Current Revitalization Strategy and Initiatives in Downtown Pomona…………….………..…………….56

Art, Commerce and the Metropolis:

The Revitalization of Downtown Pomona, 1992-2002

By Michael Reibel and David Levitan Art, Commerce and the Metropolis:

The Revitalization of Downtown Pomona, 1992-2002

By Michael Reibel and David Levitan

This study was made possible by a grant from the John Randolph

Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation.

Copyright 2002. All rights reserved. The authors gratefully acknowledge the personal assistance of Dave Armstrong, David Bergman, Michael Bufalino, Meenaxi Panakkal, Dwight Richards, Ed Tessier, Evie Tole, Barbara Way, Robert Wise, and everyone else who consented to be interviewed for this study or answered our questions. Any errors are solely the responsibility of the authors. We would also like to acknowledge the assistance of Pomona Central Business District Organization and the following departments and offices at Cal Poly Pomona: the Cal Poly Pomona Downtown Center, the Center for Geographic Information Systems Research, the Department of Geography and Anthropology, The College of Letters, Arts and Social Sciences, Cal Poly Pomona Foundation, and the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs. Finally, the authors would like to thank the good people at Taco Nazo, without whose fish tacos this work would not have been possible.

Table of Contents

Page Chapter One: A Brief History and Geography of Pomona ……….…………………………….4

Chapter Two: Downtown Decline and Strategies for Downtown Revitalization………………17

Chapter Three: Comparable Settings and Strategies………………………………………...….37

Chapter Four: Current Revitalization Strategy and Initiatives in Downtown Pomona…………….………..…………….56

Chapter Five: Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..71

Map Section…………………………………………………………………………...Click Here

Chapter Six: Summary and Findings……………………………………………………………82

Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………..88

Sources Cited…………………………………………………………….………………………89

About the Authors………………………………………………………………………………..93

3 Chapter One: A Brief History and Geography of Pomona

The City of Pomona is located 28 miles east of downtown Los Angeles, on the westernmost part of the vast inland plain (called the inland Empire) that contains urbanized San Bernardino and Riverside. This area, sometimes called the Pomona Valley, is separated from the San Gabriel Valley by the Puente Hills that rise along Pomona’s western edge. Because Pomona is in Los Angeles County, however, it is sometimes considered part of the San Gabriel Valley. It is believed that the area was first inhabited around 500 B.C., when Native Americans of Shoshonean heritage moved westward into the region. The Indian population of the San Gabriel Valley had reached about 5,000 by the time the Spanish began arriving in 1769, led by Franciscans eager to colonize ‘Alta California’ and convert the native population to Christianity. Two years later, the Franciscans began construction of Mission San Gabriel, in present-day Montebello. The mission controlled approximately 1.5 million acres of land along a 22-mile strip that extended 42 miles south to San Pedro and 62 miles east to the Muscupaibe Range.

Pomona was named in 1875 after the Roman goddess of fruit, which can be seen as both homage to the past and a prophecy of the future. The first grove of 400 orange trees was planted in 1804 by the Franciscans, as well as hundreds of apple and peach trees. For the first 70 years of the 19th Century however, cattle would dominate the region’s economy. By 1834, the last year of Franciscan rule, 16,500 cattle grazed on mission lands. It was then that, having gained its independence from Spain twelve years earlier, the land was secularized and redistributed by the independent nation of Mexico via the Secularization Act of 1834. Most of what is now Pomona was granted to two Mexican ranchers from Los Angeles, Ignacio Palomares and Ricardo Vejar. The cattle industry flourished for these Mexican rancheros, especially in the late 1840’s when the discovery of gold in Northern California saw beef prices soar.

This period of affluent Mexican ranchos would be short-lived, however, as the annexation of California to the United States in 1848 via the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo would soon change life in the Pomona region and across California. One year later, the California Board of Land Commissioners was created to investigate and pass on land titles. Many Mexicans lost their land when they could not prove ownership, but Palomares and Vejar were

4 granted their land, based on a partition that had taken place in 1846 that included a third partner, Los Angeles merchant Henry Dalton. Yet, while they were able to keep their land, both Palomares and Vejar accrued a large amount of debt while taking out high interest loans to cover the higher taxes that accompanied the transition to American rule in the 1850’s. This was followed by several years of intermittent floods and drought during the 1860’s, which resulted in a 71% decline in the number of cattle in Los Angeles County during the decade. By 1864, Vejar was forced to sell his land and Palomares had died, and Pomona was beginning to change rapidly.

As the first transcontinental railroad to reach Los Angeles, the Southern Pacific Railroad was extremely influential in determining the development patterns of Southern California in the latter part of the 19th Century. Concerned that the railroad would bypass Los Angeles in favor of San Diego, Los Angeles County voters approved a large subsidy to Southern Pacific to encourage them to build 25 miles of track eastward from Los Angeles. Almost immediately, land values in areas adjacent to the railroad’s route rose in values and town sites were surveyed in anticipation of the expected population boom. By 1875, a Southern Pacific line that would eventually reach Yuma, Arizona had made it to what is now present-day Pomona.

A year earlier, a small group of Southern California men had created a new organization called the Los Angeles Immigration and Land Co-Operative Association. By April 1875, the group had arranged to purchase much of the former Vejar property from the current owner Louis Phillips, consisting of about 2,500 acres that lay just south of the railroad route. The area was surveyed and staked out in July of that same year, and by August an approved map had been filed with the Los Angeles County Recorder. By early 1876, the roads had been paved, a reservoir had been built, and several businesses, including a hotel, a grocery store, and a drug store, had been established. The association held a land auction in late February, which generated land sales of approximately $19,000. However, years of drought and a disastrous fire reduced the population of Pomona to just 130 by 1880, and in 1881 the land was returned to Louis Phillips. The town was revived with the arrival of Cyrus Mills and M.L. Wicks in 1882, whose Pomona Land and Water Company bought out the interests of everyone in town and the surrounding areas, amassing over 12,000 acres. By 1887, water rights had been secured, and the

5 town began to take shape with the construction of several schools, banks, churches, hotels, grocery stores, and fruit canneries. By January of the next year, the City of Pomona had been incorporated, with a total of 213 businesses.

As the city began to take shape, a rate war between the Santa Fe and Southern Pacific Railroads helped attract hundreds of farmers fleeing Midwestern winters with hopes of finding a piece of the fertile land. Grapes became the first fruit to flourish in the area, and by the end of the 1880’s winemaking was the largest industry in town. This was partially due to problems faced by the region’s orange growers, which included disputes with the railroads over cooling and refrigeration techniques and shipping costs, which caused Eastern markets to dry up and prices to plummet. By 1894, many of these issues had been addressed by the creation of the California Fruit Growers Association, which handled quality control, advertising, and publicity for the area’s growers.

Newly organized, citrus production would explode in Pomona, located in the middle of the “Citrus Triangle” region that produced $2 billion in income from citrus between 1890 and 1940. By 1916, more than 5,000 acres in and around Pomona were devoted to citrus production, and the San Antonio Fruit Exchange, located in Pomona, accounted for over a third of the entire shipment of the California Fruit Growers Exchange. With jobs plentiful in the fields and factories, Pomona reached a population of 10,000 by 1913. The city also experienced a brief surge in its Hispanic population, following the 1911 Mexican Revolution that encouraged thousands to flee north.

Citrus prices dropped immediately following World War I, but were able to recover by the early 1920’s, and several new citrus-related enterprises were opened by the end of the decade. The Great Depression, however, saw agricultural prices drop by 65% nationwide, and helped bring about a major change in the demographic makeup of the region. Thousands of Mexican agricultural workers were “voluntarily” repatriated during the 1930’s, and were soon replaced by white farmers escaping the Midwest’s Dust Bowl conditions and extremely high unemployment. With the outbreak of World War II, the citrus industry was greatly aided by

6 large government purchases for military use. This was a temporary solution, however, as these purchases would end in 1946, when America’s soldiers returned from abroad.

Population growth in Pomona surged in the period immediately following World War II. The United States Chamber of Commerce named Pomona as one of the two fastest growing communities in 1946, and by 1950 the city had over 17,000 residential units, with many built on abandoned orchards. Job opportunities did not grow as quickly as the population, however, and many of the city’s residents were forced to commute 15 to 30 miles to work, mostly to Alhambra and Pasadena. In response, the city began to actively recruit new manufacturing companies to Pomona, attracting among others Wayne Manufacturing Company, American Break Shoe Company, and, most importantly, General Dynamics, whose 100,000 square foot industrial research ordnance plant employed 4,500 by the early 1950’s. The completion of the San Bernardino Freeway (I-10) in 1954 further opened the area to new residents, and attracted several new businesses due to its excellent transportation access. Between 1955 and 1966, manufacturing employment in the East San Gabriel Valley more than doubled, from 30,600 to 71,300. (Security Pacific National Bank, 1968) The city’s population proceeded to double during the 1950’s, with about 75% of the net increase due to in-migration.

While the population boom in Pomona over the first sixty years of the century excluded almost all non-white minorities, the 1960’s saw the area begin to become more racially diverse. The decade saw a net increase of 22,000 residents, of which 17,000 were black. By 1972, blacks and Hispanics accounted for 12.2 and 13.7% of the population, respectively. Many were drawn to the 22,000 manufacturing and aerospace jobs that the city offered in 1971. The black population, however, would be disproportionately affected by the 25% decrease in federal aerospace funding in 1972, cutbacks that led to high unemployment in Pomona. (Lothrop, 1988) As non-manufacturing jobs totaled just over 4,000 in the city, by the mid 1970s the majority of residents had significant commute times to work. This was especially true for the city’s black population, as new affirmative action polices created job opportunities in local and county government offices throughout Los Angeles County.

7 As the city experienced several years of recession in the 1970’s, the ethnic makeup of the city continued to change, and Pomona began to differentiate into ethnic neighborhoods. The white population began to shift to the newer and more suburban areas such as Philips Ranch, while the expanding black and Hispanic population took up residence in the older neighborhoods closer to downtown Pomona. With increased aerospace funding under Reagan in the 1980’s, Pomona began to recover economically, and local jobs surpassed 40,000 by the middle of the decade. At its peak, General Dynamics alone employed nearly 10,000 people, and its workforce numbered 8,800 as late as 1987. However, as the Cold War came to a close in the late 1980s, the federal defense budget began to shrink, and the company made plans to cut back its payroll by 30-40%. But before this could happen, the company was bought by Hughes Aviation in 1993 and moved to Arizona two years later, a move which would eliminate some 20% of the local workforce. As California experienced a major recession in the early 1990s and Pomona lost several businesses, many blacks and whites left the city, while the Hispanic population would continue to increase.

