DOCSLIB.ORG

Zoning Code Evaluation Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Zoning Code Evaluation Report A New Zoning Code for a 21st Century Los Angeles To create livable communities, encourage sustainable development and foster economic vitality, we need a modern and user-friendly zoning code – we need to re:code LA. Zoning Code Evaluation Report Zoning-Code-Evaluation-Report.pdf Page 1 Printed 09/11/2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft March 07, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 Zoning-Code-Evaluation-Report.pdf Page 2 Printed 09/11/2014 2 | RE:Code LA Zoning Evaluation Report Draft March 07, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 Project Background 1 4. Transportation Choice 36 Basis of Analysis 2 4.1. Rethink Zoning Around Transit Stations 38 Community Outreach 3 4.2. Prepare a Comprehensive Set of Street and Block Standards 40 Code Drafting Steps 4 4.3. Rightsize the Code’s Approach to Parking 42 The Result 6 Next Steps 7 5. Jobs and Innovation 44 Report Organization 7 5.1. Create Industrial Sanctuaries to Meet Future Employment Needs 46 5.2. Prepare New Industrial Zones to Implement Community Plans 47 1. Distinct Neighborhoods 8 5.3. Rezone Industrial Land Only Where Necessary 48 1.1. Combine the Existing Residential Requirements into a New System 10 5.4. Enhance the Jobs Housing Balance 49 1.2. Continue to Protect Historic Resources and Established Neighborhoods 12 1.3. Address Impacts within Single-Family Residential Neighborhoods 13 6. A Strong Core 50 1.4. Enhance Multi-Family Design Standards 14 6.1. Make Downtown a More Complete Neighborhood 52 1.5. Improve the Transition Between Corridors and Neighborhoods 15 6.2. Revise the Adaptive Reuse Ordinance 53 1.6. Retain the Rural Lifestyle 16 6.3 Rethink the Transfer of Floor Area (TFAR) 54 6.4. Fix the Greater Downtown Housing Incentive Ordinance 55 2. Housing Affordability and Diversity 18 2.1. Continue to Provide Incentives for Affordable Housing 20 7. A Healthy City 56 2.2. Provide a More Prescriptive Set of Housing Options 21 7.1. Implement the Plan for a Healthy Los Angeles 58 2.3. Improve Regulations for Second Units 22 7.2. Implement the LA River Master Plan 59 2.4. Enhance the Design of Small Lot Subdivisions 23 7.3. CEQA Streamlining and Improvements 60 2.5. Remove Barriers to Micro-housing 24 7.4. Remove Barriers to Green Solutions 61 2.6. Improve Options for Shared Housing Communities 25 8. Code Delivery 62 3. Centers and Corridors 26 8.1. Develop Clear and Transparent Review Procedures 64 3.1. Improve Base Zoning Options for Commercial Corridors 28 8.2. Develop New Zones to Implement Current and Future Plans 66 3.2. Require Enhanced Walkability and Form Standards 29 8.3. Modernize the Look, Feel and Organization of the Code 67 3.3. Expand and improve the Approach to Commercial Corners 30 8.4. Provide a User-Friendly and Accessible Code 68 3.4. Provide Enhanced Standards for Landscaping 31 8.5. Ensure Continued Maintenance and Upkeep of the Code 69 3.5. Integrate Sign Types and Design Standards within the New Zoning 32 3.6. Consider Improved Options for Design Review 34 9. Summary of Recommendations 70 Zoning-Code-Evaluation-Report.pdf Page 3 Printed 09/11/2014 Draft March 07, 2014 RE:Code LA Zoning Evaluation Report | 3 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 CONSULTANT TEAM The City has engaged an extensive team of planning and zoning consultants to work on this project. The team includes a mix of national and local consultants, led by Code Studio from Austin, Texas. The full consultant team includes the following firms: National Los Angeles/Metro Area Code Studio (Austin, TX) Torti Gallas and Partners (Los Angeles, CA) HR&A Advisors (Los Angeles, CA) Code Lead/Project Management Urban Design/Planning Economics White & Smith (Kansas City, MO) Urban Insight (Los Angeles, CA) The Robert Group (Los Angeles, CA) Legal/Drafting Support Web Design/Web-Based Code Public Outreach Support Winter & Company (Boulder, CO) Impact Sciences (Camarillo, CA) VPE Public Relations (South Pasadena, CA) Historic Preservation/Urban Design CEQA Public Outreach Support Peter Park (Denver, CO) John Kaliski Architects (Los Angeles, CA) The Doyle Logan Company (Los Angeles, CA) Process/Administration Analysis Architecture Project Identity Lamphier Gregory (Oakland, CA) Patricia Smith (Los Angeles, CA) Design Gnomes (Los Angeles, CA) Drafting Support/CEQA Landscape Architecture Graphic Design/Editing Zoning-Code-Evaluation-Report.pdf Page 4 Printed 09/11/2014 4 | RE:Code LA Zoning Evaluation Report Draft March 07, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 PROJECT BACKGROUND re:code LA, a comprehensive revision of LA’s outdated zoning code, is one of most ambitious projects of its kind ever attempted. When the current zoning code for the City was have become the norm, rather than the exception. velopment standards citywide is sorely needed, written in 1946, Harry Truman was president, As a