Pasadena Conference Center Expansion
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EWS NWest Pasadena Residents’ Association Pasadena, California established 1962a Winter 2005 Pasadena Conference Center Expansion: If we Build it, Will they Come? by Cheryl Auger here seem to be two major The Mayor, responding to the Tissues plaguing the proposed Brookings Institution report, requested convention center. One is the the city revisit past assumptions regard- recently published Brookings Institution ing projections for the proposed report. The report cited a glut of convention center. Many convention exhibition space nationally and a centers try to remain competitive by declining demand for convention and offering deep discounts or city spon- trade show space. The report also stated Pasadena Civic Auditorium 1980, sored amenities such as publicly that returns to cities from convention Inset 1932 financed hotels. Spending city money business are often far short of projec- it be “more bold and modern” to to expand the convention center, only tions. The second issue is the design contrast with the 1932 auditorium and to then spend additional city money to concept that was reviewed at a special stand on its own as a work of art. Either make it attractive may not make sense. Design Commission meeting late way, the Pasadena Center Operating Roger Smith, the PCOC CEO, January. The meeting left open ques- Company (PCOC) won’t let any argues that the Brookings Institution tions about the appropriateness of the disagreements slow its document only refers proposed design. Should the expansion attempt to start this project. Our recent to larger convention of the Pasadena Conference Center be It is scheduled to appear construction efforts centers and that designed in a “nostalgic” style or should before Council around support the concerns Pasadena’s convention April 11th. (Check the of Pasadena Heritage center would be more ALSO IN THIS ISSUE council agenda if you are and the Design appropriately compared Ambassador Campus Update . .3 interested in attending.) Commissioners. with local competitors President’s Message . .4 A larger question is such as Long Beach, Looking to Make a Difference? . .5 whether expanding the convention Palm Springs and San Diego. The total Reengagement in the PUSD . .6 center is even worth doing. In January cost of $65 to $68 million would be Maranatha High School 2005, the Brookings Institution report- offset by the $1.6 million bed tax that Seeking CUP . .6 WPRA & the Arroyo Seco Lose a ed the following: the city expects to collect per year. The Friend — Richard Flanagan Davis . .7 • Since 1993, the convention center tax has to be used within the year it’s West Pasadena Residents marketplace is declining with slim received. (Note: a 5% loan over ten Respond to NFL Survey . .8 likelihood of a turnaround. years for $68 million costs roughly $8.8 NFL Survey Results . .9 • Convention center space has million per year to repay the debt). Mr. Transportation Update . .11 increased by nearly 50% since 1990. Smith prefers to use the Convention New ARTS Service for SW Pasadena . .12 • 44 new or expanded convention Sports and Leisure (CSL) organization Weekly Neighborhood E-Newsletter . .12 centers are currently being planned for guidance and future projections. Let your City Representatives know . .12 nationwide. The PCOC will conduct the economic ARTS Bus Route 70 . .13 • Despite dedicated tax dollars to pay analysis to show how the convention Thank You to Our Donors . .14 off tax bonds, many convention centers center in Pasadena will be profitable. Board of Directors / Phone Numbers . .16 operate at a loss. The Pasadena Center Operating continued on page 3 Pasadena the site deserves. The PCOC believes direction in a few short weeks. It is that Design Commission has over- unclear if the Mayor’s financial analysis Conference Center stepped its role as a reviewing agency by will be completed by that time. It’s also unclear whether changes will be made Continued from front page suggesting a specific redesign. Some Design Commissioners felt they have to the concept design, as requested by Company, the Design Commission, been treated as “an annoying hindrance the design commission and suggested Pasadena Heritage and the City to the project.” by Pasadena Heritage. If the project is Council are the players in the design Our recent construction efforts sup- approved, bids will be solicited in the controversy. The PCOC supports the port the concerns of Pasadena Heritage Spring and construction will start in current design by architect Curt and the Design Commissioners. There November, beginning with the parking Fentress which boasts flanking two- has been such a large amount of lot along Marengo. story entrance lobbies, a new parking construction in our city over the last It is unknown whether the Council structure, a 24,000 square foot plus several years but