Downtown Pomona The old central business district (CBD) of Pomona is in many ways typical of downtowns in blue-collar cities of similar size, and it has undergone a fairly typical trajectory of growth, decline and opportunities for redevelopment. Downtown Pomona, located in the area south of the passenger rail depot at First Street and Thomas Street, grew rapidly with the city during the citrus boom of the 1880s. Pomona remained the third largest city in Los Angeles County until just after 1900, following Los Angeles and Pasadena. Many of the large commercial buildings in downtown Pomona dating from this period immediately before and after 1900 have been preserved, and the dense, pedestrian-scale urban landscape of the downtown, incorporating these large, turn of the 20th century vintage buildings and somewhat more recent small storefronts, is a central asset that shapes strategies for downtown revitalization.

Like downtown areas throughout the nation, downtown Pomona experienced a steady decline during the thirty years following the end of World War II. Unlike many medium size southern California cities, it peaked as a major center very early: by 1910 it had slipped from third largest city in Los Angeles County to fourth; by 1920 it was sixth, by 1930 eighth, and by

8 1940 twelfth. Given the relative lack of construction during the 1920s and 1930s, by the late 1950s downtown Pomona was already showing its age. But instead of turning their backs on the area, and focusing on establishing new commercial centers on the outskirts of the city, the leaders of Pomona decided to try to revitalize downtown. The result was the Pomona Mall, one of the earliest urban pedestrian malls in the United States. Opened in 1962, the mall, stretching along Second Street from White Avenue to Park Avenue, featured attractive landscaping, public open space and noteworthy public art and fountains. It was anchored at its east end by Buffums department store. While initially successful, by 1972 forty two of the 111 stores in the downtown mall were vacant or being used for storage. The Mall was re-opened to car traffic in 1973, but the pedestrian oriented landscape improvements remain.

Thus, downtown Pomona continued to decline as a center of social life and commercial activity during the 1970s and 1980s. By the early 1990s, leaders in the city government and downtown business community perceived that conditions had swung back to potentially favoring the redevelopment of older downtowns. This perception was fostered by the success of a new generation of so-called urban entertainment center districts in such areas, notably Old Town Pasadena and the Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica. Plans for the revitalization of downtown Pomona were drafted, eventually taking shape as the City’s Downtown Specific Plan and the business community’s Arts Colony initiative, sponsored by the Central Business District organization.

Adopted by the City Council in 1994, the Downtown Pomona Specific Plan aims to create an “appealing downtown shopping, educational and community facilities environment” that will serve the city and the region at large. The Specific Plan area covers approximately 380 acres and is bound by White Avenue to the west and Towne Avenue to the east, with Holt Boulevard and Mission Boulevard serving as the approximate north and south boundaries, respectively. The governed area extends south of Mission Boulevard to include the Pomona Civic Center, and also includes several blocks along Garey Avenue to the north of Holt Boulevard. Throughout this study, the terms “downtown Pomona” and “downtown” will be used to mean the area covered by the downtown specific plan. The heart of the Downtown Specific Plan is the International Fair, a ten-block, “T” shaped district just south of the metrolink line

9 between Rebecca Street and Eleanor Street. Designed to be more pedestrian-friendly than the average regional mall, the International Fair is a contiguous commercial-zoned area that consists of four distinct districts: the Historic Edison, Downtown, Antique, and Performing Arts Districts. These four districts, which it is hoped will offer a wide range of retail, dining, and entertainment choices, are discussed in more detail in Chapter four.

Major Assets for Revitalization While the suburbanization that has occurred in Southern California since the end of World War II has had a serious impact on downtown Pomona, the area still exhibits several traits that make its commercial revival quite feasible. First, the downtown area offers a compact commercial area with a good walkable radius. The city points out in the Downtown Specific Plan that the ten-block International Fair District, the retail core of the downtown area, can be covered in its entirety in less time than one can cover the entirety of the average regional mall. In fact, no point in the four commercial districts is more than four-minute walk from the commuter rail station. Should the city be able to establish a wide variety of commercial businesses within the International Fair in such a compact area, it should be able to tap into a population that patronizes regional malls for precisely this reason.

The downtown area also offers a large quantity of vintage commercial / industrial built stock in good condition that is suitable for adaptive reuse, and thus would not have to be demolished for redevelopment to occur. Many buildings along Second Street have already been rehabilitated and now house restaurants and specialty retail stores. The high ceilings and large open spaces of such buildings, many of which formerly served as warehouses, have also made them perfect for conversion to artist lofts and galleries, which require such characteristics. These traits have proven to be successful in attracting dozens of artists to the downtown area, and have helped spawn the Pomona Arts Colony. The Pomona Arts Colony website (www.pomonaartcolony.com) lists fifteen galleries located along 2nd, Main, and Thomas Streets, and the area offers an ArtWalk exhibition the second Saturday of each month, to allow the public to come and view their work. As many of the artists that work and exhibit their pieces downtown also live there, downtown Pomona has a resident artists population to draw from. The

10 role that artists often play in urban revitalization will be discussed at length in Chapters two and four.

In addition to the sense of community Pomona provides for artists, another major attraction of the area is its affordable lease rates. As of two years ago, lease rates in the area ranged from $525 to $825 for lofts that range in size from 750 to 2000 square feet. (http://www.downtownpomona.com/rentals.htm) When compared with Los Angeles, West Hollywood, and other areas within greater Los Angeles that typically attract artists, downtown Pomona is significantly less expensive. Downtown Pomona also benefits from its proximity to several major universities. The City of Pomona estimates that some 95,000 students attend universities that are located within a fifteen-minute drive of the area. (http://www.ci.pomona.ca.us/Properties/One%20Page%20Flyers/MissionGarey.pdf)

Besides offering another built-in population of consumers and a large resource of educated and knowledgeable professionals, these universities are also potential development partners for the city. The Western University of Health Sciences is a post-graduate university located downtown that offers a number of medical and health-related degrees. Through its ambulatory care medical center and the variety of free medical screenings and educational programs that it provides to Pomona residents, Western’s Second Street campus and facilities would be directly affected by any changes that occur downtown.

Cal Poly Pomona is also a downtown presence, with its Downtown Center located at Second and Main Streets. The Cal Poly Pomona Downtown Center lists its mission as “provid[ing] a forum for the University to bring education and applied knowledge to downtown Pomona, thereby contributing to the economic revitalization of the city,” in hopes of receiving “an ongoing education in the realities and issues faced by the City of Pomona.” (http://www.class.csupomona.edu/downtown/goals.html) The Downtown Center facilities include a gallery, studio theater, and computer lab, which help the university to sponsor events ranging from a street gallery of public art to arts classes for local children and adults. Other potential development partners include Mount San Antonio College, DeVry University, Westech College (a computer training school located on Mission Blvd), and the Claremont Colleges, a

11 collection of five liberal arts colleges plus a graduate center located five miles northeast in Claremont. Another potential development partner for downtown Pomona is the Los Angeles County Fairplex. Located approximately 2 miles northwest of downtown Pomona, the Fairplex is known primarily as the site of the Los Angeles County Fair, yet it hosts nearly 300 events per year on it various facilities, which include a Sheraton hotel, horse racing track, automobile raceway and museum, and RV park. Fairplex officials estimate that the facility generates some $70 million annually for the Pomona community.

Major Limitations to Revitalization While the downtown area contains several assets, several issues must also be considered as liabilities that might hinder downtown revitalization. The downtown’s commercial woes can be traced back several decades, with much of it due to local shopping center competition. As discussed above, the Pomona Mall could not compete with newer freeway-oriented development, particularly Montclair Plaza. Over the years, several other pedestrian and regional malls have appeared in the region, leading to an even more competitive commercial shopping center market in the Pomona Valley. The stiffest competition comes from the colossal Ontario Mills, a 1.7 million square foot regional shopping center housing over 250 shops, restaurants, and entertainment venues, located ten miles east of downtown Pomona. Downtown Pomona would be unlikely to attract shoppers looking for major retail chains, as the center boasts over a dozen anchor stores. Several other major mall developments are found along the I-10 freeway in Montclair and West Covina, at the intersection of the 210 and 30 freeways in San Dimas, and along the 60 freeway in the City of Industry.

While these malls represent strong and possibly overwhelming competition for downtown Pomona in the area of general retail and mall-based entertainment, they are not direct competitors to the type of niche-oriented, arts-and-culture driven, organic pedestrian scale neighborhood commercial district envisioned by the downtown business community and the Downtown Specific Plan. Other local entertainment districts in the Eastern San Gabriel Valley and Pomona Valley, many of them also centered on older downtowns of former citrus packing towns, are more direct competition in this geographic market niche. Similar, though smaller centers of this type, often embellished by redevelopment, are found in Covina, LaVerne, and

12 (increasingly) Azusa; farther afield, visitors are drawn from varying distances to the older centers of Monrovia, Whittier, and the larger cities Anaheim and Riverside.

By far the most direct competition for Pomona in terms of neighborhood entertainment and shopping, however, is Claremont Village, in the center of the City of Claremont. Located five miles northeast of downtown Pomona, Claremont Village offers a mixture of outdoor retail, dining, and entertainment activities similar to that Pomona is aiming for. Designed to reflect the city’s small-town, academic and commercial roots, the Village is an alternative to mall retailers; the streets are lined with trees and public art, and the streets teem with local students from the Claremont Colleges, artists, and assorted well educated, well-heeled visitors. The image of Claremont differs greatly from that of Pomona, which is seen as more urban, more industrial, and containing more non-Anglo persons and more low-income persons (including some Anglos). There is anecdotal evidence that many residents of the region view downtown Pomona as an unsafe area due to its large Hispanic population and aging built environment. This perception, however distastefully unscientific, might prove difficult to overcome.

Is the commonly held assumption that working class and non-Anglo persons correlate with danger and crime valid? Of the 55 California cities with populations over 100,000, Pomona had the 22nd highest rate of major crimes in the year 2000, with 3,952 crimes per 100,000 population (preliminary results for 2001 show this to have risen to 4,120 crimes per 100,000 population. This level represents the 19th highest rate for California cities above 100,000). (http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/police/chief/cas/stats/rates/RATES01.htm). While relatively high, this number is about 5% less than that of nearby Pasadena, which has seen its downtown area experience a startling revival over the past ten years. Clearly, perceptions of danger and crime differ greatly from actual risk, and not always in predictable ways. While popular misconceptions often appear to reflect racial and ethnic bias, Pasadena’s boom is occurring not only in a higher crime city than Pomona, but also in a city of increasing ethnic diversity and rapidly declining (in fact, vanished) predominance of non-Hispanic whites (Myers and Park, 2001). This example suggests that it is not a decline in negatively perceived markers that leads to improved perceptions of place, but rather perceived positive developments that render potential visitors willing to overlook local facts on the ground that might otherwise

13 discourage them from spending time in the location. This bodes well for Pomona, inasmuch as it will be easier (and more plausible) for the city to make noticeable improvements in the urban environment than to attempt to change the ethnic and income structure of its population for the sole purpose of accommodating the irrational ethnic and class fears of potential visitors.