result, development under the zoning code is and graphically illustrating those rules helps World War II had just ended, and the population now a challenging process, and routinely confuses the world know what we’re looking for. of the City was just under 2 million (roughly half developers and planners, as well as the general » Let’s streamline the review processes to what it is today). The zoning code at that time was public. achieve the outcomes we want with less has- a manageable document of 84 pages, and was In response, the City of Los Angeles is undertaking sle. We need to ensure that small projects take appropriate for the relative simplicity of the City it a 5-year, $5 million project to completely rewrite a modest amount of effort, and big projects was responsible for regulating. the zoning code. There are numerous goals for that match our plans can be reviewed and Over the next 57 years, LA’s population more than project, including improved clarity, procedural built before the market for their product has doubled. During this period, entire neighborhoods streamlining, alignment with the City’s plans, changed. have completely transformed both demographi- attracting investment and improving the quality of » Let’s upgrade our neighborhood protection. cally and physically, the hubs of commerce and life for all Angelenos. Fixing the transition between zones of differing activity have shifted multiple times, and residents LA needs a new code approach. It has been over intensity, managing impacts created by specific of Los Angeles of 1946 would scarcely recognize 50 years since the last comprehensive review and uses, avoiding incompatible uses, protecting the current city. update of the regulations-far too long! our elegant historic resources, and ensuring a In an attempt to manage this rapidly changing This time: quality lifestyle in many different flavors, from place, the City has tacked on layers of new plans, rural to urban. » Let’s zone like we mean it, in a transparent overlays, and property-specific development way. No more using industrial zones to build » Let’s make LA a model of how web-based limitations to keep up with market trends and shopping centers, no more special zone zoning gets done right. There is a substantial community needs. As a result, LA’s zoning code change conditions on top of overlays on top need to make zoning more accessible, and grew from 84 pages in 1946 to over 600 pages of outdated base zones. digital approaches across the country fall short now. Today, over 60% of the City’s land is covered of furnishing a user-friendly document to all » Let’s broadcast our intention to get quality by special overlays and site-specific designations. possible devices. This project can be revolu- development for everyone. Improving the de- These amendments to a particular parcel of land tionary in its ability to serve up the code in a smart, functional, easy to use way. Zoning-Code-Evaluation-Report.pdf Page 5 Printed 09/11/2014 Draft March 07, 2014 RE:Code LA Zoning Evaluation Report | 1 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW Draft - Released March 07, 2014 BASIS OF ANALYSIS dialogue, a more complete picture of what is DOCUMENTS REVIEWED happening and what LA wants to see happen has In preparing this report, a variety of regulatory been pieced together. General Plan Framework Element, Housing and planning policy documents and regulations Element, Health Atlas, Plan for a Healthy Los This analysis requires the consultant team to read were reviewed. While these documents provide a Angeles (goals draft) foundation for understanding LA’s planning and the existing provisions very literally. In other words, regulatory framework, it was the time spent touring the review focuses on what the zoning code actu- Community Plans (30+) LA and meeting with staff, stakeholders and the ally says and not on how it has been interpreted or general public that provided the details of the administered over time. While this approach can Specific Plans (15+) problems and opportunities facing the City. result in occasional misinterpretations of intent or Coastal Zone Plan, Venice Local Coastal Plan established local traditions, such miscues provide An organized tour of the City was conducted (draft) valuable insight into provisions in need of clarifi- that included key members of City staff. The tour cation. covered San Pedro, South LA, West LA, Central Development Reform Strategic Plan LA and the Valley. The tour allowed the out-of- Finally, it is important to note that inconsistencies Planning and Zoning Code town consultants to get a feel for the sheer size or weaknesses in the current zoning code are in no way intended to reflect poorly on the drafters or of the City.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CLASSIC JAZZ This Page Intentionally Left Blank CLASSIC JAZZ
