dedicated to isquared, calling them pioneers. just because they came down here doesn't make them pioneers, especially since they weren't event he first. i realize this isn't the la times, but someone with your connections and knowledge of downtown could have surely come up with a few bites on some real pioneers.
real people, with limited budgets and big dreams have really taken risks to be down and i just think this article might have mentioned those people that i know put their blood, sweat and tears into their businesses and laid it all out on the hopes of a great downtown. not a multi-million dollar furniture chain who chose to capitalize on what was already going on down here.
Hala Pickford (@misspickford) on September 15, 2010, at 06:52PM – #5
I think it would take one of two ways for retail to be revived: 1) something like Target comes along. It would have to be a major, big name, and it would likely be near the Financial district which may or may not help Broadway or Spring or the Fashion district.
2) Some combined effort would have to occur where several big, but not Target-esque, stores agreed to open under a set up like the Promenade. Say an H&M, Claire's, Urban Outfitters, etc.
It actually might take both approaches, 1 first, then 2. I'd like to see an IKEA downtown, a Fresh and Easy or Trader Joes, Target, and an assortment of clothing stores. We got good restaurants and bars...but there isn't anything to do in between. I think if we get retail we will then get the theatres up...and finally reach some full revitalization.
Guest on September 15, 2010, at 08:35PM – #6
Fresh and Easy!!!!
Guest on September 15, 2010, at 10:27PM – #7
We should be careful wishing for the typical chain retailers like target, H&M, etc. Why do we live downtown rather than in a place that offers that carbon copy of every suburb in the US. I'd argue its because we are looking for the same sense of character and identity that one finds living in Manhattan, Chicago, Seattle or any number of other urban locales characterized by there own unique scene. At Target you can get a toilet brush, toilet paper and tomatoes in one place, but does the place become a part of who you are...and if it does, what does that say? Yes, shop these places, they serve a purpose, but do we really want a carbon-copy of Third St. Promenade in Downtown. That said, downtown still lacks an axis that pulls it all together and defines the community, like The Square to Madison, Chelsea Market to Chelsea/Manhattan, or on a grander scale, Pike's Place to Seattle. These things will happen...it takes time...it should take time.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 12:03AM – #8
Anyone have an idea of the kind of sales numbers the Foot Locker on Broadway puts out? I realize it's Foot Locker, but aside from that I believe Big Lots is the only other form of a major chain located on Broadway.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 12:10AM – #9
Guest #7 - And enough with this "carbon copy" crap and the idea of uniqueness and Downtown needing an identity. I'm tired of this hipster mindset. I like living in DTLA, but I also purchased here recently as an INVESTMENT. Take a walk down Broadway and let me know if you change your mind.
Hala Pickford (@misspickford) on September 16, 2010, at 12:48AM – #10
Guest #7 I must agree with #9 to a point. This 'carbon copy' thing can go so far. There are many little communities in and around LA we can learn from; and I don't think what I set up above would 'carbon copy' anything.
Hollywood Blvd is a good one. Tons of room for 'independent' stores but instead its mostly sex and bong shops. It has very few corporate stores and none of them are big enough to be interesting (it is perhaps the smallest H&M in all of LA.) Too tourist driven.
Santa Monica is good enough, but the 'non chain' stores are equally tourist dull. Not bongs and sex, but more kitschy over priced crap. The new mall is equally dull. High priced chains (Neimans) and the 'indie' stores aren't interesting, more like Hollywood and Highland in their dullness.
Old Town Pasadena is maybe something more to look to. Chains, but many indie stores that are actually interesting. But as I sit here writing this I can't think of any place in or around LA that has 'indie' stores and isn't a wannabe hipster hell (Hollywood/Sunset Melrose area). I like indie stores, but I can't think of a cluster that has anywhere making me go 'yes I want to spend my money here and can afford to.' Most stores are too expensive and uninteresting anyways.
