DOCSLIB.ORG

The State of Highland Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The State of Highland Park THE STATE OF HIGHLAND PARK A REPORT PRESENTED TO THE HISTORIC JADIE WASILCO HIGHLAND PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL KATE LEFKOWITZ DECEMBER 2013 STEVEN KATIGBAK Acknowledgments This report was the product of a quarter-long graduate course, Urban Planning 214: Neighborhood Analysis, offered by the Department of Urban & Regional Planning at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. We would like to thank Professor Paul Ong and Teaching Assistant Chhandara Pech for facilitating the course and providing invaluable feedback on the development our report. We would also like to thank the recipient of this report, the Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council, specifically the following individuals who have been a generous resource to our group: Monica Alcaraz, Fernando Villa, and Antonio Castillo. The authors are solely responsible for the contents of this report. Table of Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 1 Intent, Purpose, Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 1 Brief Description of Data and Analysis ...................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Part I: Background ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Neighborhood History ............................................................................................................................... 4 Contemporary Overview + Zoning ............................................................................................................ 5 Boundaries + Operationalizing Boundaries into Tracts for Analyses ........................................................ 8 Population Trends by Race/Ethnicity ........................................................................................................ 9 Part II: Demographics ................................................................................................................................. 13 Age .......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Nativity ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 Language ................................................................................................................................................ 14 Family & Non-Family Households ........................................................................................................... 14 Family Household Size ........................................................................................................................... 15 Part III: Socioeconomic Status .................................................................................................................... 17 Educational Attainment ........................................................................................................................... 17 Labor Force Participation Rate ............................................................................................................... 18 Unemployment Rate ............................................................................................................................... 18 Full-Time Full Year Workers ................................................................................................................... 18 Class of Worker ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Median Annual Earnings ......................................................................................................................... 20 Income & Poverty .................................................................................................................................... 20 Use of Public Programs .......................................................................................................................... 21 Part IV: Housing and Transportation ........................................................................................................... 23 Households by Tenure ............................................................................................................................ 23 Age of Housing ........................................................................................................................................ 25 Units in Structure ..................................................................................................................................... 26 Housing Tenure ....................................................................................................................................... 26 Home Values ........................................................................................................................................... 27 Monthly Housing Costs ........................................................................................................................... 28 Housing Burden ...................................................................................................................................... 29 Vehicle Ownership .................................................................................................................................. 30 Commute Patterns .................................................................................................................................. 31 Figure 22. Where Residents Commute to Work ......................................................................................... 32 Part V: Neighborhood Economic Base ....................................................................................................... 35 Recent Employment Trends.................................................................................................................... 36 Spatial Location of Jobholders ................................................................................................................ 38 Jobholders by Industry ............................................................................................................................ 38 Jobholders by Educational Attainment .................................................................................................... 41 Jobholders Earnings ............................................................................................................................... 43 Jobholders by Race ................................................................................................................................ 44 Jobholders by Ethnicity ........................................................................................................................... 45 Jobholders by Age .................................................................................................................................. 46 Jobholders by Sex ................................................................................................................................... 