Posted by Mike (63.197.36.43) on January 24, 2002 at 21:17:31:
From: Ken Bernstein We worked to interest preservation-savvy private sector developers in stepping forward to play a role on this site: however, for years the problem (aside from the $80 million debt hole any project would have had to surmount) was the legal cloud over the property -- even if a private developer purchased the site, LAUSD still could have exercised its eminent domain powers and re-condemned the property. Few hotel or housing developers would feel comfortable with such a risk. Also be aware that even the last-minute attempt by developer Alan Casden to out-bid LAUSD prior to the settlement would not have resulted in preservation of the hotel: Casden's proposal was to demolish the Ambassador for high-density housing, and LAUSD threatened to go after the site nonetheless. However, it's also been clear for some time that LAUSD might end up with the whole property, so we've prepared for that possibility by conducting the reuse study you've seen summarized. Today, the Conservancy is simply responding to the very difficult and very real situation we find ourselves in: LAUSD has put more than $100 million of public money into the Ambassador property, and it is not in the hospitality or housing business: its need is to build 85 new schools in five years, and this is the Los Angeles neighborhood that has the greatest deficit of seats for school kids. It also has no other possible sites anywhere within several miles that will give them this much property (24 acres) -- to double-check LAUSD's claim, we even retained a commercial real estate broker last year to search for alternative sites in the area that might work for the District, but came up empty. And now that LAUSD has expended so many years (and so many careers) trying to acquire this particular site, it has no reason to sell -- and no one can force them to sell. We wish all of this weren't true, but it is. So, as hard as it has been to let go of our own hopes and dreams for the site, we've come to the difficult conclusion that the choice is really no longer grand hotel vs. school: that decision has been made. It's a choice between a new, sterile school campus vs. an inspiring, historic campus. What we in preservation call "adaptive reuse" -- using historic buildings for new purposes -- doesn't mean the building is lost to us. It can still serve as an anchor to a community, as a tangible piece of our history, and an inspiration to our future. The Wilshire District itself offers a great example of the benefits of adaptive reuse at Bullock's Wilshire: surely it's better that this Art Deco jewel remains standing in a new use, even as a law school building and library, than if the site had been cleared. Because the District needs seats at all grade levels, its stated goal is to put a kindergarten through 12th grade campus on this site. Having the equivalent of three schools on this site would even preclude utilizing any of the Wilshire frontage for commercial development, as the Wilshire Chamber has proposed. We're not supporting LAUSD's specific program for the site. We're just trying to show them, whatever their educational program ends up being, how they can meet their facilities goals in a better way by including preservation of one of the most historic buildings in Los Angeles. This is how the Conservancy works, pragmatically, persistently, and collaboratively, with government agencies and private sector developers all over the city: demonstrating how preservation makes good economic sense and results in better projects. The issue also isn't whether or not we trust LAUSD. We know that, in the District's hands, the Ambassador remains very much at risk, and so we intend to be vigorous in our advocacy. The Conservancy has sued the District once before, a decade ago, when it approved a project then to demolish the hotel for a high school. It's premature to speculate on what we might do if LAUSD is not prepared to collaborate this time, but we clearly believe saving the Ambassador is a very high priority. So, the bottom line is that we're all in for a difficult fight just to keep the Ambassador standing and to see it reused in a productive way. I hope that the Gaylord's tenants, who also obviously value Wilshire Boulevard's rich history, will stand up for preservation of this important site at the very least -- and, as we move forward, work to re-shape LAUSD's vision so that we all get a project that's the very best it can be. Ken Bernstein ................................................................. Ken, Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I have a fresh understanding of how little respect this city has for its past. Today at the Hollywood and Vine metro station, I saw another homage to the Brown Derby in the form of a badly-executed brown hat sculpture on a stalk supposedly used as an umbrella. Other representations can be found at Walt Disney World MGM Studios and at the Los Angeles Museum of Neon Art, where theyÕve kept the sign. There are nods to the Brown Derby everywhere, but the real thing is missing...ripped out for a sorely needed strip mall. Do people in this city only notice things once theyÕre gone forever? Where will the homage to the long-lost Ambassador Hotel be built? Six Flags over Georgia? A real city would have protected The Ambassador Hotel as a landmark upon its closing, regardless of how many architectural updates it may have suffered in an effort to modernize. And we canÕt blame Sammy Davis Jr. because heÕs dead. I do understand that we need schools, but in a city overflowing with tens of thousands of sad 70Õs stucco blunders and weed-infested parking lots, why victimize a lone diamond in the rough? If weÕre determined to dispose of the last green patches, why not level MacArthur Park? Homeless people have claimed the park as their own for years now. Why not gut Belmont Learning Center and start again? Why not use several of the mid-rise abandoned buildings downtown (I pass three on the way to Pershing Square every day)? How about The Coldwell Mortgage building on 6th and Vermont? When the commercial real estate broker the Conservancy hired went looking for potential properties, were they looking to design a 3 in 1 mega school, or were they scouting locations for normal individual schools? I canÕt believe he/she couldnÕt find room for the individual schools. If the LAUSD is so determined to flush money, they could afford to buy out several depressing apartment blocks and broken-glass littered parking lots. Use eminent domain for good instead of evil. Do they seriously need 24 acres for education? IÕve been in New York City for 7 years now and have seen playgrounds on rooftops and in shared public parks. They donÕt have the space to sprawl and ruin everything in their wake. As far as I can tell the children turn out just fine. If the LAUSD indeed has the property in a death-grip, why not fight to give the building Historical Landmark status NOW to prevent it from being touched? IÕd rather look at the ghostly shell until 2012 than deal with the demolition, construction, sterile architecture, and 7 billion kids keying cars, setting off alarms, breaking off antennas, and tagging my building because theyÕre bored. Three public schools and a defiled landmark. Guess IÕll give up on the Downtown corridor and keep moving West like everyone else. Mike McCabe
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:20:28 -0800
Thanks so much for your message. Since you raise a serious issue, I wanted to take a moment to respond in some detail. We at the Conservancy agree with you: we would prefer to see the Ambassador recapture its glory years as a renovated hotel once again. Or, we would certainly like to see it reused for housing, as you suggest. Indeed, last summer, the Conservancy organized an intensive charette (planning workshop) with the cooperation of the then-owners (Wilshire Center Marketplace) to explore these types of private-sector reuse options. We laid out a detailed plan showing how the ownership could reuse the hotel, particularly for housing, and yield a positive economic return through the use of tax credits and other historic preservation incentives.
Director of Preservation Issues
Los Angeles Conservancy