Downtown could easily right this wrong. One NEEDS a Target or some such store for living reasons. When I go to little enclaves I find myself annoyed at the lack of somewhere with a wide magazine selection like a Barnes and Nobles (I like the indie bookstores; they just don't have that.) Or I'll go and they'll have one of my favorite chains, but not a handful so my shopping will be easy and useful.
Ideally I think a community would need the 'needed' stores (Target, Trader Joes, etc); restaurants both chain and non chain (and all price ranges and types); entertainment including film, music, dance, and culture; and retail. Retail would need to include chains for both men and women, various age groups or tastes, and then smaller stores for the even more discerning.
Broadway is so perfect for something like this. The only problem is you couldn't really stick a Target on it in the traditional manner. Maybe at that little split by 9th and Broadway. You could put it in one of those old buildings ala something like their Van Nuys store, but they would want parking and Broadway severely lacks parking...and I wouldn't want to see a building destroyed for parking.
You could easily throw chains like an H&M as well as a Macy's in the old stores. You could also give a new upstart a chance, and if foot traffic was there all the better. I'd love to see an indie store with reasonably priced ($20-$100 pieces) fashionable clothing with a beautiful window display on Broadway. And a few higher end stores for good measure. All these stores would mutually benefit from each other; but someone or something has to make the first move.
Macy's (or something like it) could possibly do it if parking was around. I just don't think something like H&M could all alone. Target could. I don't think an indie store could unless it was well financed to weather the start up. It would have to be a really damn good store with an online base, and it would have to be right there front and center on the sidewalk with a good sign and window display, adjacent parking, and a clean area. Not impossible, but who is willing to try it?
That's why I said fixing retail will be the start of the finalizing of the revitalization. I love going Downtown but once I eat or browse a book store...what more can I do other than be shouted at in Spanish while some woman jingles penny bracelets in my face in the middle of the sidewalk? A full day would include the opportunity for a meal, a snack/coffee, stores to browse, things really needed (like Target or the knife store), a chance at entertainment, and a place to hang out late before going home. We already have the workers and some of the apartments, we already have restaurants and clubs...we just lack the 'weekend/middle of the day' stuff that truly makes a community.
Ideally I'd love to see a setup like this (as an example): take one of the theatres. Revitalize it and it shows a film or two every night. Next door is an H&M and maybe an Ulta. Near that a Macy's or a department store. Near or in the department store would be a good cafe...not a Starbucks but something where you could drink coffee and talk with friends all day, and not be accosted by bums.
If this spread out through Broadway the mixing and matching is endless...it would be a hell of a town center if done right! I think someone else pointed out earlier that there is so much space one could easily fill up even the second floors of most of these places with stores/cafes/offices. All the better!
Hala Pickford (@misspickford) on September 16, 2010, at 01:02AM – #11
As if I haven't rambled long enough I wanted to add this thought: everyone says 'Non hipster, totally independent, stores'. Okay. But let's be honest: how could that happen?
I don't know of any such place in or around LA...or even in the country. Maybe I'm just sheltered that way and I welcome anyone to point me to a proper example. Winter Park in Florida was very upscale (think the poorer cousin to Beverly Hills) and would not let chains in. So they had a lot of European stores (like the make up chain Douglas) and indie stores run by trust fund or rich wife types. They had a chocolate place from France that was to DIE for. And a Pita place run by an Arab guy that was divine. I miss it sometimes.
But Winter Park has been there since the 1800s and refused to 'downgrade' in all those years. They barely let non white people on the city borders (and don't label me insensitive or racist; search the Orlando Weekly there was a whole article about it.) These people were and have remained old money...they never fell like Broadway did.
So how could we, who have fallen, rise again? And rise in a way that kept out H&M/Target? I'll give you this: I don't think its impossible. But I do think its highly improbable. Its like saying 'I'm gonna get a perfect score on the SATs...and take it in Mandarin...though I don't speak Mandarin!'
We COULD...but I think it would keep a much more realistic type of progress back. Los Feliz has a cute little area of pure hipster, but its kissing an area riddled with CVSs and Rite Aids in big box store form. Eagle Rock has a Target so huge it puts the Midwest to shame. They don't have 9 blocks of huge buildings to revitalize. And if you want me to shut up about Broadway the same theory applies to much of Downtown: big buildings, in long non breaking rows. Its much different then Los Feliz.