One final obstacle that a successful revitalization would need to overcome is the seeming lack of community in downtown Pomona. While the downtown area is bustling during the day, business and pedestrian traffic tends to drop off at night. Besides nights when special activities such as the Second Saturday art walk are planned, a concert is taking place at one of the local clubs, or the Fox Theater has been rented out, downtown streets have little traffic. Partly this is due to the fact that beyond the few stores and venues that cater to their needs and tastes specifically, the local majority Latino population are not drawn to the downtown during the evening hours. Essentially the Arts Colony strategy is not designed specifically to serve the Latino community, despite the excellent effort by galleries to promote the work of Latino, and especially local Latino artists. The new Latino Art Museum at 256 S. Main is evidence of the Arts Colony’s commitment to this goal. But fine arts are never a mass market phenomenon for any demographic. Complementary services that target local and regional markets more broadly would help build a sense of community downtown through increased use of the area.

Thus, there are three possible strategies for revitalization in downtown Pomona: The Arts Colony approach, a residential development strategy to bring more residents (and presumably more class diversity) to the downtown, and a local niche marketing strategy to develop services for the local residents (who are predominantly Latino). These approaches are by no means mutually exclusive, and all three have been pursued with some degree of success. Ultimately, however, there are trade-offs to each of these strategies in terms of increasing downtown traffic, especially foot traffic and especially in the evening hours. The fastest way to achieve these goals would be to exclusively promote services catering to the local population. In the long run, however, the residential and Arts Colony strategies can be expected to yield a deeper and more sustainable economic recovery, provided the downtown can overcome regional competition to attract visitors and new residents in sufficient numbers. The tension that arises

14 between tactics designed to meet short term and long term goals also takes other forms, which we will discuss in greater detail below.

Previous Economic Development Studies Over the last fifteen years, several studies have evaluated the redevelopment potential of Pomona. The first of these, “Mobilizing Pomona’s Human and Physical Resources: a Comprehensive Development Strategy,” was completed in 1990 by Trevor Campbell, Lukman Clarke, and Eduardo Ochoa. While the document analyzes Pomona as a whole, several interesting ideas regarding downtown were discussed within the report’s recommendations. The study draws a parallel between Pomona and the City of Santa Ana, a city located 25 miles south in Orange County. The authors feel that due to similar socio-demographics, downtown Pomona could become successful by imitating the ‘mercado’ theme of development in downtown Santa Ana. It is proposed that catering to the local Hispanic community might help to achieve a similar intimacy and sense of security, and thus draw them downtown for a variety of retail, entertainment, and dining needs.

The study calls for a mix of uses, in hopes of increasing the density of stores and making it more pedestrian friendly. It points out that downtown Pomona is already identified with its historic buildings, antiques district, and numerous artists. It calls for a modification to zoning laws to allow live-work lofts for artists, which did take place later in the decade. Addressing the apparent lack of community, the study encourages more condominiums be built as opposed to rental housing, which might parlay the pride of home ownership into a more active role in one’s community. Overall, it was felt that creating new businesses that better catered to the area’s two major population segments- artists and Hispanics- would help to revitalize downtown. Until now, most of this focus appears to have been placed on improving the artist community, while doing little to attract the local Hispanic population. This will be discussed later in Chapter 4. In general, Campbell et al.’s study appears to have been influential in shaping both the Arts Colony strategy and the Downtown Specific Plan.

Several years later, a site case study of the South Garey Avenue area was completed as part of the Livable Communities Program by The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments

15 (SGVCOG). A large portion of this study examines the relationship between urban design and economic development, and discussing several New Urbanist principles. There is an emphasis on capital improvement projects, such as infrastructure, streetscape, and housing, with the belief that public investments would eventually lead to private investment and development. Among other things, it discusses the need to create a local identity and develop pedestrian scale walkways, which along with other streetscape improvements, such as a network of public spaces and pedestrian linkages, would be achieved by way of projects. It concludes that the South Garey Avenue area is suitable for mixed-use developments, and that infill housing on the downtown periphery lots would be able to create a viable downtown population able to sustain the new downtown uses.

16 Chapter Two: Downtown Decline and Strategies for Downtown Revitalization

The Life Cycle of Downtowns The problem of urban revitalization can only be properly understood in the broader context of urban and regional growth cycles. In their book Urban America: From Downtown to No Town, David Goldfield and Blaine Brownell describe four basic urban forms when attempting to explain the history of urban America. They describe the period between 1870 and 1920 as ‘the radial center,’ an era which brought about the regionalization of the American urban system. As metropolitan areas began to appear throughout the nation, a dramatic population shift began to occur, causing millions to move from rural to urban areas throughout the country. The US Census shows that as the population nearly tripled from 38 million to over 106 million during these fifty years, the percentage of Americans living in urban areas doubled, from just 25.7% in 1870 to over 51% in 1920. During this period, larger industries began moving to the periphery in search of more and cheaper space, and downtown areas became primarily retail, wholesale, financial, and entertainment centers.

Downtown areas are believed to have reached their pinnacle in the 1920s, by which time they had developed into large, central areas that served the retailing, office, government and entertainment needs of a population that was still highly dependent on mass transit and areas that could accommodate significant pedestrian traffic. (Robertson, 1995) By 1930, 56.2% of the American population lived in urban areas. However, as automobile ownership and use began to rapidly increase in the years just prior to the Great Depression, American growth and development entered what Goldfield and Brownell labeled ‘the vital fringe.’ Changes in transportation from mass transit to automobiles took away the locational advantages of many downtown areas, a process which accelerated beginning in the 1950s with the construction of a federal highway system.

The years following the end of World War II brought rapid growth and economic prosperity to the nation, but started an era of sprawl and decentralization that would devastate

17 many urban centers. Mass automobile ownership and highway building programs caused metropolitan areas to expand rapidly, since the new development option of suburban sprawl made possible by an automotive society proved much easier than redeveloping older urban districts. Probably more important to developers in their decision to pursue sprawl than perceptions of inner city blight were the large tracts of open land available for huge master planned subdivisions on the urban fringe. These areas, which were previously beyond commuting range but suddenly viable as potential suburbs due to the triumph of automobiles, presented no existing developed use patterns to compete with or complicate the typical postwar suburban landscape of tract homes on cul-de-sacs that began sprouting on the periphery of American cities like mushrooms after a spring rain. As the population began to move away, so too did downtown businesses, which eventually led to the creation of major job centers in the suburbs (so-called “edge cities” often emerging at key freeway intersections, of which the more recently developed parts of Ontario, California are an excellent example). Many newer suburban areas quickly went from farm or bedroom communities to urban centers in their own right in the span of relatively few years.

By the 1960’s, older urban centers had been transformed. As whites fled to the suburbs, blacks and other minorities replaced then in older inner city neighborhoods. The combination of racial bias, physically depreciating older built environments and a weak commercial base led to large scale disinvestment in these now minority neighborhoods. The resulting lack of funds for building maintenance and commercial ventures caused further decline, touching off a downward spiraling feedback loop of neighborhood decline. The result was so-called donut cities, in which inner cities became social and economic vacuums of poverty and disadvantage surrounded by healthier neighborhoods of businesses, retail and relatively affluent residents (Beaureguard, 1993). The civil unrest and urban rioting in the mid and late 1960s that shook America would aggravate this process. Confronting this pattern of decline, “urban renewal” policies of the 1950s and 1960s consisted of little more than razing entire neighborhoods, with the hope that large open tracts of land would be redeveloped as more desirable residential neighborhoods. In fact, large shopping centers or government buildings, or expanding institutions such as hospitals and universities, typically filled the resulting clearances. The result was displacement and an aggravation of the acute shortage of affordable housing.

The decline of urban centers has not been limited to large cities such as New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Smaller cities have faced many of the same setbacks that decentralization has brought to their larger brethren, although processes have been somewhat different. A few studies have been done on how isolated (or “stand alone”) small cities, most typical in the Midwest and the South, have performed in the era of decentralization. One of the best is Robertson’s Downtown Development Principles for Small Cities, which discusses cities such as Texarkana, Texas/Arkansas; Carson City, Nevada; and Wausau, Wisconsin. Small city downtowns tend to be laid out on a more pedestrian scale, have lower levels of traffic and crime, less corporate presence, closer associations to residential neighborhoods, and (until recently) a retail structure not as dependent on large, national chains. There appear to be no studies on the particular redevelopment challenges of aging downtowns in smaller cities like Pomona that are peripheral centers within a large metropolitan system.

Southern California presents several excellent examples of peripheral cities, most of which exhibit characteristics that lie somewhere between small cities and large stand alone cities. Cities such as Burbank, Glendale, Long Beach, Pasadena, Pomona, Santa Ana, and Santa Monica emerged in the late 19th Century in peripheral Los Angeles County. By the early 20th Century these cities had developed their own commercial business districts and industries. Many of these industrial suburbs continued to grow during the 1930s through the 1950s, housing a population that had begun to decentralize locally but had not yet entered the age of truly suburban sprawl. Because of this, many of these smaller peripheral cities were not as rapidly impacted financially as their associated central cities, and in many instances experienced rapid growth even after the end of World War II. For example, while retail sales increased 50% between 1935 and 1939 and nearly quadrupled between the years of 1939 and 1948 in Los Angeles County, retail sales in the city of Los Angeles saw increases of just 10% and 100%, respectively, which demonstrates the mid-century economic vitality of peripheral cities. (Fogelson, 2001)

Sprawl-oriented growth and the accompanying disinvestment in older, central urban areas have harmed all the residents of the sprawling metropolis, not only the residents of the declining

19 inner cities. It has promoted an inefficient urban morphology that has produced significantly higher commute times, and created a series of prepackaged sprawl communities that lack the social and historical context and aesthetic depth of older communities that developed organically as human environments over time. Put another way, the undesirable geographies arising from sprawl and inner city disinvestment are a socially and culturally toxic externality generated in markets for developed land and inflicted, much like pollution, on society at large. Therefore the redevelopment, revitalization and re-use of existing urban areas are public policy priorities intended to restore health and balance to the urban system. These policies are pursued by a variety of means, including public subsidies and tax expenditures, organized maintenance reinvestment by merchant groups, regulatory support for and cooperation with potential redevelopers, and a variety of urban design strategies.