    CLASSIC JAZZ This page intentionally left blank CLASSIC JAZZ A Personal View of the Music and the Musicians FLOYD LEVIN Foreword by BENNY CARTER UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS Berkeley Los Angeles London Title page illustration: The author and his wife, Lucille—Emperor and Empress of the 1985 Jazz Jubilee, Sacramento, California. Unless otherwise credited, all illustrations are by the author or are from his collection. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2000 by the Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Levin, Floyd. Classic jazz : a personal view of the music and the musicians / Floyd Levin. p. cm. Includes index. isbn 0-520-21360-2 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Jazz—History and criticism. 2. Jazz musi- cians—United States. I. Title. ml3508.l48 2000 781.65—dc21 00-022554 Manufactured in the United States of America 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 00 10987654321 The paper used in this publication meets the mini- mum requirements of ansi/niso z39.48-1992 (r 1997) (Permanence of Paper). To Lucille, my loving wife and perceptive editor, who shared these wonderful experiences with me. Her sincere praises buoyed my efforts, and her unerring criticisms deftly improved my narration. This page intentionally left blank CONTENTS FOREWORD BY BENNY CARTER xv PREFACE xvii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xxiii INTRODUCTION 1 1 KID ORY AND THE REVIVAL ERA 9 Kid Ory / 11 Kid Ory’s Legendary 1921 Nordskog/Sunshine Recordings / 14 Papa Mutt Carey
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Historic Preservation in Blighted Areas: Effects of the Abolishment of Redevelopment Agencies in California
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Theses (Historic Preservation) Graduate Program in Historic Preservation 2012 The Future of Historic Preservation in Blighted Areas: Effects of the Abolishment of Redevelopment Agencies in California Lauro Alonso Parra University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses Part of the Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons Parra, Lauro Alonso, "The Future of Historic Preservation in Blighted Areas: Effects of the Abolishment of Redevelopment Agencies in California" (2012). Theses (Historic Preservation). 204. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/204 Suggested Citation: Parra, Lauro Alonso (2012). The Future of Historic Preservation in Blighted Areas: Effects of the Abolishment of Redevelopment Agencies in California. (Masters Thesis). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/204 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Future of Historic Preservation in Blighted Areas: Effects of the Abolishment of Redevelopment Agencies in California Abstract Redevelopment agencies play a major role in the preservation or destruction of historic buildings. When considering the benefits of preservation, we not only consider the protection of buildings for history's sake; but its usage has become more evident as a form of economic growth. During 2011, in efforts to balance the budget in the state of California, Governor Brown proposed abolishing
    [Show full text]
  • John Valadez Interviewed by Karen Mary Davalos on November 19 and 21, and December 3, 7, and 12, 2007
    CSRC ORAL HISTORIES SERIES NO. 10, DECEMBER 2013 JOHN VALADEZ INTERVIEWED BY KAREN MARY DAVALOS ON NOVEMBER 19 AND 21, AND DECEMBER 3, 7, AND 12, 2007 John Valadez is a painter and muralist. A graduate of East Los Angeles College and California State University, Long Beach, he is the recipient of many grants, commissions, and awards, including those from the Joan Mitchell Foundation, the California Arts Commission, and the Fondation d’Art de la Napoule, France. His work has appeared in exhibitions nationwide and is in the permanent collection of major museums; among them are National Museum of American Art at the Smithsonian, Bass Museum of Art in Miami Beach, Museum of Contemporary Art San Diego, Mexican Museum in Chicago, and Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Valadez lives and works in Los Angeles. Karen Mary Davalos is chair and professor of Chicana/o studies at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. Her research interests encompass representational practices, including art exhibition and collection; vernacular performance; spirituality; feminist scholarship and epistemologies; and oral history. Among her publications are Yolanda M. López (UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center Press, 2008); “The Mexican Museum of San Francisco: A Brief History with an Interpretive Analysis,” in The Mexican Museum of San Francisco Papers, 1971–2006 (UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center Press, 2010); and Exhibiting Mestizaje: Mexican (American) Museums in the Diaspora (University of New Mexico Press, 2001). This interview was conducted as part of the L.A. Xicano project. Preferred citation: John Valadez, interview with Karen Mary Davalos, November 19 and 21, and December 3, 7, and 12, 2007, Los Angeles, California.