few, if any, of these will enable the PCOC to proceed or ballroom and a 60,000 foot subter- new buildings would be considered wait to revise the current design. Now ranean exhibit space that is dividable. architectural masterpieces. In addition, is the time for us all to become The Design Commission finds the there has been a public outcry to raise informed on the finances of small Fentress plan to be imitative of the our standards rather than accept convention centers, consider the type Civic Auditorium and recommended a mediocrity in design. Others ask why of public process a city project of this more modern approach. Pasadena the new design does not encourage size should follow and determine what Heritage has attended many meetings pedestrian traffic from the nearby Gold type of building should occupy that and offered input throughout the Line, furthering City goals to increase space. In the meantime, information is process, but remains concerned that the pedestrian access by offering “gates” available on the WPRA web site design needs further exploration. It is from the West. (www.wpra.net) and Council Member certainly more respectful of the Civic City residents will now have to wait Steve Madison would probably Auditorium than the last round, but it and see what unfolds. The City appreciate your feedback. I is not the great design solution which Council will be asked to decide the best 2 Ambassador Campus Update by Mike Vogler West Campus – Citizen advocacy a success With help from WPRA, Save South Orange Grove (SSOG) has fulfilled its goal of ensuring that the former Ambassador College property West Campus will not become a massive housing development: the Ambassador Auditorium has been saved without a penny of taxpayer dollars, with the being elevated many feet above the three things are requested: California Symphony kicking off its street. This is not only inconsistent 1. The City utilize its discretionary first season of performances; land use with the Specific Plan, but will create authority within the Planned of most of the West Campus is to “concrete canyons” which are incom- Development Code to ensure that the remain educational, due to its purchase patible with the character of Old project is appropriate and complimenta- by Maranatha High School; and five Pasadena. ry, in both size and scale, to the Old historic homes on Orange Grove north Pasadena Historic District and that of Development must fit our of Del Mar will be preserved due to the the surrounding historic neighborhoods. community creation of the Ross Grove Landmark 2. Should the City enter into any Allowable heights and number of units District. Development Agreement with the permitted by the Central District developer, that Agreement be made East Campus – Developer Specific Plan are maximums, NOT available to the public, for public com- seeks change in land use entitlements. Under a Planned ment, prior to approval by the City. designed by citizens Development Application, a developer 3. That the City Council require the With the purchase of the former East is not constrained by the limits within developer to produce, for public view- Campus by Sares-Regis, citizens may the zoning code and could build a pro- ing, a three-dimensional model of the soon find a massive housing project ject much larger than allowed by the proposed development prior to approval rising up in west/central Pasadena, one Central District Specific Plan, if of the project by the City Council. which will define our city for genera- approved by the City Council. This is tions to come. With a proposed 832 what Sares-Regis is proposing to do. Citizens must stay engaged units on little more than 11 acres, However, a Planned Development cuts Contact your City Council Member, Sares-Regis is proposing the largest both ways. The City can use its discre- Mayor and City Staff to request that housing project ever built in Pasadena. tionary authority (contained within the City ensure transparency and guar- Of particular concern is the fact that the Planed Development Code) to antee a fair process for the community. this project is in the heart of the Old reduce a project below what is being This project will dramatically define Pasadena Historic District, where proposed in order to ensure that the the future of Old Pasadena for future seldom do the quaint, century old development fits Old Pasadena and generations. Don’t let an Orange brick buildings exceed two stories. the surrounding historic neighbor- County developer such as Sares-Regis Sares-Regis is proposing structures up hoods. Citizens are urged to implore tell you and our City what Pasadena is to 60ft in height, a full 20ft higher the Council to use this opportunity to to become. Make your voice heard! than the 40ft height maximum ensure that the project fits Pasadena. Check the WPRA website for new allowed under the new adopted On January 10th, SSOG appeared developments.