A word is in order regarding revitalization and gentrification. While often used synonymously, these terms are distinct: Gentrification is the process through which undervalued existing urban areas are transformed, physically, economically and socially, into more expensive (and socially exclusive) districts through a series of investments, changes in the target demographic and/or tenant mix of retail and service outlets, and ultimately changes in commonly held perceptions of the area. Gentrification is thus one type of revitalization process, with particular consequences for local economies, social structures and built environments. “Revitalization”, depending upon context, may alternatively mean a commercial renaissance; or simply a transformation of the social life of the neighborhood (reduction in crime and of social elements deemed undesirable by acknowledged stakeholders), combined with fairly superficial esthetic improvements in the physical environment, but not necessarily significant economic transformation. Groups of stakeholders may therefore agree about revitalization but disagree about gentrification.

Logically, the operators of properties have a vested interest in gentrification, i.e. an increase in the value of their properties. This interest is especially acute for redevelopers involved in new construction or the repositioning of existing properties. Indeed, depending on the strategic vision of the developers, such investments can amount to a gamble that gentrification will occur locally within a given time period. Even where project underwriting is

20 conservative, redevelopers assume that the existing neighborhoods in which they invest will at the very least not decline economically. This is not to say that redevelopers of existing urban areas are mere speculators; rather, through their investments they are linked to, and contribute to, the process of urban change far more directly and dynamically than non-productive speculators in commodity or financial markets. Furthermore, because of the extreme complexity of urban land as a commodity, their risk can be harder to manage. It is therefore entirely sensible for such developers to take a strong interest in every aspect of neighborhood revitalization, since the social and esthetic condition of the neighborhoods they invest in are major components of their risk and return.

Tenants’ interests in gentrification are more complex, and to some extent divided by tenant type. Tenants are not always uniformly opposed to rent increases, provided a) that they can afford them and b) that rent increases do not exceed the perceived value of improvements in housing services and amenities (including neighborhood amenities). Other things being equal, however, tenants obviously don’t like increases in rents because they are interested in deriving personal use values from spaces at the lowest possible cost. Commercial (i.e. retail and service) tenants can be expected to have more mixed feelings about rent increases: commercial leases are a cost of doing business entrepreneurs wish to minimize, but gentrification is normally associated with changes in the amount, timing and composition of traffic (including foot traffic) that lead to increases in sales and revenue. For commercial tenants, therefore, gentrification becomes a cost/benefit question whether higher revenues offset rent increases.

Commercial Redevelopment Strategies Two assumptions are generally made when discussing revitalization policies: first, that the policies will lead to a multiplier effect; and second, that the limits to sprawl will create opportunities for creative redevelopment in existing core areas of cities. The theory of the multiplier effect is that direct investment in projects or landscape improvements by public agencies will eventually generate additional benefits by making the area more attractive to private market-driven investors, thus leveraging additional investment dollars for each subsidy dollar expended. Additionally, it is assumed that as the metropolis continues to expand spatially

21 beyond a critical threshold of average commuting time, central areas will gain desirability and hence some incremental competitive advantage in attracting development investment.

As the focus of this chapter is on commercial revitalization in urban areas, it is important to distinguish commercial revitalization from employment-based economic development. Commercial revitalization entails practices and policies that will make an area attractive for private investment in real estate, with the hope that this investment will lead to the revival of the commercial core and associated residential districts. Employment-based redevelopment, on the other hand, employs the theory that the presence of more and better job opportunities alone can lead to neighborhood revival. This theory was behind many of the urban renewal projects of the 1950s and 1960s, and again in the 1980s, that saw large numbers of downtown businesses and residents displaced in favor of large office complexes. The strategies listed below are limited to the area of commercial revitalization, with the exception of community development corporations (CDCs). Since the 1970s, the focus of many CDCs has been on bringing job centers to urban neighborhoods. (Zdenek, 1987)

In most cases, an existing core serves as the target of commercial revitalization efforts, an area that formerly served as the nucleus of the city’s commercial efforts prior to its decline. Such areas are often known as central business districts, or CBDs. A term that originated at the beginning of the 20th Century, by the 1920’s the term central business district was used almost interchangeably with downtown, as the creation of peripheral business districts in ever-widening metropolitan areas meant that downtown was no longer the only business district. (Fogelson, 2001) After decentralization began in the 1920’s, growth in outlying business districts eventually contributed to the deterioration of downtown economic conditions. Yet, for all of the ills that central business districts have faced over the last seventy five years, they remain the chief target of most downtown revitalization efforts. This is because they usually represent the historic center of the city, are compact in size, and in the past have been the commercial center of the city. These key characteristics make CBDs a natural setting for downtown revitalization efforts, with the implied hope that commercial revival will then expand to outlying areas.

22 Civic, Entertainment, and Cultural Centers: “Big Ticket” Redevelopment Projects The last several decades have seen an increase in public/private partnerships, in which the public entity (city, county, or state) and private developer work together on major development projects. Such ventures are most common when significant public incentives are necessary to make the project feasible. In many cases, public subsidies for downtown redevelopment are focused on one large “big ticket” project. The Urban Land Institute describes such a revitalization strategy as a catalytic approach to revitalization; as opposed to an incremental strategy, which is implemented over a long period of time, “development with a catalyst usually relies on a major development to revitalize the downtown” on its own. (ULI, 1992) Catalytic approaches to downtown revitalization can take the form of sports arenas or ballparks, large museums or cultural centers, making up what Frieden and Sagalyn (1989) have described as “the civic agenda for downtown development in the last third of the twentieth century, a trophy collection that mayors want”.

Robertson labels such projects “special activity generators,” which tend to be most successful in medium to large cities within a greater metropolitan area. The appeal of these special activity generators are that they can draw large numbers of visitors downtown, including significant numbers from outside the greater metropolitan area. However, the amount of public subsidies contributed to these redevelopment projects are dependent on the degree of multiplier effect that they are anticipated to have on downtown as a whole, which varies according to the dynamics of the urban area and the specific type of project. For example, convention centers are currently experiencing a surge in popularity, with 20 new convention centers under construction as of 2000 expected to increase the total convention space in this country to 82 million square feet by 2005, an increase of about 35%. (http://www.tradeshowweek.com) Convention centers are appealing because of the multiplier effects that they are anticipated to have, such as increased business for downtown hotels, restaurants, and retail businesses, and are thus often heavily funded by public subsidies.

One problem with convention centers is that when they are not in use, they are nothing more than dead space, sitting idly and not contributing anything to surrounding downtown businesses. This is often the criticism leveled at another type of big-ticket project that has

23 proven popular in the last few decades: downtown sports arenas and stadiums. Economists such as Dennis Coats and Brad Humphreys of the University of Maryland, in their 2000 report, “The Stadium Gambit and Local Economic Development,” have blasted such projects being billed as catalysts for nearby development, saying that their “research suggests that professional sports may be a drain on local economies rather than an engine of economic growth.” One of the arguments is that unlike convention centers, downtown stadiums and arenas draw a mostly local metropolitan crowd that stay downtown for a shorter period of time, and thus do not pump as much money into downtown businesses, decreasing the multiplier effect. Nationwide, the willingness of municipalities to contribute public subsidies seems to vary on a city-by-city basis. While cities such as Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Milwaukee and Detroit have picked up most of the tab for the construction of new stadiums, San Francisco saw the construction of a downtown stadium constructed with only $10 million in tax increment financing, and several Missouri legislators went on record opposing public funding of a new stadium for baseball’s St. Louis Cardinals, although the deal was eventually approved. (Schlinkman, 2002) In addition, disputes over public subsidies for a stadium to house a new NFL team have kept the City of Los Angeles without a professional football team for the last seven years, with city leaders unconvinced that a downtown stadium would be worth the amount of money being asked for.

The development of cultural venues as the linchpin for urban revitalization is part of a trend, found throughout the United States and Western Europe, toward reinventing cities with dwindling production capacities as sites of cultural consumption. (Strom, 2000) When discussing cultural venues, it is important to distinguish between the three types of cultural revitalization strategies that exist. Sports arenas and stadiums would be classified under the first: centralized, low-culture venues. Such strategies are typically aimed at attracting a broad demographic mix. The second type of cultural strategy is a centralized, high-culture approach. For example, the revitalization and redevelopment of downtown Cleveland, Ohio is often traced back to the renovation of three theaters in the 1970’s, which helped to turn Cleveland into a regional cultural center and attract scores of new suburbanites that had recently moved away from the city. (Weber, 1997) Although most high cultural activities do not turn a profit, the theory behind them is that they may leverage other investments that do. High culture projects tend to attract an audience that is disproportionately affluent and well educated. By attracting such an audience, cities present a coveted demographic group that will be attractive to various

24 types of retail establishment. The final type of cultural strategy is the decentralized strategy. By offering subsidies to several smaller businesses and institutions, cities aim to spur extensive local entrepreneurship as the route to commercial revitalization. The advantage of a decentralized policy is that public subsidies can fund a wider variety of uses, with the hopes that a larger and more diverse segment of the population will be attracted downtown. Several examples of cities that have used this approach with positive results are discussed in Chapter three.

Centralized Commercial Strategies As suburban malls are often seen as one of the major causes of the decrease in downtown commercial efforts, many cities have responded with large-scale, centralized commercial strategies for their downtowns. The three most common strategies are malls, mixed-use developments, and Urban Entertainment Centers. The philosophy behind downtown malls is that by combining the selection and convenience of a regional mall with the uniqueness and vitality of a downtown area, downtown will be able to attract not just city residents, but downtown workers and metropolitan area residents as well. Workers will be presented with a retail experience equal to the average suburban mall, and might thus stay after work to do their shopping downtown, instead of rushing back to the suburbs. At the same time, a downtown mall might prove to be attractive to metropolitan residents, who might be drawn to the possibility to visit a cultural center or eat in a nice restaurant while they are downtown. Following the construction of the first downtown mall in 1964 in Rochester, NY, several downtown malls were built in the 1970s, mostly in medium-size cities such as New Haven, Connecticut; Buffalo, New York; Worcester, Massachusetts; and San Bernardino, California. (Frieden and Sagalyn, 1989). While most of these downtown malls did fairly well, retail sales still fell below industry-wide benchmarks. When combined with the large number of obstacles such projects must overcome, such as difficulties in assembling the necessary amount of land and land costs significantly higher than the suburbs, downtown malls have proven to be a difficult sell to cities and developers alike.