    [Show full text]
  • Amended Judgment (Pdf)
    Case 2:12-cv-00551-FMO-PJW Document 608 Filed 12/13/17 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:9492 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 7 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (WESTERN DIVISION) 8 9 10 INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER OF ) Case No.: 12-CV-00551 FMO (PJWx) 11 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, et al. ) ) 12 Plaintiffs, ) AMENDED JUDGMENT PURSUANT 13 ) TO CORRECTED SETTLEMENT vs. ) AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN 14 ) ) CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND 15 CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ) PLAINTIFFS 16 CALIFORNIA, and COMMUNITY ) REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE ) 17 CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ) ) 18 Defendants. ) ) 19 20 21 WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles, a defendant in this action (the 22 “City”) and the Independent Living Center of Southern California (“ILCSC”), the 23 Fair Housing Council of the San Fernando Valley (“FHC”) and Communities 24 Actively Living Independent and Free (“CALIF”) (collectively referred to herein as 25 “Plaintiffs”) have entered into a Corrected Settlement Agreement; and 26 WHEREAS, the Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this 27 action, the Plaintiffs, the City, and the Corrected Settlement Agreement; and 28 ILC, et al v. City of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. 12-CV-551 FMO (PJWx) AMENDED JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CORRECTED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Case 2:12-cv-00551-FMO-PJW Document 608 Filed 12/13/17 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:9493 1 WHEREAS, upon consideration, the Court finds the Corrected 2 Settlement Agreement to be fair, reasonable, and adequate. 3 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED 4 AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: 5 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Metro Quarterly, Readers Enjoyed a Transit Account
    spring 2004 Metro Fights For la County’s Fair Share Of Transit Funding Find Out How You Can Help Chief Executive Metro is navigating di;cult >nancial straits as the ?ow of transportation funding mq spring 2004 O;cer d.c from Sacramento and Washington, . becomes more scarce. Still, it’s not Published by Roger Snoble all doom and gloom by any means. In fact, it’s an opportunity for Metro to craft Metro Communications new and better ways of moving people and goods. At the same time, we’re Department exercising a leadership role in mobilizing Los Angeles County stakeholders to Editor: contents >ght for the region’s fair share of available transportation dollars. gary wosk Los Angeles County could lose as much as $1 billion in state transportation Writers: funding in the next >ve years. Congress also is scrambling to >nd new monies for bill heard highway and mass transit projects against a backdrop of mounting federal warren morse budget de>cits. That’s the bad news. ed scannell 4 cean collier The good news is key Metro projects are moving forward. Metro’s Eastside light lisa huynh s 4 fast lanes rail project has emerged as one of the Federal Transit Administration’s top adrienne figueroa Exclusive lanes make Wilshire Boulevard Metro Rapid funding priorities, and the Metro Orange Line transitway in the San Fernando claudia keith Valley is under construction. trips even faster. Graphic Design: Metro is taking delivery of 300 high-capacity buses. Two more Metro Rapid lines metro design studio 6 getting there will debut on Soto and Vernon/La Cienega in June, and Metro is testing an Metro Orange Line transitway construction underway.