47 Preliminary Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 48 References .................................................................................................................................................. 50 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 52 Description of Data Sources and Data Items .......................................................................................... 52 Variable Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 55 Census Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 61 List of Tables and Figures Figure 1. Current Zoning Map ....................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Historic Preservation Overlay Zone ............................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. Race/Ethnicity (2010) .................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4. Race/Ethnicity Changes in Highland Park from 1980 to 2010 .................................................... 10 Figure 5. Age Distribution ............................................................................................................................ 13 Table 1. Nativity Status ............................................................................................................................... 14 Table 2. Definition of Household Types ...................................................................................................... 14 Figure 6.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) List City Declared Monuments
    Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) List City Declared Monuments No. Name Address CHC No. CF No. Adopted Community Plan Area CD Notes 1 Leonis Adobe 23537 Calabasas Road 08/06/1962 Canoga Park - Winnetka - 3 Woodland Hills - West Hills 2 Bolton Hall 10116 Commerce Avenue & 7157 08/06/1962 Sunland - Tujunga - Lake View 7 Valmont Street Terrace - Shadow Hills - East La Tuna Canyon 3 Plaza Church 535 North Main Street and 100-110 08/06/1962 Central City 14 La Iglesia de Nuestra Cesar Chavez Avenue Señora la Reina de Los Angeles (The Church of Our Lady the Queen of Angels) 4 Angel's Flight 4th Street & Hill Street 08/06/1962 Central City 14 Dismantled May 1969; Moved to Hill Street between 3rd Street and 4th Street, February 1996 5 The Salt Box 339 South Bunker Hill Avenue (Now 08/06/1962 Central City 14 Moved from 339 Hope Street) South Bunker Hill Avenue (now Hope Street) to Heritage Square; destroyed by fire 1969 6 Bradbury Building 300-310 South Broadway and 216- 09/21/1962 Central City 14 224 West 3rd Street 7 Romulo Pico Adobe (Rancho 10940 North Sepulveda Boulevard 09/21/1962 Mission Hills - Panorama City - 7 Romulo) North Hills 8 Foy House 1335-1341 1/2 Carroll Avenue 09/21/1962 Silver Lake - Echo Park - 1 Elysian Valley 9 Shadow Ranch House 22633 Vanowen Street 11/02/1962 Canoga Park - Winnetka - 12 Woodland Hills - West Hills 10 Eagle Rock Eagle Rock View Drive, North 11/16/1962 Northeast Los Angeles 14 Figueroa (Terminus), 72-77 Patrician Way, and 7650-7694 Scholl Canyon Road 11 The Rochester (West Temple 1012 West Temple Street 01/04/1963 Westlake 1 Demolished February Apartments) 14, 1979 12 Hollyhock House 4800 Hollywood Boulevard 01/04/1963 Hollywood 13 13 Rocha House 2400 Shenandoah Street 01/28/1963 West Adams - Baldwin Hills - 10 Leimert City of Los Angeles May 5, 2021 Page 1 of 60 Department of City Planning No.
    [Show full text]
  • Bow Tie Yard Lofts Project Initial Study
    City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Major Projects & Environmental Analysis Section City Hall 200 N. Spring Street, Room 750 Los Angeles, CA 90012 INITIAL STUDY Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan Area Bow Tie Yard Lofts Project Case Number: ENV-2016-2862-EIR Project Location: 2750-2800 W. Casitas Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90039 Council District: 1, Gilbert A. Cedillo Project Description: The Applicant proposes the development of a mixed-use project in the Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan area that would consist of five buildings with a total of 419 multi-family residential units (approximately 423,872 square feet) and approximately 64,000 square feet of commercial space. The 5.7-acre Project Site is located at the terminus of Casitas Avenue in Glassell Park in Northeast Los Angeles. The Los Angeles River is adjacent to the Project Site’s southern boundary line, and the Glendale Freeway (SR-2) is located to the north and west of the Project Site. The existing zoning designation of the Project Site is [Q]PF-1-CDO-RIO. Existing on-site uses, including a light manufacturing/warehouse/film production building (approximately 117,000 square feet) and its associated surface parking, would be demolished as part of the Proposed Project. The proposed residential units would include a combination of 119 studios, 220 one-bedroom, and 80 two-bedroom units in four buildings ranging from five to six stories (60 to 81 feet above grade). Eleven percent of the base-density residential units (approximately 35 units) would be reserved as Very Low Income Units.
    [Show full text]
  • 17-Unit Small Lot Subdivision Development Opportunity in Los Angeles’ Eagle Rock Neighborhood
    4035 EAGLE ROCK BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CA 90065 17-unit small lot subdivision development opportunity in Los Angeles’ Eagle Rock neighborhood. CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLAIMER The information contained in the following Marketing Brochure is proprietary and strictly confidential. It is intended to be reviewed only by the party receiving it from Marcus & Millichap and should not be made available to any other person or entity without the written consent of Marcus & Millichap. This Marketing Brochure has been prepared to provide summary, unverified information to prospective purchasers, and to establish only a preliminary level of interest in the subject property. The information contained herein is not a substitute for a thorough due diligence investigation. Marcus & Millichap has not made any investigation, and makes no warranty or representation, with respect to the income or expenses for the subject property, the future projected financial performance of the property, the size and square footage of the property and improvements, the presence or absence of contaminating substances, PCB’s or asbestos, the compliance with State and Federal regulations, the physical condition of the improvements thereon, or the financial condition or business prospects of any tenant, or any tenant’s plans or intentions to continue its occupancy of the subject property. The information contained in this Marketing Brochure has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable; however, Marcus & Millichap has not verified, and will not verify, any of the information contained herein, nor has Marcus & Millichap conducted any investigation regarding these matters and makes no warranty or representation whatsoever regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information provided.