The Urban Land Institute’s Downtown Development Handbook (1992) states “a diversity of uses is one of the most important characteristics of a vital downtown,” which can often lead cities to “encourage a mix of development types through zoning and financial incentives.” This

25 philosophy has led many cities to implement so-called mixed-use or master planned developments, combining retail with entertainment venues and sometimes office and residential space. One of the key components to such projects is that the development is “in conformance with a coherent plan,” which is “quite different from the unplanned mix of uses in projects by different developers.” (ULI, 1992) By limiting plans for the project to just one or a few developers, cities ensure that the individual pieces are more likely to fit together and complement one another. However, this can also lead to high front-end costs and put the city at greater risk should the project not succeed. Because of this, such projects are often developed in phases, so as to gauge the success of the early stages of the development and enable cash flow from the completed sections help to fund the later stages of the project. As of the early 1990s, mixed-use developments accounted for a very small percentage of total downtown development in this country. However, recent years have seen several large-scale projects in cities such as San Diego, Boston, Portland, and Phoenix, and the majority of these developments can be considered successful. In very recent times, the Trizec-Hahn company has completed innovative, mass transit oriented mixed use developments in downtown Pasadena (Paseo Colorado) and at Hollywood Boulevard and Highland. Increasingly, mixed-use developments are seen as a desirable way for medium and large-sized cities to incorporate housing, retail, and employment centers in one compact area.

A third commercial strategy that often is centralized in nature and is sometimes used to revitalize older CBDs is the urban entertainment district, a variant of the urban entertainment center (UEC). UECs are defined as pedestrian spaces that create synergies between entertainment, dining and retail (ULI, 1998). As such they are destinations with a long expected stay whether they are incorporated into the fabric of an existing urban area (as is Paseo Colorado, a mixed use development that combines the features of an urban entertainment center with housing) or are constructed remote from existing areas (e.g. Ontario Mills). Centralized UECs such as the two examples given are master planned developments in which all space, both leased and public (or more accurately, quasi-public) is developed, owned and operated by a single principal entity. UECs can also be developed (or employed as a strategy to redevelop existing areas) as districts, in a decentralized way. Urban entertainment districts are developed as a functional infrastructure in which numerous independent retailers and service providers are encouraged to locate. Indeed, shopkeepers currently operating there may already own many of

26 the properties in these areas. Urban entertainment districts will be discussed in more detail below.

Decentralized Commercial Strategies and Historic Preservation Many central cities have come to the realization that suburban areas have competitive advantages for mainstream mass retailing, including less expensive land, more and easier parking, and better freeway access. These make direct competition with suburban regional malls difficult. So, instead of downtown malls or large mixed-use developments, several cities have adopted a variety of decentralized commercial strategies. The major appeal of such a strategy is often the formation of a retail niche by which the community becomes known and with which it is associated. (Milder, 1997) Some examples of decentralized commercial strategies are antiques districts and farmer’s markets, which often attract people from outside of the community who “make a day” out of coming downtown.

In the last ten years, the emerging concept of the urban entertainment center (UEC) has been applied to revitalization efforts in older CBDs and other existing urban commercial districts in need of large scale repositioning. While the typical centralized version of the UEC can be thought of as a new, improved version of the traditional shopping mall, applying the UEC concept to create urban entertainment districts in existing urban areas usually requires a decentralized approach. This is true because there are numerous property owners in such environments, but also because the open space is truly public, rather than being owned by the entity that controls entire centers under the centralized model. Aesthetic and physical planning improvements to the public space therefore cannot be directed by any single private entity. For many of the same reasons, urban entertainment districts intended to revitalize a declining older retail district typically involve large scale public investment and the creation of one or more public/private partnerships for investment. The prototype urban entertainment district of this type is the Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica, California. The success of the Third Street Promenade rests both on its design as a district and on the mix of retail, services and activities it provides. The design and some of the activities (including programmed street performances) were made possible by significant public investment. Key features of the design are an extremely well landscaped pedestrian mall, with ample seating, kiosks that break up the

27 rectangular street environment into smaller, variegated spaces, graphic banners, striking dinosaur topiary and, critically, vast amounts of affordable parking in city-built and city operated parking structures. The most important design element, however, is large numbers of people on foot, enjoying themselves and spending money. The evolution of pedestrian traffic on the Third Street Promenade is instructive: consumers were attracted first by a concentration of movie theaters. The movie crowds, in turn, supported a growing number of restaurants, and finally, as the Promenade became a recognized destination, retail was transformed. Moreover, the Third Street Promenade bears special comparison to Downtown Pomona, not just because of the similar urban setting in a small, peripheral downtown in greater Los Angeles, but because both are attempts to update unsuccessful pedestrian malls that date from the early to mid 1960s.

Decentralized strategies can be a smart and welcome change of pace in cities that exist within a highly competitive metropolitan retail market, especially when combined with historic preservation efforts. Concern for historic preservation in aging CBDs is a relatively recent phenomenon that stands in sharp contrast to the wholesale destruction wrought by urban renewal projects of the 1950s and 1960s. A 1966 report by the U.S. Conference of Mayors’ Special Committee noted that of all the historic landmarks of local identity recorded in detail over the previous three decades, nearly half had been demolished or mutilated beyond recognition. (Moe and Wilkie, 1997) However, the last few decades have seen the preservation of older, architecturally significant buildings become a major revitalization strategy. Historic preservation entails the adaptive reuse of older buildings, in which a building constructed for one purpose is converted to house a different use. The strategy has resulted in an abundance of historic neighborhoods and buildings nationwide, in cities of all different sizes. Bigger cities often designate entire neighborhoods as historic districts, as well as drafting specific ordinances regarding historic preservation. Meanwhile, many smaller cities have followed the guidelines of the Main Street program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which aims at “building on downtown’s inherent assets- rich architecture, personal service, and traditional values and most of all, a sense of place.” (http://www.mainst.org/AboutMainStreet/aboutmain.htm) Downtowns that exhibit these characteristics are distinctively appealing compared to the surrounding cookie-cutter metropolitan sprawl. These assets are often seen as a means of attracting customers who desire to enhance their retail experience.

Decentralized commercial strategies based on historic preservation have had mixed results over the last few decades. The 1970s saw the creation of several festival markets, consisting of specialty shops, entertainment, and food aimed at affluent adults, but interest waned in response to disappointing economic performance and an over-saturation of the market (Robertson, 1995). However, the last two decades have seen increased federal and state funding allow many cities develop grant and loan programs to encourage historic preservation and adaptive reuse. According to the National Park Service’s Federal Historic Preservation program, federal tax incentives for historic preservation since 1976 have helped fund some $18 billion in private rehabilitation efforts, resulting in the rehabilitation of more than 27,000 historic buildings. (http://www2.cr.nps.gov/tps/tax/tax_p.htm)

Residential Strategies Recognizing that residential flight to the suburbs was a precursor to the commercial decentralization that has led to the deterioration of downtown areas, many cities have focused their earliest revitalization efforts on developing more and better downtown housing. Contemporary downtown housing is often developed within the context of two downtown revitalization strategies: mixed used developments and historic preservation. Discussed above, mixed use developments are projects that consist of three or more significant revenue-producing uses; besides residential units, these uses can include retail, office, entertainment, cultural, and recreational. (ULI, 1992) Residential units are typically located along the upper floors of such developments, with retail, entertainment, and office uses below. Urban centers typically focus on the cultural aura and variety of dining and retail options of downtowns when marketing to one of their key demographics: aging baby-boomers. As baby boomers begin to retire and their children move away, they are increasingly attracted to the cultural venues that downtowns offer. (Axtman, 2001) Because these baby boomers are mostly relatively affluent, they present a more attractive commercial population to downtown businesses and developers, making subsequent commercial revitalization more likely.

Often aided by the financial incentives (tax increment financing, tax abatements, low mortgages) that are common in large-scale mixed-use developments, downtown housing of the

29 past two decades has been able to better compete with suburban housing. However, new downtown housing more often than not still incurs higher development costs than competing suburban settings. Allowing for higher residential densities is one way that cities address this issue, as more units make for a better rate of return for downtown developers, and thus make downtown areas more appealing. Another method gaining in popularity is the adaptive reuse of existing buildings, with the most common practice loft conversion (the term loft refers to apartment units built in an existing industrial, commercial or public building that has been at least partially retrofitted for residential use. Originally, these lofts were large, undivided spaces with high ceilings that directly reflected the original industrial open floor plan, and which were particularly suitable as live-work spaces for artists, but the term is increasingly used for any residential unit in a retrofitted industrial building, or even in purpose-designed new multi-use buildings). Most downtowns offer an abundance of large industrial buildings in relatively good condition. Many of these buildings are eligible for grants, loans, and tax credits through various historic preservation programs, making downtown lofts even more attractive as redevelopment investments.

Pedestrian Friendly Environments Robertson states that “the most important benefit from improving the environment for pedestrians is a more attractive image of downtown for potential users,” since “the vitality and positive image of a downtown often are gauged not by economic indicators, but by the volume of pedestrian activity.” (Robertson, 1995) Increasing pedestrian traffic can help to increase a sense of safety and security downtown, and thereby make the area more commercially attractive. Some of the tactics for increasing pedestrian traffic include widening sidewalks, establishing more sitting spaces, and completely separating pedestrians from vehicular traffic, achieved through street closures and barriers. When these characteristics are combined, the resulting pedestrian malls allow customers to walk from store to store in a controlled outdoor setting, eliminating any worries about vehicular traffic.

Aesthetic Solutions Prior to any economic revitalization, many cities can benefit from a variety of strategies to help improve the aesthetic image of the downtown area, as real or perceived blight often

30 fosters feelings that downtowns are unsafe. Funding for these aesthetic improvements can come from either public or private sources. Public agencies often use money from the Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) to initiate grant and loan programs for façade improvement, landscaping, or uniform signage, in hopes of cleaning up the image of their downtown areas. In addition, downtown businesses themselves can form business improvement districts (discussed later this chapter) as a way to supplement city services.

Public art is an aesthetic solution that is gaining more and more acceptance as a downtown revitalization strategy. Public art can serve to draw a disproportionately affluent segment of the population downtown, which once there can be expected to patronize the local businesses. It is a strategy that works well when combined with pedestrian malls or other decentralized commercial strategies. Offering an attractive visual atmosphere can help differentiate a community that otherwise is very similar to surrounding municipalities, providing it with a competitive commercial advantage.