    [Show full text]
  • Recorder's Office, Los Angeles County, California 01/29/13 at 10:51AM
    This page is part of your document - DO NOT DISCARD 20130143515 Q ~~~~~~ ~~!~l~~l~!~l!~~!J~~~!~~~~~ 1111 Pgy~g: Recorder's Office, Los Angeles County, California 01/29/13 AT 10:51AM FEES: 0.00 TAXES: 0.00 OTHER: 0.00 PAID: 0.00 LEADSHEET 201301290070020 00007158687 lllllllllllllll~ IIIII IIIII IIIII ~lllll~llllll 1111 Ill 004609967 SEQ: 01 . DAR - Counter (Upfront Scan) llllllllllllllllllllllll~lllllllllllllllll~lllllllllllllll~ llllllllllllllllllllllll~llllllllll lllllllllllllllllll~ lllllllll~l\11111~ llllllllllllllll~llllll\llllllll\11 ~~~~ 11111111111 THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED £4419$3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND AFTER RECORDATION RETURN TO: City Clerk City ofLos Angeles 200 North Spring Street, Room 395 Los Angeles, California 90012 Attention: June Lagmay NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN CITY OF LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 9 (DOWNTOWN STREETCAR) Pursuant to the requirements of Section 3114.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code and Section 53328.3 of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the "Act"), the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Los Angeles (the "City"), State of California, hereby gives notice that a lien to secure payment of a special tax is hereby imposed by the Council of the City, State of California. The special tax secured by this lien is authorized to be levied for the purpose of ( 1) paying the principal of and interest on bonds, the proceeds of which are being used to finance the facilities described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof, and (2) providing such facilities. The special tax is authorized to be levied within City ofLos Angeles Community Facilities District No.
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Compliance Agreement
    VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 1 I. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 3 II. DEFINITIONS..................................................................................................................... 5 III. REMEDIAL ACTIONS..................................................................................................... 11 A. Compliance with Civil Rights Requirements .................................................................... 11 B. Requirements for Future Housing Developments, Housing Developments Currently Under Construction, Housing Developments Subject to Substantial Alterations, and Housing Developments Subject to Other Alterations .............................................................................. 12 C. Requirements for Existing Housing Developments........................................................... 13 D. Neutral Accessibility Consultant (NAC) ........................................................................... 16 E. Additional City Actions to Achieve Owner and Subrecipient Compliance with the Accessibility Standards. ............................................................................................................ 28 F. Enhanced Housing Accessibility Program for Individuals with Disabilities..................... 29 G. VCA Administrator and Section 504/ADA Coordinator..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Million Dollar Theater Building
    Los Angeles Department of City Planning RECOMMENDATION REPORT CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION CASE NO.: CHC-2019-244-HCM ENV-2019-245-CE HEARING DATE: February 7, 2019 Location: 306-316 West Third Street; TIME: 10:00 AM 301-313 South Broadway PLACE : City Hall, Room 1010 Council District: 14 - Huizar 200 N. Spring Street Community Plan Area: Central City Los Angeles, CA 90012 Area Planning Commission: Central Neighborhood Council: Downtown Los Angeles Legal Description: Property of T.D. Stimson Tract, LT E PROJECT: Historic-Cultural Monument Application for the MILLION DOLLAR THEATER BUILDING REQUEST: Declare the property a Historic-Cultural Monument OWNER/APPLICANT: Adam Daneshgar Langdon Street Capital 9777 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 811 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 GCS Emerald LLC Et al. c/o Langdon Street Capital LLC and GCS Equity LLC P.O. Box 1936 Beverly Hills, CA 90213 PREPARER: Amanda Yoder Duane GPA Consulting 617 South Olive Street, Suite 910 Los Angeles, CA 90014 RECOMMENDATION That the Cultural Heritage Commission: 1. Take the property under consideration as an Historic-Cultural Monument per Los Angeles Administrative Code Chapter 9, Division 22, Article 1, Section 22.171.10 because the application and accompanying photo documentation suggest the submittal warrants further investigation. 2. Adopt the report findings. VINCENT P. BERTONI, AICP Director of PlanningN1907 [SIGNED ORIGINAL IN FILE] [SIGNED ORIGINAL IN FILE] Ken Bernstein, AICP, Manager Lambert M. Giessinger, Preservation Architect Office of Historic Resources Office of Historic Resources [SIGNED ORIGINAL IN FILE] Melissa Jones, Planning Assistant Office of Historic Resources Attachment: Historic-Cultural Monument Application CHC-2019-244-HCM 306-316 West Third Street; 301-313 South Broadway Page 2 of 3 SUMMARY The Million Dollar Theater Building is a twelve-story mixed-use commercial building located on the southwest corner of Broadway and Third Street in Downtown Los Angeles.