    [Show full text]
  • 20) Medium Clubs (20-40) Large Clubs (41+) Award Name Small
    Rotary District 5260 2006-07 Awards Program CLUB SERVICE Small Clubs (<20) Medium Clubs (20-40) Large Clubs (41+) Antelope Valley Sunrise Bishop Sunrise Bishop Atwater Silverlake Sunrise Canoga Park Burbank Burbank Sunrise La Cañada Flintridge Glendale Calabasas Lancaster Glendale Sunrise Crescenta Valley Lancaster Sunrise Granada Hills Northeast Los Angeles Mammoth Lakes Sunrise Lancaster West Northridge/Chatsworth Mid San Fernando Valley Mammoth Lakes Palmdale North Hollywood Santa Clarita Valley Rosamond North San Fernando Valley Woodland Hills Santa Clarita Sunrise Studio City-Sherman Oaks Sun Valley Tarzana Encino Sunland-Tujunga Van Nuys Universal City-Sunrise Warner Center Award Name Small Club Winner Medium Club Winner Large Club Winner Best Overall Club Service Award Antelope Valley Sunrise Lancaster Rotary Lancaster West 2nd Place Overall Service Atwater Silverlake Sunrise Warner Center Glendale Sunrise 3rd Place Overall Service Santa Clarita Sunrise Bishop Sunrise Granada Hills Superior Avenue of Service (best single project) SCS - Hurrican Fundraiser Lancaster - Reverse raffle $12K Lancaster-W auction $50K &19 PHF 2nd Place Service Project (2nd best single project) ATS - 8 PHF Tarzana - 7 New member Granada Hills - Bowling $13K 3rd Place Service Project (3 best single project) Palmdale - Fireworks fundraiser MSFV - Local 300 - Scholarships GSR - 16 New members CinAC / Golf $12K Stand-Out Public Relations Award ASSRC - PR/Bulletin/Website Lancaster - Antelope Valley Fair Lancaster-W Lobster fest & Radio broadcast Perfect Partnership
    [Show full text]
  • Health Atlas for the City of Los Angeles
    Prevalence of Childhood Obesity by Community Plan Area (2010) ¨¦§5 Sylmar Granada Hills Health Atlas SAN Fast Food RestaurantFERNANDO Rate per 10,000 Residents June 2013 |ÿ118 Pacoima Motor Vehicle Crashes with Pedestrians and BicyclistsChatsworth Tujunga Northridge ¨¦§5 Sun Valley for the City210 of Los Angeles ¨¦§ Canoga Park Reseda Van Nuys BURBANK 5 |ÿ170 ! ¨¦§ Warner North Center Hollywood ¨¦§!!5 |ÿ2 Encino Modified Retail Food Environment Index Sylmar ! !! ! ! PASADENA !!!! £101 !!! |ÿ134! ¤ Sherman Granada ! Oaks Hills ! ! ! GLENDALE CALABASAS Studio City Universal City !! ! !! Griffith Ü Park SAN FERNANDO Ü ¨¦§405 ! ¤£66 Ü Ü ! ! ¤£101 Ü Northeast Hollywood ! Bel Air - Beverly Crest ! Los Angeles Ü 5 ! ! ! ¨¦§ ! |ÿ118 ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !!! Sylmar ! !!! ! Ü !WEST HOLLYWOOD ! ! ! Pacoima! ! Silver Ü BEVERLY! Lake Elysian ALHAMBRA Ü !!!! !!!!! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! Granada HILLS ! Park! ! ! ! Ü Chatsworth ! ! Tujunga Ü ! ! ! ! !!! !!!!! !!!!! !! ! Hills ! ! !!!! ! UCLA!! ! ! !!! !!! !! Wilshire!! ! !!! ! ! Ü ! !! Downtown ! Koreatown Los Angeles 10 Ü ! Westwood Westlake ! ¨¦§ !! ! Ü ! !!! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! Pacific Century ! City !! !! ! ! ! Ü Palisades MONTEREY PARK !! SAN ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! |ÿ1 ! !!!!!!! Sylmar! FERNANDO SANTA!!! ! Boyle ! Northridge! |ÿ60 ! MONICA ! Heights !! ! !! !!! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! Granada! ! ! 10 West Adams ! !! ! ! ! ! ¨¦§ ! Ü ! ! ! !!! Ü Ü Hills ! ! ! USC ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! ! ! Ü Ü Ü ! Palms/ ! ! ! !! !! !! ! Mar Vista/ ! Sun Valley Ü Ü ! CULVER Lemert ! ! ÿ118 Ü Del Rey! Baldwin !! Southeast ! 5 | CITY ! Park
    [Show full text]
  • COMMUNITY RESOURCE GUIDE for Families/Caregivers of Children Ages 0-5
    COMMUNITY RESOURCE GUIDE for Families/Caregivers of Children Ages 0-5 Serving the communities of: Eagle Rock, Highland Park, Garvanza, Glassell Park, Mt. Washington, & Cypress Park Revised Jun 2016 Funded by First 5 LA. INTRODUCTION Choose Health LA Kids is a partnership between the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health and 20 funded agencies throughout LA County working towards reducing childhood obesity among children ages 0-5. Funded by First 5 LA, Choose Health LA Kids’ funded agencies are engaging the community through a variety of activities including grocery store tours, food demonstrations, parent education, and linking community resources to families with children ages 0-5. WHAT YOU WILL FIND The Community Resource Guide for Families/Caregivers of Children Ages 0-5 is a comprehensive publication focusing on Los Angeles County. The Guide is divided into five sections: First 5 LA Resources Nutrition and Healthy Lifestyle Resources Physical Activity Resources Free/Low-Cost Resources for Pregnant/Post-Partum Women Social and Health Services Resources TABLE OF CONTENTS First 5 LA Resources ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ pg 3 Perinatal and Parent Support Nutrition and Physical Activity Oral Health Housing Best Start Early Care and Education Health Coverage and 211 LA County Vision Nutrition and Healthy Lifestyle Resources _______________________________________________________________________________ pg 7 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Community