Safety and Security In her Downtown Safety Strategies (2000) Dolores Palma lists three categories of factors that contribute to the perception that downtown areas are unsafe. The first set of factors are physical or environmental, and include property condition, amount of lighting, and the presence of litter and graffiti, with the belief that poor physical condition presents the image of an abandoned, and therefore unsafe, downtown. The second set of factors are social, and include the presence of the homeless, panhandlers, and excessive loitering, which can create an atmosphere of intimidation or fear in downtown customers. The final set of factors is image related, such as the nature and extent of media coverage of an area, and the effect that they have on the viewing population. For, as Palma says, “it is ironic that the physical, environmental, social, and image-related items discussed above often carry greater weight- in terms of downtown being viewed as unsafe- than incidents of real downtown crime.” (Palma, 2000)

Realizing that differences between real and perceived crime often exist in older urban center, one downtown revitalization strategy that can be used is the establishment of a greater feeling of safety and security in the neighborhood. This can come from developing a closer

31 relationship between police officers and local residents and businesses, through community policing or police augmentation downtown. As perceptions of crime often prove to be more important than actual crime, these exhibitions of safety and security can aid in making downtown areas more attractive to potential residents and consumers.

Branding of an Area In discussing decentralized commercial strategies above, the idea of “niche” retailing was presented as a method of establishing a commercial presence by which that area becomes known. By developing such a niche, the area can become branded as the best place for a specific venture. The branding strategy can be especially successful in smaller cities that might not be able to attract big retail chains or cultural venues to take up residence in their downtown. Instead, a city can seek to gain name recognition based on a smaller decentralized strategy, such as the aforementioned antiques district or farmers’ market. Branding is not limited to small cities, however. For example, Anaheim, California has come to be associated with all things Disney. While this might be an extreme example, it illustrates that a unique commercial presence can help to distinguish a community from its competitors, which, once established, can attract customers downtown that would not necessarily have visited before.

Financial and Investment Structure With such a wide variety of strategies available to cities hoping to revitalize their downtown areas, it seems only natural that several methods of funding these strategies exist, both public and private. Listed below are the most common.

Redevelopment Agencies and Tax Increment Financing In California, redevelopment agencies are public agencies, which consist of a governing board (most often made up at the county level by the Board of Supervisors, and at the city level by the City Council) and a full time staff. (To distinguish the wide range of downtown improvement initiatives from the projects of redevelopment agencies in particular, the authors use the term “revitalization” throughout this study for the broader meaning). Redevelopment projects are located within specific redevelopment project areas, which can be adopted by the

32 agency following adequate public hearing for the affected residences and businesses, a process described in more detail below. Once adopted, the redevelopment agency becomes responsible for future projects in the area.

Redevelopment agencies obtain the majority of their funds through a process known as tax increment financing. Developed as an alternative to tax abatement, tax increment financing (TIF) is used to assist developers with initial development costs directly associated with the “public costs” of the program, such as infrastructure reconstruction and land assembly. (Greuling, 2000) The technique uses the expected increase in property taxes from the development to help fund these public costs at the outset, and is based on the basic tenet that almost any redevelopment activity in an urban area will create higher property values, and, thus, increase the property tax revenues from that area. (Banovetz, Dolan and Swain, 2000)

Before TIF can be introduced in a city or county, it must first be put into legislation at the state level. Only after the city or county designates a “blighted” or deteriorating neighborhood or district for redevelopment and valuates the property in the project area can the redevelopment agency make the public improvements. Once the improvements are made, the city sells the land to a developer, and the taxes generated by this increase in assessed valuation goes into a tax allocation fund used to pay the public costs associated with the project. (Greuling, 2000) Once the redevelopment of the area is completed and all public spending has been recouped, the TIF district is dissolved and property taxes based on the full increased assessed valuation of the area go to the taxing bodies. However, in most cases the tax increment money an agency receives will not cover the full costs of the redevelopment activities and development projects. When this is the case, the tax increments are used by the redevelopment agencies to issue bonds, which are then paid back over time using tax increment revenue.

Community Development Corporations As government funding for urban revitalization began to decrease in the late 1960’s and downtowns continued their downward slide, renewed calls were made for federal and state funding, eventually leading to the Special Impact Amendment to the Economic Opportunity Act of 1966. (Stoecker, 1997) This act, and subsequent legislation, would lead to the creation of

33 hundreds of community development corporations (CDCs) over the next two decades, and eventually stimulate private philanthropic investment. According to Stoecker, CDCs “are characterized by an IRS 501(c)(3) nonprofit tax-exempt status, a volunteer board, and an emphasis on physical redevelopment” and is based on the ideals of participatory planning. The earliest CDCs were funded almost exclusively by the federal government and targeted the areas of job creation and housing, as these were the most pressing issues for downtown residents who had been displaced by the large-scale urban renewal projects of the 1950s and 1960s that saw entire neighborhoods torn down (Pierce & Steinbach, 1990; Zdenek, 1987). Yet while federal funding for CDCs between 1966 and 1980 rose to over $500 million, contributing to the creation of some 2,000 CDCs by the 1980’s, recent years have seen a dramatic decrease in the amount of government aid. Stoecker cites this lack of funding when concluding that CDCs have not been especially successful.

Although the creation of affordable housing and job opportunities has been a priority for many CDCs, their participatory nature also aims at creating a sense of pride and increased quality of life in the community. Many CDCs aim to increase political activism and participation and the sense of community in these urban neighborhoods in hopes of making them more appealing to private investment. Overall, while critics and proponents can argue the impact and success that CDCs have had in urban neighborhoods, it remains that the popularity of CDCs has made them a major contributor to the politics, if not the economics, of downtown revitalization.

Business Improvement Districts Described as “an alternative to traditional municipal planning and development, as well as to the typical downtown merchant association,” business improvement districts (BIDs) have been in existence for the last 25 years, but have experienced a surge in popularity over the last decade. As of 1999, at least 404 independently managed BIDs existed in the United States. (Mitchell, 2001) BIDs are formed when a majority of property owners in a specific area agree to impose an added tax or fee (such as higher business license fees) in exchange for an extra level of public service, and take advantage of state enabling legislation that allow for these property owner assessments (excluding residences) to be used for capital and operating improvements in a downtown commercial district. (Bradley, 1995) Such legislation yields a steady source of tax-

34 supported income from the local government, and in many cases make BIDs more appealing than CDCs, which are often plagued by lack of funding. BID services can be implemented by either a nonprofit organization, government agency, or public-nonprofit partnership, with smaller municipalities typically setting them up as a government agency, and larger municipalities more often than not establishing them as a nonprofit organization. (Mitchell, 2001)

BIDs have typically been involved in a more incremental approach to downtown revitalization, such as supplementing city sanitation and public safety services in the hopes of creating a safer, cleaner, more appealing downtown. In other words, they have been limited mostly to providing additional funding to the various human scale solutions to commercial redevelopment listed above. However, the last decade has seen many BIDs become more immersed in traditional economic development activities, “leading to the consideration that BIDS are another alternative organizational mechanism to encourage economic growth within communities” (Mitchell, 2001). This more direct involvement in economic solutions can include staff outreach to and consumer marketing for current and potential downtown businesses, as well as tax abatements and loans for new businesses.

City-University Partnerships Beyond the financial sources listed above, hundreds of cities across the United States have another potential partner for community revitalization: universities. John McIlwain, the President and CEO of the Fannie Mae Foundation, is quoted as saying that "universities can play a pivotal partnership role by mobilizing intellectual and economic resources to address community challenges affecting their surrounding at-risk communities" (http://www.inform. umd.edu/Outlook/1998-03-17/mar-17/fanniemae.html). For example, students and professors from the University of Illinois, in working to improve economic conditions in nearby East St. Louis, identified the Mississippi River as a potentially major generator of revenue, spurring the creation of a local riverboat gambling industry that has created 1,200 jobs. On a larger scale, the University of Wisconsin-Extension and Wisconsin Downtown Action Council have formed a partnership in which the university monitors the 65 BIDs in the state.

35 The recognition of the benefits of such partnerships has resulted in increased federal funding though agencies such as the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which has created an entire program to help fund such ventures, the Office of University Partnerships (OUP). (http://www.oup.org) Among the recipients of the agency’s Community Outreach Partnership Center (COPC) Program were the City of Burlington and the University of Vermont, who were awarded a $400,000 grant that resulted in a 3-year partnership known as the UVM/Burlington COPC. (http://www.uvm.edu/~copc/general/aboutCOPC.php3) In analyzing the earliest results of the COPC program in places such as Burlington, HUD has identified community development technical assistance, such as helping to identify housing needs and develop specific plans, as the chief benefit of such partnerships. (http://www.oup.org/ Researchandpubs/pubs/lessonslearned/ch6.pdf) So, while not providing significant direct economic assistance, these partnerships are often useful in increasing the sense of community in these neighborhoods, helping to make them areas that are appealing to more wide-scale redevelopment.

36 Chapter Three: Comparable Settings and Strategies

The previous chapter discussed several of the most common strategies implemented by cities for the purpose of reinvestment in, and subsequent redevelopment of, older downtown areas. However, while the economic theories discussed are a good starting point from which cities like Pomona can judge the applicability and feasibility for success in their unique downtown atmosphere, to properly understand and evaluate the dynamics and processes that facilitate such projects it is important to examine specific case studies. So, prior to the thorough discussion of the socioeconomic conditions and redevelopment strategy which pertain to Pomona’s downtown revitalization effort and are discussed in Chapters four and five, this chapter focuses on comparative assessments of various downtown redevelopment strategies undertaken by American cities over the past two decades.

Most of the literature on downtown redevelopment efforts of the past three decades has focused on large central cities such as Seattle, New York, and Los Angeles. (Burayidi, 2001) However, as central cities often face a unique set of economic and social conditions, analyzing the results of such efforts would not be especially relevant to Pomona. At the same time, cities within greater metropolitan areas like Pomona must also be differentiated from smaller, stand- alone urban communities, as “evidence from the few studies that have been conducted on such free standing small urban communities indicate that there is a distinctive difference in the forces that shape these small cities versus those of the large urban centers or their suburbs” (Burayidi, 2001).

With this in mind, the case studies chosen for analysis have been selected based on their inclusion in one of two groups. The first group of cities is geographically and historically comparable to Pomona. Geographically, the cities are like Pomona in that they are medium to large in size (100,000 to 500,000) and exist within a larger metropolitan area, peripheral to a large central city. Beyond their size and geographic location, all four cities discussed also share Pomona’s past as older, historically industrial suburbs that have been affected by decentralization over the past fifty years, as well as changing trends in manufacturing. These

37 trends can be seen as major contributors to the decline of downtown areas in these cities, declines that necessitated the revitalization efforts discussed below.

