Which Way Civic Center?

http://www.planningreport.com/2015/06/02/parker-center-sparks-las-civic-center-master-plan

Parker Center with Los Angeles City Hall in the background
dornsife.usc.edu

Hello Everyone:

Today we are returning to the subject of Parker Center.  Rather than spend time telling you why it should be spared the wrecking, yours truly would like report how it sparked a conversation about Los Angeles's Civic Center. Our guide is The Planning Report (http://www.planningreport.com) which presented an edited selection of a recent gathering of civic leaders and land-use experts to consider, whether or not, Parker Center should be saved.  The group consensus was an affirmative.  The gathering was convened at the suggestion of the American Institute of Architects  Los Angeles chapter's Director of Government and Public Affairs Will Wright. The meeting was moderated by TPR publisher David Abel and included: Los Angeles Office of Historic Resource Manager and Principal City Planner Ken Bernstein, Cultural Heritage Commissioner Vice President Gail Kennard, Los Angeles Conservancy Executive Director Linda Dishman, CBRE Senior Vice President Philip Sample, and Trust for Public Land California Co-Chair Dan Rosenfield.

Los Angeles Civic Center
studentreader.com

Will Wright's purpose for convening the meeting was to ask, where a civic conversation is happening about the future of Parker Center.  Mr. Wright was not clear on where the decision-making was taking place within Los Angeles.  He was "hoping to curate some more awareness so that more decisions can be shared with everybody."  Mr. Abel, asked Mr. Bernstein, ...given the purpose of this AIA-LA conversation, could you begin by sharing with us what votes the LA City Council's PLUM Committee meeting took recently regarding Parker Center?

Ken Bernstein replied that an application to designate Parker Center a historic-cultural landmark has been proposed to PLUM (Planning and Land Use Management) Committee.  The application was approved by the Cultural Heritage Commission a few months ago and is awaiting final approval by the full City Council.  Mr. Bernstein said, The nomination was first heard last week in committee.  Councilmember Huizar heard the item as committed of one...He expressed some support for further investigation of a partial preservation option, and asked our staff to come back this week with recommendations for perhaps a more limited Historic-Cultural Monument designation to portions of the building...

Los Angeles Civic Center Map
dornsife.usc.edu

Ken Bernstein also shared that in the interim, a procedural error was discovered.  The City Clerk processed a two week extension for the Council to take action on the matter, thus they actually relinquished jurisdiction over the nomination.  The end result was PLUM could not take action on the matter and the nomination expired.  However, Council member Huizar did announce in committee:.. he had introduced a new Council motion that would do two things:

First, it would direct the Bureau of Engineering and other departments to work on a new alternative to be included in the Parker Center EIR that would  look at a larger tower as part of the partial preservation option, potentially building on what is now the jail portion of the property.

The second part of his motion asked multiple city departments to begin work on, essentially, a Civic Center Master Plan.

He also announced a third element, which was not part of the of his written motion.  Once further analysis on the EIR and, presumably some work, on the Master Plan has been completed, he expressed his intention to ask either the Cultural Heritage Commission or our department to reinitiate the Historic-Cultural Monument application.

U.S. Federal Courthouse postcard
dornsife.usc.edu

Gail Kennard, the vice president of the Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Commission, voted in favor of saving Parker Center from the wrecking ball.  Ms. Kennard favors adaptive re-use (we love Ms. Kennard) because she sees it as a win-win situation for portions of the buildings to be conserved,...  Ms. Kennard favors a compromise solution but firmly believes,...it's important to preserve at least part of that building.

Linda Dishman, the Director of the L.A. Conservancy, shares Ms. Kennard's view that Parker Center should be saved.  Like we thought otherwise.  She also believes in seeking a win-win solution for property owners or clients and serving the needs of preservation.  Ms. Dishman stated, The EIR did identify a win-win solution-not quite the same square-footage of the new construction.  But I think there is now an opportunity to look at a fourth alternative for the site...

City Hall Poster
dornsife.usc.edu

Gail Kennard picked up the conversation by reminding the panelists of how the site Parker Center sits on used to be part of Little Tokyo (see "#SaveParkerCenter" May 27, 2015).  Ms. Kennard also believes Parker Center offers a tremendous opportunity to focus on the issue of urban law enforcement. Blogger's thoughts exactly.  Thank you Gail Kennard.

Will Wright, the Director of the AIA-LA Government and Public Affairs, suggested ...you can't really have an intelligent conversation about Parker Center without also having an intelligent conversation about the facility needs of the city and Civic Center itself...  Panel moderator David Abel asked Trust for Public Land California Co-Chair Dan Rosenfield to discuss the 1997 Civic Center Master Plan (suisman.com.site/wp-content/uploads/.../Civic_Center_Master_Plan.pdf).  Mr. Rosenfield summarized the plan:

The Ten-Minute Diamond Plan was the first Civic Center land use plan in about 30 years.  At that point, there was a question as to whether we even needed a Civic Center....The conclusion in 1997 was that, perhaps more than ever, given that the city is so diverse and dispersed, having certain symbols of our unity and democracy like the City Hall tower were perhaps more significant than before.  Then, after 9/11, I think the significance of a place to gather was reinforced...

