Grand Central Market Place: Still the people's place?

There have been a series of articles in the Los Angeles Times about the proposed rehabilitation to the Grand Central Market Place. The Grand Central Market Place is located in the historic core of Downtown Los Angeles on Broadway. The market is slated for rehabbing by the Yellin Development Company in an effort to adjust to the area's changing demographics. As part of the project, the market will be cleaned up and provide a greater mix of offerings. In essence, turn the market into a hotel lobby or living room space. Developers claim that the proposed project is in response to the changing demographics of Downtown Los Angeles. Indeed, the population of the area has changed. In 2000, about eighteen percent of the area's residents had four-year college degrees or higher. Now that number has increase by over half to twenty-seven percent. The number of residents who make more than $125,000 has doubled since 2000 and number of those making between $60,000 and $125,000 has grown two-thirds. Also, the racial and ethnic makeup has changed; there are proportionally more Caucasians and Asians then African-Americans and Latinos. Numbers don't lie. Based on recent experience, Downtown Los Angeles is rapidly becoming a West Coast version of Manhattan. Is this a good thing? Maybe? Is The Grand Central Market Place, as it is now, part of the draw to Downtown Los Angeles or would a gentrified version be more palatable? The market has always been geared to the working class. In fact its placement on Broadway is no accident because it located near transit lines, making it easy for people coming home from work or school to do their shopping or pick up a treat. When the building where the market is located first opened in 1917, Homer Laughlin, the owner, set out to build a place where blue-collar neighbors could meet each other and shop. In short a real community orientated place. Mission accomplished. It has also been the place where candidates for office could shake hands with the common man (potential voter). However, the idea of a wine cheese bar and a kitchen classroom a la Sur La Table brings to mind a very different clientele. Instead of the blue-collar worker, a gentrified venue would attract a more upscale consumer. This would mean landlords would need to put in place businesses that would be more at home in more affluent parts of Los Angeles than the lived in-ness of the market place. In turn, it would result in higher rents and drive out long-time vendors and their customers. You have to ask yourself, in the wake of this proposed project and the proposed gentrification of Jordan Downs (see previous post) is the blue-collar worker, a staple of the American mythology becoming a relic confined to the dustbin of history? Is the blue-collar worker being redefined? Why are developers and city officials so anxious to meet the needs of the more affluent instead of focusing on more immediate needs in the surrounding communities? Is it a form of trickle down economics? Who knows?