Cities that merely exhibit physical, economic, and social characteristics similar to Pomona are useful in analyzing alternate redevelopment strategies. Even more useful are comparative assessments of cities that share both the geography, history, and specific redevelopment strategy of Pomona; case studies of this kind make up the second group of cities. The current revitalization strategy in downtown Pomona is to capitalize on the city’s long history as an attractive community for artists, as well as the existence of an abundance of moderately priced commercial space suitable for live-work artists’ studios to create an Arts Colony. Envisioned as a major part of a pedestrian-friendly downtown lined with galleries, restaurants, and retail stores, city officials and business leaders hoped that an increase in foot traffic combined with a resident artist population would help to spur wider-scale economic revitalization in the area. A detailed discussion of Pomona’s revitalization strategy is the subject of chapter four.

Geographical Comparable Settings The relatively late metropolitan development of Southern California, when compared with the rest of the United States, has created a unique urban environment that emphasizes a large amount of intercity competition between industrial suburbs; a more in-depth examination of this intercity dynamic is included in Chapter 6. Because of the unique nature of the region, the four cities discussed in this section have purposely been drawn from the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area, as they are most likely to present similar conditions that Pomona faces. Southern California presents a fascinating example of the competition that suburbanization and decentralization has caused among older, historically industrial cities. Prior to World War II, relatively few population centers existed outside of Los Angeles. Older parts of Orange County such as Anaheim, Fullerton, Orange, and Santa Ana had been developed for several decades, but had relatively few residents. East of Los Angeles, Pomona was one of just a handful of manufacturing hubs that existed.

38 Southern California witnessed a population explosion in the 1930’s with the arrival of thousands of Midwesterners seeking a new life in the face of the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl. However, for the most part these new residents settled in already established industrial and commercial areas, in order to be close to the agricultural and manufacturing jobs that many took up. The years just before and during World War II witnessed increased levels of industry in these peripheral cities. With large population bases that were fairly centralized, the downtowns in these areas were the flourishing centers of retail, restaurants, and services.

World War II saw a build-up in the industrial nature of many cities in Southern California, as production for the war effort produced new factories and a whole new slew of new suburbs challenging these older cities. Unfortunately, this did not last, as the 1960’s and 1970’s saw many manufacturers throughout the United States move to rural communities to capitalize on the low-skill, low-wage labor that these areas offered. (McNamara and Kriesel, 1993) By the 1980’s and 1990’s, many of these manufacturers, in search of even more profitable venues for their plants, began moving to Mexico and third-world countries around the world. Cities in Southern California were additionally hit by air quality standards that were much stricter than the most of the nation, which resulted in hundreds of additional manufacturers fleeing for Arizona, Nevada, and other less environmentally-stringent Western states. In response, several Southern California cities have implemented programs in hopes of revitalizing their aging downtowns. Listed below are a few of the most well known:

Pasadena One of the most often cited case studies of downtown revitalization in metropolitan Los Angeles is that of Old Town Pasadena. The City of Pasadena is located five miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles, and has a population of 134,000. The city was incorporated in 1886 and soon became an upscale residential city, as well as a resort town for the wealthy of Los Angeles and a fashionable place for well-to-do Easterners to maintain winter cottages. (Ovnick, 1994) The city rejected several attempts by Los Angeles to incorporate it into its boundaries, and was in fact one of Los Angeles’ biggest competitors in expansion. Between 1909 and 1914 the city annexed tracts along the Arroyo Seco to prevent Los Angeles from acquiring them, while the 1920’s saw it annex several highly populated residential tracts to the east. (Crouch and

39 Dinerman, 1963) It was well connected regionally via the Pacific Electric Railway system, which also developed a local streetcar system in the city. By the 1940’s, many light industries, particularly those involved in national defense research, had moved to Pasadena, which led to an increase in the spending power of the local community.

As the city began to rapidly expand and increase in population in the 1920’s, it soon developed a thriving downtown central business and retail district, but the heart of downtown remained 14 blocks of commercial buildings dating back to the 1890s. For the first half of the 20th Century, the area was lined with shops, offices, and restaurants. However, by the late 1940’s a new shopping district was being built just a mile away in a newer part of the city, and the aging downtown was also forced to compete with new shopping centers located in the many newly incorporated cities in the region. Built to cater to the Red Car streetcar system that was the major mode of transportation at the time the area was built, the lack of adequate parking became a competitive disadvantage that caused many businesses to leave the area. (ULI, 1992) In much of the city’s pre-1929 housing, middle-income families were replaced by low-income families, resulting in the concentration of the minority population in the older areas in and around downtown. By the late 1960s, retail conditions in downtown Pasadena resembled those of big-city downtowns across the nation, as “retail sales had been on the decline since the mid- 1950s, rents were low, vacancies high, and the 1920s buildings were too small and shabby to attract a high level of trade,” a process that caused downtown sales to decrease 10% in the three year period between 1966 and 1969. (Frieden and Sagalyn, 1989)

The City of Pasadena describes the revival of Old Pasadena as the result of “one of the earliest efforts (1978) to transform a blighted older downtown area into a vital neo-traditional urban village.” (http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/housing/CentralArea/OldPasadena.asp) One of the keys was to prove that there was still interest in downtown Pasadena. Since the introduction of the Downtown Specific Plan in 1970, city leaders had wanted a shopping center to increase tax revenue, and soon began negotiating with Ernest Hahn, a prominent retail developer. However, Hahn “intended to follow the industry prototype by building an enclosed, two-story, air- conditioned mall,” a proposal unacceptable to city officials as it would split the heart of downtown in two, walling off the civic center from the new mall. (Frieden and Sagalyn, 1989)

40 After several years of debate, plan revisions, and negotiation, such as the inclusion of a pedestrian mall and a line of streetfront stores along Colorado Blvd, work began on the Plaza Pasadena in 1976. The city spent vast amounts of public money on the project, as by 1976 estimates for the public subsidy had almost tripled, to $41 million, from original estimates. The $32 million bond offering for land acquisition set a record as the largest issue of tax allocation bonds in California. Fortunately, the city was able to partially finance the project using TIFA revenues generated via property tax increases that had occurred following the construction of several large office complexes in the early 1970s.

Upon its opening in 1980, the success of Plaza Pasadena was almost immediate, as sales in major retail categories doubled in real dollars between 1978 and 19821. The project’s success also “helped make the climate right for new shops to move into the 1920s and 1930s two-story buildings along Colorado Blvd where rental space had gone begging for years.” (Frieden and Sagalyn, 1989) The year before the opening of Plaza Pasadena, much of what would become the Old Town area west of Raymond Street had been slated for the wrecking ball to allow for the construction of two high-rise office towers. After almost a decade of opposition by local merchants and preservationists, a reprieve was granted in the form of the “Plan for Old Pasadena,” an ordinance that called for “preservation of the architectural character of Old Pasadena.” (http://www.oldpasadena.org/history1970s.asp) Although redevelopment plans for the area were stagnant for the much of the 1980’s, and a lack of adequate financing caused a proposed specialty retail center to fall through in 1988, the city remained convinced that revitalization of the area was both feasible and affordable. Two years later, the project was revived and renamed, and 1993 saw the opening of One Colorado, made up of an entire block of restored historic building boasting 280,000 square feet of retail, dining, and entertainment uses. The immediate success of the project, combined with favorable tax credits, encouraged other owners to rehabilitate the historic buildings. As a lack of parking was seen as a possible deterrent, the city had spent $27 million to build two parking structures (a third private parking structure was also built), a move now considered “a key catalyst to promote what has grown to

1 Interestingly, Plaza Pasadena had begun to lose its commercial luster by the early 1990s, at precisely the time the decentralized urban entertainment district of Old Pasadena was taking shape a few blocks to the west – an example of one urban revitalization strategy torpedoing another. Plaza Pasadena has since been completely repositioned as the trend setting Paseo Colorado mixed use development, which appears to coexist better with Old Pasadena.

41 nearly $400 million in private investment for acquiring and renovating virtually all the buildings in the fourteen-block area.” (http://www.scag.ca.gov/pasadena.pdf)

The financial success of Old Pasadena is unquestioned. Sales tax revenue in the area increased six-fold between 1986 and 1996. As of the year 2001, Old Pasadena boasted 280 businesses and annual retail sales of $121 million, and a central district workforce of about 60,000. (http://www.oldpasadena.org/economic.asp) Unfortunately, Pasadena exhibits several key characteristics for revitalization that Pomona does not. Even before the revitalization occurred, Pasadena had a higher per capita income than most cities in Los Angeles County, while Pomona is located near the lower end for Los Angeles County. The surrounding area also contained several large industrial firms, while Pomona has seen its industrial employment base severely diminished over the past decade.

Santa Monica The heart of Santa Monica, California, a coastal community west of Los Angeles, is the Third Street Promenade. A lively pedestrian mall, the promenade generated more than $1.3 million in local sales tax revenue in 1996, and retail sales rose every year since 1989, even during the recession years of the early 1990s. (Lockwood, 1997) The Promenade resulted from the repositioning of the pedestrian Santa Monica Mall, which opened in 1965. The original pedestrian mall faced obstacles due to the decline of the surrounding neighborhood, and was significantly underutilized during most of the 1970s and 1980s. By the early 1980s, several Santa Monica residents had proposed a revitalization plan for the Santa Monica Mall to the City Council, and in 1986, the city commissioned a design group to come up with such a plan. ROMA, the design group, based the design of Third Street on “the premise that a city’s public spaces- its streets, parks, plazas, and other gathering places- are the principal stages on which the life of the city is acted out.” The plan called for a three-block section of Third Street to be closed to vehicular traffic, encouraging patrons to walk throughout the entire area. After approval by the City Council and a number of community groups, and the passage of a citywide bond measure to finance the project, construction began amid hope, yet reservations, as “no other city in America had succeeded in such an effort, especially while maintaining a continued commitment to a ‘pedestrian mall.’” (http://www.smrr.org/news/3rdstprm.html)

To encourage the pedestrian nature of the mall, the city installed 30-foot-wide sidewalks, which soon attracted several sidewalk cafes. As commercial decentralization to other areas of the city, specifically the popular Santa Monica Place, were seen as a major contributor to the failure of the original Santa Monica Mall, the city changed its zoning ordinance to control commercial development in other areas of the city in hopes of spurring development downtown. For example, 3rd Street was the only area of the city in which new movie theaters could be constructed.