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Los Angeles (NELA) Hillsides Work Program
    Northeast Los Angeles (NELA) Hillsides Work Program What is the Northeast Los Angeles (NELA) Hillsides Work Program? The NELA Hillsides Work Program is the directive that resulted out of the adoption of the Interim Con- trol Ordinance (ICO) by the Los Angeles City Council in December 2006. The purpose of the NELA Hillsides Work Program is to review and assess issues such as the minimization of grading and soil erosion, protection of ridgelines and landforms, protection of plant life and wildlife, appropriate scales of hillside development, and, adequate access for residents and emergency vehicles in the Northeast Los Angeles hillside areas of Mount Olympus, Paradise Hill, Rose Hill, El Sereno, and Monterey Hills. The goals of the NELA Hillsides Work Program are to identify issues and opportunities in the hillside communities, set objectives, and develop land use regulations that promote policies and objectives of the Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan for development in the hillsides that: • are appropriate in scale and minimally disruptive of the natural terrain, vegetation, water courses and wildlife; • ensure that future developments improve the identity and appearance of neighborhoods and communities through scale, height, bulk, setbacks, design, and landscaping parameters; • give consideration for the steepness of the topography and geological stability in any proposal for development; • ensure the availability of adequate infrastructure and access to emergency services; and, • promote the protection of natural resources. Focus Group* Purpose: • The focus groups help identify the issues and opportunities related to hillside development and conservation. • The focus groups explore ways to promote good planning principles by soliciting community input that will be used to develop land use regulations which will promote appropriate development in the Northeast Los Angeles hillsides.
    [Show full text]
  • Concentrated Poverty Neighborhoods in Los Angeles
    Concentrated Poverty Neighborhoods in Los Angeles Michael Matsunaga Economic Roundtable Executive Summary Poverty adversely affects the lives of Los Angeles residents as well as the City as a whole. Among other things, poverty has a direct financial impact on local government because of above-average per capita costs for municipal services related to police and fire protection, courts, education, and other services in poor neighborhoods. Nationally, the number of neighborhoods marked by concentrated poverty and the number of people living in such acutely poor neighborhoods has declined. Los Angeles is one of only two major U.S. metropolitan areas in which concentrated poverty became more prevalent between 1990 and 2000. This analysis of concentrated poverty (census tracts in which 40 percent or more of households were below the poverty level in 2000) found that neighborhoods with concentrated poverty are clustered in a corridor extending from downtown-adjacent neighborhoods to South Los Angeles. Eight percent of the tracts in the City have concentrated levels of poverty. These tracts are home to 15 percent of all the City’s households in poverty. Residents of concentrated poverty neighborhoods (CPNs) are disproportionately Latino and Black. They also are largely foreign-born and face language barriers. The proportion of residents in CPNs who are working-age is comparable to that in the City as a whole, but residents of CPNs are less likely to be employed and more likely to be out of the labor force. The wide-spread impacts of concentrated poverty are revealed by a variety of indicators of social well being. CPNs are 63 percent more adversely impacted than the City as a whole as measured by: à Housing insecurity à Young adults at-risk à Immobility à Maternal health outcomes à Educational attainment à Public safety à School performance There is a much higher concentration of construction workers among CPN residents than in the overall City or County of Los Angeles.