I stand by what I said in the above post, that at least one super fabulous 'so good the trust fund kids have to drive from Beverly Hills to it' type store would have to open itself and set the area right. But current things make me think that's a long shot. There are small fashion stores by Spring, Main, and Los Angeles. But all are either too cheapy and gaudy (the Fashion District area; which despite itself has some good stuff) or its too hipster and overpriced (to save feelings I won't mention examples; but they reside near spring.)
I applaud anyone trying to revitalize, and there is nothing wrong with those type stores. But those aren't gonna magically turn the area into the Promenade. A real and full iniative needs to be taken...and some like Bringing Back Broadway have tried to set the tone. But a real push needs to be made. A real plan with approval from the city and building owners and a real courting plan made to retailers. One will have to bite before it becomes real, but I think it could.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 06:32AM – #12
@Guest #8: I think Foot Locker on Broadway closed recently.
bill on September 16, 2010, at 07:04AM – #13
As a downtown resident I love what is happening with all the new restaurants and bars. Retail would be great, but I agree with the posters who would rather see individual stores rather than big corporate chains. And I used to be a Target lover, but then they went and gave that $150,000 to the candidate who wants to eradicate gays, so no more Target for me. Retail will get here. Based on how the dining/bar scene has evolved, I think it will be fresh, innovative and exciting.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 08:00AM – #14
anyone else tired of the "hipsters" vs. everyone one else comments? there is room in downtown for everyone.
Jennifer Girsky on September 16, 2010, at 08:54AM – #15
A good first step would be a "Nike Town" store in the area near the Staples/L.A. Live complex. What better retail is there for a sports complex than a sporting goods business? If it performed well, perhaps other retailers would realize downtown L.A. has plenty of places to eat, but what are tourists and hotel guests supposed to do the rest of the time?
Sebastian on September 16, 2010, at 09:21AM – #16
If you build it they will come. I remember Universal studios when city walk wasn't there, not one soul, now you can barely walk there on a saturday night. We can create this type of hub in and around L.A. Live. We need to start thinking in revitalizing the center core of the city. When people see L.A. they see downtown but when they come to visit they go everywhere else but downtown. Let's make them come here and build a true L.A. urban core full of things to do and not just a place to work and eat.
crystal on September 16, 2010, at 09:54AM – #17
Hala, you are talking about putting a Macy's on Broadway. We already have one at 7/Hope. Yes it is small and needs renovation but I doubt they are moving.
Even if we just revitalized that mall a bit it would be a start. I think we all forget it exists. There is Macy's, Express, Lady Foot Locker, and Bath Body Works, Victoria Secrets there. That is pretty much the basis of every American mall, we just need some diversity in or around it now.
While it may not be convenient for us it is near the Financial district to pull day time people to help survive.
Hala Pickford (@misspickford) on September 16, 2010, at 10:16AM – #18
Crystal I am aware and that's why I mentioned it. If I remember my history right Macy's (as one of the chains it bought out) used to be on Broadway, then moved into that location sometime in the 70s. Then somehow they ended up with two Macy's (the one at the official 7th and Fig) and closed one. Its in the archives on this site somewhere.
I have nothing against the mall, though it too needs revitlized. I'd rather see Broadway then the Financial because the Financial is doing quite well already...I don't think it needs the push. It'll get there. That's why people write of putting a Target in the 'old' Macy's, the 7th and Fig gaping hole.
If one department store went to Broadway, and did it right (like my cafe example), they could help set something off. I doubt Nordstrom's would do it, and frankly they are good but too pricey for someone like me (except pantyhose; they kick ass in the pantyhose department). There's a few other department stores, but most of them have been consolidated into things like Macy's.
I wish we had more. There used to be a 'Broadways' and 'Mays' and all sorts of department stores, many of which started Downtown. Macy's ate them all.