    [Show full text]
  • Union Station Area Connections
    metro.net Union Station Area Connections Line Direction/Destination Via Bus Stop Chinese Board at Map Ref A Scale One Unit:1/4 Mile B C Historical D Lincoln/Cypress Station E Society Chinatown Metro B Heritage and 1 1 Metro Local Stop ER 1 A NA Visitors Center 28 WESTBOUND to Century City Olympic Bl 3 6 T X C2, C3 110 R T Metro Local and D S Metro Local NORTHBOUND to Eagle Rock Eagle Rock Bl 7 R U Y C2, C3, D2 1 Y S A RapidL Stop W T G 30 330 WESTBOUND to West Hollywood Pico Bl, San Vicente Bl N O C5, C6 Y F N A W I ST Metro Local & Limited EASTBOUND to Union Station 7 P C6, Inset I M A Chung King Bamboo Chinese R Los Angeles R E Metro Rapid Line IU N P YS T WESTBOUND to Santa Monica Venice Bl 6 6 D C3, C4, Inset N E Cultural E 33 D Road Art Plaza State S W S N A D BA Metro Local C C4 T A C Center D EASTBOUND to Union Station Galleries HU M N Metro Silver Line Stop S NG B Historical E S D K O A U R IN G O T A G C 40 SOUTHBOUND to South Bay Galleria King Bl, Hawthorne Bl 5 A IN C4, C5, D4, Inset T L A N T P S I N Park N A Mandarin K G I N N Metro Local NORTHBOUND to Union Station 10 B C G C4, D4 E G LIN L N N Metro Silver Line G W N B U Y Plaza P R H E E O C 45 NORTHBOUND to Lincoln Heights Broadway 7 R U Y C2, C3, D2 I L N E D Paci>c L C S T T E Metro Rail Station A Metro Local SOUTHBOUND to Rosewood Broadway 3 6 TX C2, C3 T J M E Alliance U L S N Y U G J R Y I W N and Entrance G L S W W Y N 68 EASTBOUND to Montebello Cesar E Chavez Av B C C4, D4 Medical Y G U R B O N E T M I R O L N P Metro Local A I WESTBOUND to 6th St & Los Angeles
    [Show full text]
  • The Digital Divide in Assembly District 53: Broadband Wireline Service
    The Digital Divide In Assembly District 53: Broadband Wireline Service District 53 Served Underserved Unserved Total 173,779 119 6 173,904 Households 100% 0% 0% 100% 463,430 400 86 463,916 Population 100% 0% 0% 100% Meets and Exceeds State Goal of 98% Served Source: Service availability data submitted by California broadband providers and validated by the CPUC as of December 31, 2014. Prepared by Watsonville GIS Center. This is a graphic representation only of best available sources. The City of Watsonville assumes no responsibility of errors. The Digital Divide in Assembly District 53: Broadband Wireline Service Unconnected and Percent Percent Percentage by Under-Connected Not Connected Connected Smartphone Only Statewide 16% 84% 14% Low-Income (<$20,000 Annually) 32% 68% 25% Spanish-Speakers 31% 69% 30% People With Disabilities 29% 71% 13% Seniors (65 or Older) 44% 56% 5% Non-High School Graduates 37% 63% 29% Most Disadvantaged Populations are Unconnected or Under-Connected Source: The Field Poll 2016 │http://www.cetfund.org/progress/annualsurvey Publicly-Subsidized Housing in Assembly District 53 Source: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), CA Housing Authorities Project Name Project Address Housing Type Total Units MidCities 835 S. Oxford Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90005 All Low Income 59 Flores Apartments 1507 W. Pico Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90027 All Low Income 26 Rose Flores 2 1513 W. Pico Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90027 All Low Income 32 Pershing Hotel 502 S. Main Street, Los Angeles, CA 90013 SRO 65 Marengo Street Apts. 2649 Marengo Street, Los Angeles, CA 90033 Large Family 24 Prentice Apartments 1014 E.