Protestors outside Parker Center 1992
blogs.kcrw.com

Dan Rosenfield added his thoughts on the preservation of Parker Center:

First, the cultural dimension is quite fascinating and important, and should be considered.

The land-use dimension is tough.  Parker Center sits right in the middle of the block...We built a jail on one corner, and an emergency bunker...on a second corner, and then an underground parking garage on the third corner.  It's a very hard parcel to plan...

The third aspect is economics.  There's always been a tendency in government to overstate the cost of restoring historic buildings...In terms of the basic economics of running the business of government, I think the city needs to look objectively at the true cost of delivering some portion of delivering some portion of their million-feet space requirement in the existing Parker Center building.

Dan Rosenfield went on to suggest that looking at the city's space needs is a good starting point. Building commercial and institutional spaces all over the city is a very inefficient use of space.  He further suggests consolidating the location of city departments on single campus.  Before bringing all the city departments together, Mr. Rosenfield also suggests a city space should be undertaken and revisiting the Civic Center plan

Civic Center under construction
ahistoricalpanoramaoflosnagelesca.blogspot.com

CBRE Senior Vice President Philip Sample mentioned, There is a lot of Class A office space that is currently on the market for lease. If we completed a survey, we could locate a million square feet easily...The City could also look into some of the adaptive reuse buildings that are on the market for lease.  The Broadway Trade Center and the LA Times buildings could be logical plays...

Will Wright expressed some concern regarding City adding 1.1 million additional square feet of office space.  His concern centered around the economics of Downtown.  Mr. Wright said, The commercial vacancy rate here is not what it should be.  It should be much less than it is, so that we can inspire more investment in commercial offices right now...

Moderator David Abel asked Dan Rosenfield to comment how the 1997 master plan was realized, who sponsored it and how it was funded.

Lloyd Wright's plan for Los Angeles Civic Center
kcet.org

Dan Rosenfield responded:

The Civic Center Master Plan in '97 cost $250,000.  We hired Bill Fain, Roland Wiley, Steve Lewis, Doug Suisman, Charles Loveman, and a few others.

It was a city-county master plan, with the state and the federal government watching, and Metro, MWD, and LAUSD there occasionally, as well...

I think can we can now declare an interim victory.  The question, "Is the Civic Center still valid?" has been incontrovertibly underwritten.  Governments have consolidated and have built new buildings in the Civic Center.  The street environment still isn't what it could be, but the residential environment Downtown is much improved.

Hall of Justice
Downtown Los Angeles
dornsife.usc.edu

David Abel followed with a question about the scope of the master plan, ...if there were an update to the plan?  What should be the parameters of an updated study?  Mr. Rosenfield answered, There's a common thread here that says: We ought have the vision for the Civic Center before we make the decision about the Parker Center.

At the this point, Linda Dishman chimed in with her opinion on the master plan for the Civic Center.  Ms, Dishman said,

It's more complicated, too, because you've got the nomination for historic-cultural designation that's in the middle of this process.

The city could designate Parker Center and still tear it down...Making a decision about whether this meets the criteria for designation-which is how you're supposed to look at this-can happen separately form the whole Master Plan.  Certainly the Cultural Heritage Commission unanimously believes it does meet that criteria.

The Edison Building with a view of the Civic Center c.1930
waterandpower.org

David Abel followed up with the question, In addition to pressing the case for the designation, is the goal to press this case of doing an update to plan?

Linda Dishman enthusiastically responded, Absolutely.  The two are linked.  I just want to say that the nomination can proceed independently, because this plan could take a while.  Given that there was a technical issue as to why the nomination didn't go forward.,  I just want to make sure that we don't lose track of that.

Finally Mr. Rosenfield state that he believed ....there are three tracks that should be followed simultaneously.  If you do it sequentially, it'll take forever.

First, we do need to address the Parker Center building.  It's a challenge to come up with the best scheme for some degree of preservation.  If we can get 200,000 of the city's million square feet in that building for a decent price, that takes a bite of the need.  Add 300,000 feet on the jail portion of Parker site, and you're halfway there.

Second, look at the nature of office space that the city needs...Everyone in the private sector is going to what CBRE is doing  If you're not at your desk all day, maybe you shouldn't have desk...

Third, master planning.  One of the challenges with the Civic Center Master Plan is that there are at least six different entities that own land.  But the city does have five block, only two of which are optimized.  The city should do something with the MOCA-JANM site, with Mangrove, and the "Rafi Cohen" site... at 1st and Broadway.  The city has within its domain, and without even talking to other governments who are sovereign and independent, the challenge of  getting the best utilization out of that land.

This conversation highlights some of the many facets of historic preservation.  Historic preservation is not just about saving a single building, structure, landscape; it is about figuring out how said building can operate within the urban context.  Preservation planning is about "the highest and best use" of a resource.  All the opinions voiced in this enlightening conversation present a vision for Parker Center and the Los Angeles Civic Center of the future.  The question becomes "Which Way Civic Center?"