If someone recreated a Woolworth's type store I think...I'd have a heart attack from happiness. A soda fountain/cafe, an affordable retail store for all types...brilliant. And killing that we got Wal Mart...boooo.
dear God never let Downtown get a Wal Mart. That's pretty much the only thing I ask
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 10:22AM – #19
many communities desire "anchor stores" for the tax revenue....we already have plenty of that from Staples and the many manuf. business here..i think.
i agree with the posters who stated we dont want a carbon copy of every other big shopping mall with too mostly large chains--that would be unimaginitive. many developers indeed try to mix it up with big chains and smaller mom and pops to get that community cozy vibe right.
so it really comes down to what do people "need/want" and what isnt there enough of.
parking. more corner bodegas--ESPECIALLY in Little Tokyo/Arts--hello--you cant get good bread or cheese over there and there a growing demographic for that stuff.
clothing/shoes. besides the poor quality wholesale stuff near the Mart its slim picking.
crystal on September 16, 2010, at 10:46AM – #20
The financial district is doing ok, but there still aren't many options. We need mid range stores that appeal to all income levels. I understand your desire to do Broadway, but see it probably trickling that way rather than sprouting at first.
I wonder why Foot Locker closed....
Brigham Yen on September 16, 2010, at 01:05PM – #21
Guest #7 - I have no idea what you're talking about because Manhattan, Chicago, and Seattle ALL have chain stores. Have you been to Manhattan lately? Chicago has Michigan Ave and Seattle is the birthplace of Nordstrom.
Anyway, I think people here need to realize that there needs to be a balance between chains and independent shops. Hell, Downtown LA is large enough, geographically, to fill it with all the chain shops and still have way too much room left over for indies. Remember, infill projects will eventually fill in all those deadzone parking lots, with more retail spaces at the bottom to fill. Broadway itself is already more than a mile of retail space that could eventually be re-leased to more interesting shops than the swap meet crap that's there now.
As I was telling a new friend recently, there is no way you could fill all the retail commercial space of DTLA up with just indies. Chains are absolutely essential in this day in age.
Most cities that others revere are filled with chains. From my recollection, the last time I visited London, it was filled with chain restaurants on every corner. Did that make me like London any less? No.
Downtown LA needs to replace the Jewelry District with a retail district that stays open late and offers people a place to shop and dine. The Jewelry District sits strategically in the bulls eye location of a circular Downtown LA shape. Pershing Square could easily be rebranded as THE place to come and shop in Los Angeles (like Union Square in SF which has a very similar layout to Pershing Square surrounded by high-rises).
The location makes so much sense as 7th Street would literally tie in DTLA from an east-west direction and the new Hill Street would tie in DTLA from a north-south direction, with amenities like Grand Central Market being a true asset to LA that could become EVEN better like the Farmers' Market at 3rd/Fairfax.
Downtown LA has the potential to become one of the best in the country.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 01:38PM – #22
Brig,
People just don't get it. People dont understand the dynamics of real estate and how an "indie" climate can evolve. Its so sad that people ignore the material and emotional loss that many downtown entrepreneurs have endured trying to create retail/food concepts here. rather, people are easy to criticize them when the blog or dtnews puts their eviction on the front page. If I said, "hey, the high end retail are getting killed because the market they were promised isn't here and the recession killed destination customers" people would understand because they too have been hit by the economy and can't patronize high-end retail. But when these indie guys get evicted, lose their families, and livelihood its somehow inexplicable.
The days of the single entrepreneur bringing indie retail to DT came because people had money. These guys could come up with $1-$3 million over a two year period to bring these places here. When the economy hit credit sources, it killed cashflow and quaint weeknights at your favorite new places became intolerable to the operator (hurting the landlord, of course). Thus eviction.
Indie joints come when the bigs/chains have taken over the prime real estate and less desirable locales are forced to bottom down their rents to compete. So Brig is right. In this economy you NEED chains in the premium locales so as to provide landmarks, stability, and credibility to a neighborhood like downtown. Not people subject to be gone in two years, killing the value of the location and community. Once that is established lower rent will plant the seeds for other areas in downtown to develop indie, artistic venues/concepts.
