As for the rest of Mr. Noonan’s rebuttal, my little joke about changing roles with him is especially ironic to me, since I don’t myself consider liberal or conservative. I’ve always found analyses that reduce themselves to “conservatives” vs. “liberals” to be less than useful. However, to continue in the same jocular vein, my answer to Mr. Noonan would be, if “liberals” feel too much the pain of a single victim – too much compassion! the horror! – how remarkable is it that “conservatives” can hold contradictory positions without having a breakdown? As I recall, Mr. Noonan was an ardent supporter of Prop. 90, touting the stories of Mr. Surfas and Mr. Blue being victimized by the city for the “common good.” Yet here he is, advocating a fresh start by tearing down 13 acres encompassing businesses with whom he still has fond dealings…
More Questions
A few questions arise out of Mr. Champion’s proposed development on South Sepulveda Boulevard. For example, while the development would ostensibly blend local with regional and national businesses, do we really need large chains? Is there a shortage of national businesses in the area? Can it really be desirable for some local businesses to close down in favor of yet another Gap, Starbucks, Old Navy or Apple store?
While an obsession with big retailers doesn’t spell doom for the city, I’m not convinced we really need anymore. Frankly, if weren’t for cool spots like Saints & Sinners, Bottle Rock and the smattering of hip restaurants – not to forget the Pacific Theatre – Culver City would be a town that rolls up the sidewalks once the sun sets. The solution isn’t to bring in more shopping, although local, unique boutiques would be fun. Shopping can be done anywhere. What is hard to find are things to do. What about nightclubs and places to dance? Art galleries? How about a micro-brewery? A museum?
Then there are the condos, apparently to be priced between $400,000 and $800,000. Even with Mr. Champion’s estimate that 80 percent of condo buyers in his properties have been singles, childless couples and empty nesters, this promise of new housing is hardly exciting. In a state where housing supply and demand are so far out of whack that house prices are far beyond their actual worth, it’s hard to see how these condos will do anything to alleviate the housing crisis. I mean, really, half a million and more for a glorified apartment? Are you kidding me?
The Chaos of Uncoordinated Ugly
One thing I’ve learned in doing web and graphic design work is that it’s best to offer clients alternatives. And not simply variations on the same theme, but real, different alternatives. Clients love this. It lets them compare and contrast their options, examine their own needs in greater detail, and actively involves them in the process. Sometimes it even leads to unexpected directions, with results surpassing what was initially proposed.
However, I get the impression that Mr. Champion’s South Sepulveda development is the only option being offered to the community. While I understand that the city sat on his proposal for some time, and he gave up until the city finally came around, that hardly matters. The discussion so far is an either/or: either accept Mr. Champion’s plan or suffer a chaos of uncoordinated ugly.
There Are Alternatives
But this is a false choice, and there are other ways to bring much-needed change to South Sepulveda without horribly drastic measures. It’s called urban planning. The city can develop a General Master Plan that, alongside zoning, permitting, etc., sets out guidelines for the gradual redevelopment of South Sepulveda. In essence, these guidelines could require any remodels and new construction to adhere to standards involving everything from aesthetics to accessibility and the quality of infrastructure such as lighting, plumbing, etc. The General Master Plan would also provide the means to coordinate the redevelopment of many businesses and smaller developers, even if that work doesn’t occur at the same time.
Also, Design Review Boards could be established to ensure a consistency of design quality, balancing the needs of an overall vision of the area with the distinctiveness of individual projects. And Requests for Proposals can be issued to teams of architects and developers. After an evaluation, a short list of candidates could be presented to the community for real discussion and debate.
(This risk isn’t far-fetched, given Mr. Champion’s past projects. While they certainly have the gloss of professional design, they also exhibit a singularly artless, conformist design that stifles rather than represents any distinctive community spirit.)
By analogy, we have an alternative that uses a scalpel to improve the neighborhood instead of crates of dynamite. Those properties that are unused or belong to businesses on their way out can be bought up and developed. But those businesses that are successful can be left alone. Better yet: if these businesses are just successful enough to float, but don’t have the capital to leave their outdated cocoons, then perhaps financial strategies could be developed to help them become the butterflies they really are.
Risk of Homogenous Design
When looking at developments like the partially empty Howard Hughes Promenade, the recently completed Playa del Rey, or anything done by the mighty, mighty Irvine Co., the shortcomings of a single-developer model of planning come into view; homogenous design and a cookie-cutter, top-down vision that imposes itself on the community, with mixed-results. It seems reasonable to me that this will not be any different with Mr. Champion’s development of South Sepulveda. (The risk of homogenous design is, I think, particularly plausible given Mr. Champion’s past projects. While they certainly have the gloss of professional design, they also exhibit a singularly artless, conformist style that stifles rather than represents any distinctive community spirit.) But by developing a General Master Plan with architects and extensive input from the community, and allowing the community itself to drive the work, we can have, instead, a process by which South Sepulveda shapes itself from the bottom up in an organic fashion.
With many reasons to resist Mr. Champion’s development proposal, the one that sticks out the most is still this: it’s easy to say that this won’t be a “win-win situation for everyone,” particularly when you aren’t the loser in the deal. It’s easy to say that some businesses will just “drop over the horizon” when it’s not your business being dropped. But while it’s certainly possible that Mr. Champion would lose sleep over the sacrifices necessary for his project, I seriously doubt his bank account will.
What we need is an honest discussion, because there really are different ways of redeveloping a neighborhood, beyond Mr. Champion’s proposals, to make it alive with community, business, and all that other good stuff. So how about keeping those guns drawn for just a bit longer while we consider the possibilities?