    [Show full text]
  • A NEIGHBORHOOD GUIDE to the HEART of LA the HEART of LA Try As You May—And Many Have— There’S No Pithy Way to Sum up Los Angeles
    A NEIGHBORHOOD GUIDE TO THE HEART OF LA THE HEART OF LA Try as you may—and many have— there’s no pithy way to sum up Los Angeles. Those of us who live here like it that way. It’s an eclectic place with a dynamic history of intersections (some civil, some not) between people who have created an utterly unique and multiethnic city. OUR PARTNERS Many of the neighborhoods along today’s route through the historic center of the city—the “heart of LA”—are changing. From gentrification and development to new waves of immigration and demographic shifts, there are elements being lost, buildings being renewed, and City of County of cultural movements being born. That’s the thing about a Los Angeles Los Angeles heart: if it stops circulating, you die. The same might be true of a city: if it stagnates, its vitality suffers. OUR SUPPORTERS OUR SPONSORS But the heart is more than just an organ. It is the center of Annenberg Foundation Los Angeles Department of our affection, of what we love. We heart people, places, Ralph M. Parsons Foundation Water & Power even certain taco trucks. When you know something by Rosenthal Family Foundation Roth Family Foundation Los Angeles County Department First 5 LA heart, you’ve memorized it. And hearts have layers (three of Public Health Kaiser Foundation Hospitals in humans). So does this city. The minute I think I know Goldhirsh Foundation Southern California Gas Company David Bohnett Foundation The Laemmle Charitable Foundation some tiny section of it, it opens up to reveal a layer I’d LA2050 Tern Bicycles never seen before.
    [Show full text]
  • Corrected Settlement Agreement with City of Los Angeles
    Case 2:12-cv-00551-FMO-PJW Document 608-1 Filed 12/13/17 Page 1 of 164 Page ID #:9494 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Exhibit 1 12 Corrected Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 2:12-cv-00551-FMO-PJW Document 608-1 Filed 12/13/17 Page 2 of 164 Page ID #:9495 1 MICHAEL G. ALLEN, pro hac vice DAVID GEFFEN #129342 JOHN P. RELMAN, pro hac vice DAVID GEFFEN LAW FIRM 2 D. SCOTT CHANG #146403 530 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 205 JENNIFER I. KLAR, pro hac vice Santa Monica, CA 90401 3 RELMAN, DANE & COLFAX PLLC Telephone: (310) 434-1111 1225 19th St. NW, Suite 600 4 Facsimile: (310) 434-1115 Washington, D.C. 20036 [email protected] Telephone: (202) 728-1888 5 Facsimile: (202) 728-0848 6 [email protected] DARA SCHUR #98638 [email protected] DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA 7 1330 Broadway, Ste. 500 MARONEL BARAJAS #242044 Oakland, CA 94612 8 DISABILITY RIGHTS LEGAL CENTER Telephone: (510) 267-1200 Loyola Public Interest Law Center 9 Facsimile: (510)267-1201 256 S. Occidental Blvd., Suite B [email protected] Los Angeles, CA 90057 10 Telephone: (213) 736-1496 Facsimile: (213) 736-1428 AUTUMN ELLIOTT #230043 11 [email protected] SRIVIDYA PANCHALAM #265398 DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA 12 350 S. Bixel Street., Ste. 290 13 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Telephone: (213) 213-8000 14 Facsimile: (213) 213-8001 [email protected] 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 17 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (WESTERN DIVISION) 18 INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER OF ) Case No.: 12-CV-00551 FMO (PJWx) et al.
    [Show full text]