Downtown has been and still is overinflated as far as retail real estate goes. People are signing leases for nearly $20k per month for 6k square feet places that require a million dollar build out. Thats what causes projects to "stall" and construction to stop and start. Finally, everyone talks about the demographics downtown as far as income goes, but not their consume practice. I understand why you want a potential tenant to know that there are people making 80k a year surrounding a given property, but its a misleading detail that can lead to a future "stalled" project if the proprietor isnt well funded. The fact is, the upper brackets of that demographic eats in West Hollywood, Culver City, and even Pasadena. They dedicate about seven days per month to the Standard, and drinks at Seven Grand another seven times per month. The abundance of the real consumer activity downtown right now consists of underemployed nonprofessional types, students, and workers who fill up Bar 107 (my fave bar), Hanks bar, and places like Weilands. The catch is these people want really cool, trendy, hot, indie places near their lofts so their neighborhood looks nice, but they have no intention of patronizing ten dollar a drink locales.
That means some honesty and true real estate engineering needs to take place to bring chains that can cater to these crowds, bring the area like brig suggests for Pershng Square, and let the chains stake a huge massive stake right in the center of the district. That will bring the upper demographics out of their lofts and keep them dt while bringing a good shopping cross-section from LA proper. Then that circle can begin radiate out in spheres, where cheap properties will exist on the fringes bringing birth to true artistic and indie retail gems. This practice of signing uber-cool mavericks to $4sf leases has got to stop....
J-M on September 16, 2010, at 03:17PM – #23
I think a lot of these big-box retailers are waiting for the City to give them a tax break for moving Downtown and I don't think they should get it. We can hold out a little longer. In the meantime, as a resident, I'm deeply insulted every time I go by the Staples Center and see the HUGE Target ads without a store in sight. In fact, it got to me so much, I got over my hang-up with Walmart and started shopping there instead every once in a while. All the big stores know Downtowners will drive out to shop in their other locations, so why bother with the extra expense? And the rest of us are too hip to shop in their stores anyhow, so it's definitely a mixed bag. I don't really worry about the retail situation any longer. If they come, they come, if not I still have my favorite local hangouts. Sooner or later they'll want a piece of the pie.
I'll never shop at Trader Joe's again because I've heard some of the dumbest reasons for them not opening shop here (from blaming the homeless, to low spending power, to high taxes, and bad neighborhoods), and btw there is a Fresh and Easy at Central and West Adams, which is not too, too far away.
diglounge on September 16, 2010, at 05:17PM – #24
We don't need a Target, we gotsa Big Lots! Kidding. But I feel like they really screwed the pooch on LA Live, I hope that doesn't happen with other parts of DTLA too. What I would really love downtown is something like the Chelsea Market in the meat packing district in NY.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 06:01PM – #25
diglounge, we have a Big Lots on 7th Street at Broadway.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 07:39PM – #26
I think the first furniture store after deardens was Sub Urban on 5th and main.. small shop great staff and they work with local DTLA artists..
why is no one talking about this shop?
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 08:01PM – #27
Actually Loft Appeal opened in 2003...several years before the other stores.
Guest on September 16, 2010, at 09:04PM – #28
In order to create the kind of redevelopment that we need along broadway, there needs to be a comprehensive plan for downtown. It is almost incredible that such a plan doesn't exist at this point in the game. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been squandered having "connected" design firms draw up little plans one block at a time. most of these plans seem to constitute busywork, and never see the light of day. How about a bigger vision for downtown. One where stakeholders help solve problems and make commitment for the future development of the neighborhood. We need the help of of a city planner to develop plans, The Specific Plans become law.The Specific Plans set guidelines for new developments . Then an active community develops a plan to get it funded. The stronger the partnership with the community, the more likely the project will be built. This can't happen as long as Huizar CD14 continues to use downtown as his personal backyard.
downtown needs a single council district for this type of redevelopment to take place, We have two chances to send Huizar away. One, election 11, the other, citywide council redistricting coming. It's a chance for 250,000 residents to join together and form a Central City Council District.