    [Show full text]
  • California the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City
    HUD FY2010 Community Challenge Planning Grants Summaries California The Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles will be awarded $2,250,000. The Northeast Los Angeles (NELA) Collaborative will bring together the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles, the Department of City Planning, and the Department of Transportation to create an implementation strategy for the redevelopment of 2,200 acres of the Glendale Narrows portion of the Los Angeles River, guided by the policy and vision of the 2007 LA River Revitalization Master Plan. This effort will include updating the 1990s NELA community plan to include consideration of land use, especially industrial and commercial zoning refinement, creation of integrated mobility hubs to support carpooling, bicycle use, and light rail ridership, perform a feasibility study for the creation of a regional food hub, and convene a working group of business leaders and workforce development professionals to oversee a needs assessment and develop training curricula for workforce development. The project will focus on proactive outreach to communities who would not normally participate in the planning process. Anticipated Project Benefits: The grant will allow the NELA Collaborative to develop a technology tool that measures the benefits of redevelopment. Grow key sectors, create localized family-supporting jobs, support small businesses, bolster regional food security. Project Highlights: INCREASE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT: The project will focus on proactive outreach to disadvantaged
    [Show full text]
  • Real Estate Portfolio
    PORTFOLIO Real Estate Development 2014 Table of Contents Organizational Overview…………….3 Eliminating Eastside Blight …………...4 In Construction ……………………...5 Completed Rental……………….........9 Completed Homeownership………..23 Predevelopment……………………..28 Awards & Recognition………….........34 Completed Rental Development: Lorena Terrace 2 Organizational Overview East LA Community Corporation (ELACC) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit community development corporation based in Boyle Heights, Los Angeles. Since 1995 ELACC has been dedicated to harnessing housing and community development resources for the benefit of low-income residents of Boyle Heights and Unincorporated East Los Angeles. ELACC's vision is simple - to help the members of a 95% Latino community create an environment that supports a productive, healthy, and fulfilling life. ELACC’s mission is to advocate for economic and social justice in Boyle Heights and East Los Angeles by building grassroots leadership, developing affordable housing and neighborhood assets, and providing access to economic development opportunities for low and moderate income families. ELACC has leveraged and raised over $281 million dollars to build and maintain affordable rental and homeownership units for families. As of today, 87 single family homes and 473 rental units have been developed, including 208 units that are currently in construction and another131units that are in predevelopment. Homes in Boyle Heights 3 Eliminating Eastside Blight ELACC improves Boyle Heights and East Los Angeles by acquiring blighted or vacant sites and then renovates the existing property or builds new housing. The blighted sites are often brought to ELACC’s attention from local community members who make up the foundation of the community organizing department. Lorena Terrace is built on a site previously declared unsuitable for construction due to its steep grade.
    [Show full text]
  • Dignity Health Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center 2019 COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT
    Dignity Health Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center 2019 COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT October 2019 1 Dignity Health Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment Table of Contents Dignity Health Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center .................................................. 1 2019 COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT ......................................................................... 1 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... 1 I. Acknowledgments and Authors ......................................................................................... 5 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 6 Consultants ............................................................................................................................................. 6 II. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 7 2019 Prioritized Significant Health Needs: .............................................................................................. 9 III. BACKGROUND & METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 10 Purpose and Key Partners ................................................................................................................... 11 Glendale
    [Show full text]
  • INITIAL STUDY Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan Area Bow
    City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Major Projects & Environmental Analysis Section City Hall 200 N. Spring Street, Room 750 Los Angeles, CA 90012 INITIAL STUDY Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan Area Bow Tie Yard Lofts Project Case Number: ENV-2016-2862-EIR Project Location: 2750-2800 W. Casitas Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90039 Council District: 1, Gilbert A. Cedillo Project Description: The Applicant proposes the development of a mixed-use project in the Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan area that would consist of five buildings with a total of 419 multi-family residential units (approximately 423,872 square feet) and approximately 64,000 square feet of commercial space. The 5.7-acre Project Site is located at the terminus of Casitas Avenue in Glassell Park in Northeast Los Angeles. The Los Angeles River is adjacent to the Project Site’s southern boundary line, and the Glendale Freeway (SR-2) is located to the north and west of the Project Site. The existing zoning designation of the Project Site is [Q]PF-1-CDO-RIO. Existing on-site uses, including a light manufacturing/warehouse/film production building (approximately 117,000 square feet) and its associated surface parking, would be demolished as part of the Proposed Project. The proposed residential units would include a combination of 119 studios, 220 one-bedroom, and 80 two-bedroom units in four buildings ranging from five to six stories (60 to 81 feet above grade). Eleven percent of the base-density residential units (approximately 35 units) would be reserved as Very Low Income Units.
    [Show full text]