Balancing Past and Present

Wilmington’s Banning Museum, once home to Phineas Banning, the mastermind behind the Los Angeles Harbor, is a nationally recognized historic site and the only real tourist attraction in the economically struggling port community.

The four-story wood frame mansion is, by all accounts, the finest example of 19th century Greek revival architecture in Southern California. Its gilded mirrors, Oriental rugs and carved mahogany furniture provide glimpses of upper-class Victorian life that sharply contrast with the neighborhoods nearby.

That genteel setting, however, is now the focus of a debate involving the limits of historic preservation and the strains between the central city government of Los Angeles and its far-flung communities.

The 1864 house, restored from decay in 1970, stands in the center of Wilmington’s most popular park, a remnant of a huge estate. Because Banning Park is so bucolic, many Wilmington leaders support a city plan to build a drop-in senior citizen center there, within sight of the mansion. The proposal is intended to alleviate overcrowding at the existing center.

Some residents and preservationists, however, are outraged. They say a senior center should not be placed at such a historic site--even if the new facility is designed to match the mansion’s Victorian flavor.

“The argument goes, ‘Would you put a senior center in Mount Vernon?’ ” said Jeffrey Herr, director of the Banning Museum. Advocates argue that the area proposed for the senior center is only a small corner of the 20-acre park, a space rarely used except for an occasional game of horseshoes. They also point out that tennis courts, a baseball field, a playground and a community center have been there for years.

They maintain that history must be weighed against the immediate social needs of a community sandwiched between seven oil refineries and the Los Angeles Harbor.

Wilmington’s current senior center is in a dilapidated 3,000-square-foot building, surrounded by discount furniture stores and taquerias in the community’s ailing business district.

The park, in contrast, is an oasis of well-manicured lawns, eucalyptus and magnolia trees and, of course, the museum, which is owned and partly funded by the city of Los Angeles but also receives significant support from a private group, Friends of Banning Mansion.

But the park also shows signs of a community in need. Across from the museum, the Banning Recreational Center has been trying for years to get lights fixed on its baseball field and is desperately in need of sports equipment.

Such complaints, along with a desire for self-governance, have fueled the current campaign for Wilmington and its neighboring Harbor communities to secede. Wilmington, a working-class community that joined Los Angeles in 1909, is 30 miles from City Hall and is connected to the rest of the city only by a narrow strip of land known as Harbor Gateway.

But for some residents, the senior center is a sign that the city is finally taking notice of them. “We seniors had been asking for a center for years. They researched eight sites in the community, and this was the safest and best area,” said Gertrude Schwaab, a leader of the movement to build the center.

“But we wanted to have it blend in with the Banning Mansion. We didn’t want it to stand out like a sore thumb,” she said.

According to the city’s plan, the proposed $3.1-million center, more than three times the size of the current one, would sit in front of the existing recreation buildings on the northeast side of the park. The city would use synthetic wood to frame the building in a Greek revival style similar to that of the mansion.

Opponents agree a new senior center is needed but want it elsewhere to preserve the park’s flavor.

“Those [centers] have their place,” said Wilmington resident Jose Arroyo, “but they shouldn’t go in the park.”

A leading opponent is Frank O’Brien, a San Pedro resident and candidate for the Los Angeles city council seat representing Wilmington and other Harbor areas. In April, O’Brien filed a lawsuit alleging that the city had conducted inadequate analysis of the project’s impact. Last month, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the city, but O’Brien said he will appeal the decision.

“Locating a modern building that’s not related in any way to the Banning property just doesn’t make sense,” he said.

O’Brien said the bigger issue is piecemeal planning by the city of Los Angeles and about Wilmington getting shortchanged.

“Wilmington has been neglected for years,” he said.

Barry Glickman, chief of staff for the area’s current councilman, Rudy Svorinich Jr., said finding an alternative site would be too expensive and time-consuming. “If O’Brien continues to [sue], it’s the people of Wilmington who are going to suffer.”

Some experts say preservation is about reaching a compromise between retaining history and meeting community needs.

Ken Bernstein, director of preservation issues for the Los Angeles Conservancy, said, “We don’t view historic preservation and revitalization as in any way in conflict.”