By the way, you will hear an announcement in the next few months regard a major retailer or two coming to Washington Blvd.
Hala Pickford (@misspickford) on September 16, 2010, at 09:29PM – #29
Guest 16 hit the nail on the head. Reading the comments here we got me saying Broadway for retail, 2 votes for Pershing Square/Jewelry district for retail, and a few for the Financial/7th and Fig district.
If you want to go from there we have the Main/Spring area, the Fashion District, and going further out the LA Live are and Little Tokyo area.
LA Live, Little Tokyo, and in its own way Spring/Main have all had their own designs and goals...already done. The Jewelry district is cohesive, but dying. Pershing Square is a hot disgusting mess that needs to go back to its roots and be done with all the concrete. The area around it seems to go its own way (Broadway, Financial, Jewelry) so an area there could be interesting.
And I already went on about 7th and Fig and Broadway.
There is just SO MUCH SPACE and so many buildings that could be filled. And that's exactly why some sort of idea needs to be in place. All 3 of those areas could be retail...but it would be interesting to see them focused a certain way. And until one is fully done, nothing else will pull through automatically.
Brigham Yen on September 17, 2010, at 02:40PM – #30
Thank you Guest #23 for your feedback.
To reiterate, it is critical for the future role of DTLA as an urban center for the second largest city in the country to replace the Jewelry District with LA's premier shopping destination, which could be branded and come to be associated as simply "Pershing Square." (Like Union Square in SF)
The Jewelry District, while great for what it was during a time when DTLA was forlorn, unfortunately, closes down way too early and is strategically an impediment for future growth in DTLA because it sits squarely in the middle in DTLA and discourages pedestrian connections at night. It literally divides and prevents multiple burgeoning districts from connecting with each other.
Plus, in order for LA to function better as a whole, LA "should" have the kind of revered establishments that have given Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, etc. the kind of superiority that allows those strong SATELLITE cities to "look down upon" being a part of LA and want to establishment a completely separate identity (disassociation). When the satellite cities are stronger than its main city, it's bound to breed dysfunction as communities develop a provincial mentality (what William Fulton describes as the "cocoon citizenship") - not looking at the big picture of regional relevancy.
It is, therefore, logically better for LA to be aggressive and compete for flagship businesses so that its satellite cities regard LA higher, and therefore, are more apt to cooperate from a public policy standpoint (such as mass transit planning).
What makes LA great is that it has so many different municipalities with their own unique character, but I don't think it's outrageous to encourage the CITY OF LA to set the standard for itself higher.
Pershing Square and the Jewelry District contain some of the most beautiful buildings on the West Coast. They are currently "invisible" as they are not relevant to a broader group of people, which is a pity. Historically, DTLA had been the premier shopping destination before its suburbs overshadowed it. I think it's time for the cycle to make a full circle and give back the title to LA (not Beverly Hills or West Hollywood).
Guest on September 17, 2010, at 03:57PM – #31
@ Mr. Yen,
Surely you’re not suggesting that current successful jewelry businesses re-locate. Why should they? I can understand "filling in"---but the jewelry people have been there a long time, and the ones that are left have had it pretty rough in the past few years and should be supported not pushed out.
One of the neat things about DTLA are the pockets of ACTUAL manufacturing/wholesale markets--increasingly rare in the USA...and a jewelry district seems like a precious "gem" to be built upon rather that vanquished.
Brigham Yen on September 17, 2010, at 04:11PM – #32
I am looking at it from an objective POV for the greater good of the city. Currently, the Jewelry District is not only waning in size (due to the economy), but its strategic location in the center of DTLA (literally at the crossroads of 7th and Hill) also prevents the current evolving DTLA from going to the next level as NOT only a manufacturing center, but a viable community for others including residents, visitors, and tourists.
Let me repeat, my concern over the Jewelry District rests solely on its strategic location in the GEOGRAPHIC CENTER of Downtown Los Angeles.
