The Downtown Problem

Nicolai Ouroussoff’s “A Core Dilemma” (Aug. 18) failed to mention a major hurdle to the rebirth of downtown Los Angeles: The north-south one-way street patterns on the west side of the area. I can’t tell you how many times I have been told that “I won’t come back ... it’s too hard to get around.”

Just try to get from the 110 Freeway to the Convention Center in a direct fashion. The city Department of Transportation will cluck that we have “streetcar-wide streets” and that something has to be done. However, the solution creates evening traffic jams that madden drivers and put pedestrians at risk.

JACK KYSER

Chief economist, Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

Los Angeles

*

Eli Broad deftly and succinctly punctures L.A.’s pretensions of being a “great” city or even much of a city at that. Absent a mythical and elusive “vital core” and a transportation system to link it to outlying areas, L.A. will remain what it is: the biggest small town in the world.

WILLIAM BAUMAN

Van Nuys

*

While I appreciate Nicolai Ouroussoff’s examination of the difficulties faced by those trying to figure out what to do about downtown, he seems to make the same mistake as a lot of those he criticizes. A good downtown isn’t lively because of buildings, it’s lively because of streets.

I work at 4th and Broadway, at the bottom of Bunker Hill, and go up to Grand Avenue frequently to visit the museums, theaters and restaurants. The most obvious difference between the two is that the street life on Broadway is facilitated by shops open to the broad sidewalks. Sure, a lot of the merchandise is tacky, but people walk there, talk there, interact there.

Compare that with what’s going on at the top of the hill. The new cathedral demonstrates the problem--pedestrians brave enough to walk anywhere walk beside cold, stone walls. Maybe, if they can make it safely inside, there will be a wonderful experience, as there is at MOCA, or the Taper, or many of the restaurants. But a city should be more than discrete experiences separated by car trips.

Until the folks developing downtown L.A. understand how important street life is, the problems Ouroussoff outlines will continue.

DAVID LINK

Pasadena

*

I would love to sell our townhouse in the San Fernando Valley and buy a loft in the downtown area, and experience the urban culture that could be a possibility--if only those who are planning actually plan.

It would be nice to walk to a mass transit depot and ride to my job as an aerospace quality engineer in the Santa Clarita Valley. But will there be sufficient mass transit? Will there be any mass transit? Or do I drive? Oh, wait, I forgot. I live in the city of Los Angeles, the land of the CMTP (convoluted mass transit plan).

What else prevents me? For one, a planned, viable infrastructure. Are there plans for a supermarket or a local grocer? A department store? Will there be doctors and dentists? Museums, architectural schools, music centers and the planned parks are nice, but they will not support a community. They are but the frosting.

This “build it and they will come” philosophy has overlooked the obvious: the everyday needs of the hopeful resident. There is a huge difference between being developers and being builders of a community. And you wonder why the secessionist movements thrive?

D.W. JENKS

Reseda