Having the Jewelry District relocate to the fringe of DTLA would be ideal, and would allow those beautiful historic buildings (currently locked up after 5PM) to be reused again for other purposes such as restaurants (like Bottega Louie, etc.) or flagship establishments that would be great PR for the City of Los Angeles to the rest of the world, which could benefit MORE people due to the potential increase in tourism.
Guest on September 17, 2010, at 04:22PM – #33
there is quite a bit of unused and vacant retail space in dt now---in EVERY district....even with the rents being lowered. its going to take some time before money is flowing enough again to even BEGIN to start to discuss who should or should not be relocated.
Brigham Yen on September 17, 2010, at 04:58PM – #34
^ Yes, I agree, however, it is also the best time to prepare for future changes in DTLA RIGHT NOW as vacancies are high and retail activity is low. It's actually an opportunity!
If the Jewelry District was doing fantastic (but has always closed down by 5PM and never put in the effort to rehabilitate those beautiful buildings that are currently dirty and gritty), then we would never have the opportunity to change out the tenants for restaurants, retailers, and other amenities.
Imagine the historic ornate Warner Brothers Theatre (at the NW corner of 7th/Hill) with new, culinary establishments and new retailers that take pride in the historic grandeur of the building in their creative build out enlivening the streets day and night? Shoopers and dining during the day, and a new DTLA where people come to stroll at night and peer inside beautifully reimagined spaces.
Much better in my opinion!
Guest on September 17, 2010, at 06:59PM – #35
Biggest dilemma facing downtown right now is that even with the growth of its residential population, it still lacks a large enough number of people who can keep the area's economy humming, much less booming. I'll even include daytime workers and tourists in that mix.
However, I do admit to not including the largely low-income, lowly skilled residents that dominate most of the central portion of Los Angeles. They're the people who occupy most of the communities that border downtown for miles in each direction.
So with those demographics defined, while there may be enough people in downtown right now who are providing the necessary support that allows existing shops and restaurants to stay in the black, there has to be thousands of more such residents to guarantee that the next level of commerce will be reached.
Broadway and the jewelry district can be cleaned up to the highest degree imaginable, but if the needed base of potential shoppers remains as small as it is has been, you'll soon reach a dead end.
The other dilemma is that the economy currently is preventing the addition of much new housing, either in ground-up or rehabilitated buildings.
So downtown LA is in kind of a big muddle at this moment.
Guest on September 18, 2010, at 01:37AM – #36
Anyone who thinks the jewelry district is going anywhere is delusional. We might as well be arguing about whether to relocate the Disney concert hall.
As far as big retail goes, DTLA is going to be waiting a long time. Parking is a major issue. The fact that it is cheaper to park in the public lots in Beverly Hills (and there are more of those lots) than DTLA is crazy. And I miss Brooks Brothers.
Guest on September 18, 2010, at 10:09AM – #37
I'm pretty sure the existing jewelry tenants take great pride in the old Warners Bros Theatre they lease
Guest on September 18, 2010, at 10:56AM – #38
Ross coming to Foot Locker/Woolworth? Many major retainers (e.g. Trader Joes, Target, etc) require large space 25,000 sqft, not many buildings in DTLA are able to accomodate.
Guest on September 18, 2010, at 12:01PM – #39
Hill Street needs the jewelry trade, of retailers and wholesalers, because there otherwise would be too much available ground-floor space throughout downtown that would have to be filled. There are only so many clothing stores, shoe stores, cosmetic shops, home furnishing stores, restaurants, bars and all the other type of businesses found at malls like the Beverly Center, Santa Monica Place or Old Town Pasadena that the area will ever be able to support.
However, the jewelers, or the landlords they lease from, should be pushed into steam cleaning their buildings and upgrading their storefronts.
Hala Pickford (@misspickford) on September 18, 2010, at 11:29PM – #40
The jewelry district could be the new Rodeo drive area...but that would require either Broadway or the Financial district to be fully functional. I think the Financial district needs its finishing touches (the two malls revitalized, a box store of some sort)...but I stand by thinking Broadway is where the focus needs to be.