Upon opening in 1989, the success of the Third Street Promenade was almost immediate, “demonstrating that there existed a significant latent demand within our community for a downtown where real life can happen, as distinguished from the stale, formula-driven shopping malls.” (http://www.smrr.org/news/3rdstprm.html) Hoping to apply the success of the 3rd Street Promenade to other areas of downtown, the city approved a five-phase, $18.7 million downtown streetscape plan “aimed at improving traffic and transit patterns, creating stronger pedestrian transit linkages, and luring new shops and restaurants” to the remainder of the downtown area that surrounds the 3rd Street Promenade. (Lockwood, 1997) So far, dozens more retail stores and restaurants have opened along main thoroughfares such as Santa Monica Blvd, Broadway Ave, Arizona Ave, 2nd Street and 4th Street. The Bayside District now boasts some 87 restaurants, 70 apparel stores, and 27 art galleries, according to the Bayside District Corporation, a “public/private management company in partnership with the City of Santa Monica charged with the responsibility of overseeing public safety, security, and maintenance in the Bayside Assessment District, as well as operations of public areas including the alleys and the six city- owned parking structures,” and which “represents the entire Downtown Santa Monica for marketing, promotions, special events, and any legislative or governmental issues that affect the area.” (http://www.downtownsm.com/about/about.html)

Long Beach The history of Long Beach was, for the majority of the 20th Century, tied directly to the naval and aviation industry. The Port of Long Beach was opened in 1911 as a direct competitor

43 to the Port of Los Angeles, which was built along the San Pedro and Wilmington shoreline that Los Angeles had incorporated in 1906. When the Pacific Fleet of the US Navy was authorized in 1919, about half of its 32 ships were stationed at the Port of Long Beach, remaining this way until 1935 when the majority of the Pacific Fleet was moved to Honolulu. (Starr, 1990) Helped largely by the influx of sailors, Long Beach’s population rose from 55,000 to 142,000 between 1920 and 1930. In the years leading up to World War II, Long Beach became the home to a U.S. Naval Base (early 1941) as well as the Douglas Aircraft Company, Inc., who constructed its largest factory in Long Beach, which, at is peak, produced an airplane an hour.

Downtown Long Beach had begun to flourish in the 1920’s, thanks largely to the discovery of large amounts of oil in Long Beach and Signal Hill that fueled a million-dollar-per- month building boom downtown. While the Depression years of the 1930’s slowed downtown development, the area rebounded during the war years of the early 1940’s as naval and aircraft manufacturing expanded rapidly. Like many other older industrial areas Southern California, the downtown area was severely affected by the mass suburbanization of the region after the end of World War II. After several decades of control by the California Coastal Commission, the city was given control of downtown redevelopment in 1974, and by 1976 had embarked on a multi- billion dollar redevelopment program aimed to guide the city through the end of the century, resulting in the 1978 Downtown Plan.

A key to the city’s redevelopment plan was to make Long Beach a regional tourist destination, which had already begun with the docking of the Queen Mary in Long Beach Harbor in 1967. Over the next fifteen years, downtown witnessed the construction of the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center (opened adjacent to the Long Beach Arena in 1978 and expanded in 1990), the opening of several shopping centers in 1982, the relocation of the Spruce Goose to Long Beach Harbor in 1983, and the opening of the Greater Los Angeles World Trade Center in 1989. Annual events such as the Long Beach Grand Prix, a Championship Auto Racing Teams (CART) race that weaves through the streets of downtown Long Beach, have also succeeded in attracting thousands of people from throughout the region, state, nation, and even world, to Long Beach.

44 By the late 1980s, the revitalization effort in downtown Long Beach could turn to Pine Avenue, downtown’s historic retail district. Dating back to the early 1900’s, the area remained a bustling retail center until the 1950’s, when the opening of several regional malls, most notably the nearby Lakewood Mall, drew many shoppers away from downtown Long Beach. The area began to cater almost exclusively to the local naval population, and Pine Avenue quickly became a long row of tattoo shops, bars, and adult movie theaters. (http://www.scag.ca.gov/longb.pdf) The key was to “bring in new retailers, restaurants, and nightclubs, yet maintain the downtown area’s rich history and ambience.” (Wegner, 2000) In the early stages of Pine Avenue’s revitalization, success seemed elusive. While the city experienced almost immediate economic improvements downtown and was able to attract a diverse mix of restaurants and retail stores, the recession of the early 1990’s slowed things down considerably. Then, just as the economy was beginning to recover, Long Beach was rocked by large-scale military and aerospace industry downsizing, which led to the loss of 30,000 jobs at the McDonnell Douglas plant and the closure of the Long Beach Naval Station, Hospital, and Shipyard.

Downtown Long Beach was able to quickly recover, however, largely because it had succeeded in becoming a regional destination. The area in and around Pine Avenue was soon able to attract a mix of national retailers, local merchants, art galleries, restaurants, a movie complex, and several nightclubs. Pine Avenue gross taxable sales increased more than four-fold between 1993 and 1999, from $9.2 million to $38.1 million. The success of Pine Avenue has also spurred several new large-scale developments. Slated for a Fall 2002 opening, Cityplace is a $75 million project that will be an open-air shopping center located just north of Pine Avenue, and will feature 454,000 square feet of retail space as well as 350 residential units. Even more ambitious is The Pike at Rainbow Harbor, a $100 million, 450,000 square foot retail, dining, and entertainment complex that is scheduled for a Fall 2003 opening.

Orange Old Towne Orange, the self-professed ‘Antiques Capital of California’ and original downtown of Orange, CA, is an example of a city using historic preservation in combination with niche retailing to revitalize a lagging downtown commercial district. What makes Old Towne Orange such an interesting comparative study is that the store makeup- antiques shops,

45 art galleries, and restaurants- is nearly identical to that proposed by downtown Pomona, and it is located just 25 miles south.

Old Towne Orange is a one square mile area that contains over 1400 structures built before 1940. Long the site of a Santa Fe Railway Depot, the area served as the arrival point for many of the thousands of new arrivals to Orange County in the early and mid 20th Century. As the name suggests, the city had a thriving citrus industry that was the dominant economic force for much of the first half of the 20th century. Orange was also the home station of the 30th Field Artillery Battalion during World War II, housing thousands of soldiers, many of whom returned following the war. While the post-war boom saw Orange’s population soar, the majority of the new businesses that were established were focused in newer parts of the city, and more specifically along Tustin Avenue. By the 1970’s, the Old Towne commercial area along the Chapman Circle was nearly vacant, and the residential property values in the residential area were plummeting. Recognizing the uniqueness of the Old Towne area when compared with much of the rest of Orange County, local residents encouraged city leaders to adopt programs to maintain the historical context of the area. After a decade of work by local organizations, most notably the Old Towne Preservation Association, Old Towne was named a national historic district in 1997 and placed on the National Registry of Historic Places. Recognizing the community support behind the area, and the fact that the area benefits from its historic character and distinctive physical layout surrounding the central Plaza Park, the City Council approved a major preservation and renovation project for the area in September 1999.

The renovation project, which included relocating crosswalks for better pedestrian access, repairing damaged sidewalks, and other infrastructure improvements, has coincided with a number of outreach programs that aim to attract a wider audience. The area now offers a monthly art walk the second Thursday of each month, during which customers can peruse a wide variety of shops and galleries. A report commissioned by the City of Orange Economic Development Department found that “Old Towne Orange attracts a homogeneous mix of shoppers from a fairly wide geographic area.” (Stoffel and Associates, 2002) The study found that the Old Towne area has been fairly successful in attracting a regional consumer base. While approximately 30% of the area’s visitors were residents of the City of Orange, for whom

46 “antique shopping is not their primary purpose,” it found that about 50% lived within a 20-mile radius, comprising a consumer audience that spent on average $200 per visit. With the appeal and success of Old Towne Orange, the City has been able to pursue more large-scale commercial developments, most notably The Block at Orange. Located 2 miles southwest of Old Towne, in the present-day business district, the Block is now one of the biggest shopping centers in California.

Arts Comparative Settings Art was long dismissed as an effective economic development strategy, with the belief that the arts were at best part of a city’s educational mission, and at worst an unnecessary drain on local resources. (Blau, 1989) However, over the past several decades, cities have recognized that “cultural institutions- which seldom make a profit and in fact usually require deep subsidies- can be promoted as popular vehicles of urban revitalization,” largely because “the affluence and high status of cultural consumers and the transcendent qualities attributed to the arts lend a singularity to the development of urban cultural projects” (Strom, 2000). Non-central cities implementing the arts as a downtown development or redevelopment tool can be classified into three distinct types. Only the third type of city exhibits both sets of characteristics- strategic and geographic/historic- that are relevant when completing a comparative assessment of Pomona’s downtown revitalization strategy. However, it is valuable to present and briefly discuss the first two types of “arts towns”, as they share at least some of the same assets, and face several of the same obstacles and limitations as Pomona.

Category One: Long-Standing Artist Colonies The first group of cities can be distinguished by the long periods of time in which they have harbored significant artist populations. Because of this, these cities do not truly serve as redevelopment comparisons, as artists were never targeted specifically as agents of economic revival. However, as many of these cities share many of the same physical characteristics as Pomona, their relative successes and failures are useful when evaluating Pomona’s strategy. Ranging from quaint towns to medium sized cities, the long history of a local artist population in this first group of cities is often based on surrounding attractive landscape scenery that provides

47 local artists inspiration and subject matter. For example, artists have long been attracted to the white-sand beaches and picture-perfect Florida sunsets that Key West, a seaside resort town located at the southernmost point in the United States, offers. Key West welcomed a large influx of artists starting in the 1920’s, when the marine-related industries- shipbuilding, sponging, and salvaging- began to move north towards Miami. It is similar to Pomona in that the abandoned marine industrial buildings provided an attractive and affordable setting for the creation of a downtown arts colony; however, because the establishment of the arts colony preceded World War II, its development differs greatly from that which Pomona is striving to achieve.

The relatively small population, tropical environment, and resort atmosphere of Key West make the success of its arts colony difficult to interpret and compare to Pomona’s redevelopment efforts. A better example might be the long and successful history of Santa Fe, New Mexico as an “arts town.” The oldest and highest capital city in the United States, the emergence of Santa Fe as an American cultural hub is often traced back to the writings of D.H. Lawrence, who, “some time between the wars… discovered the beauty of the place and wrote about it so passionately that it attracted fellow romantics,” resulting in the creation of a local writers’ and artists’ colony. (Fotheringham, 2000) Transferred from Mexican to American rule in 1848 by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (which also ceded California to the US), by 1880 three railroads had reached Santa Fe on their westward path across the country. The city experienced an economic revolution, but was soon sidetracked by government corruption. (http://santafe.org/Visiting_Santa_Fe/History/index.html) While several companies moved away or went out of business at the beginning of the 20th Century, they were soon replaced by artists drawn to the majestic scenery, ample commercial space, and unique mixture of Spanish, Mexican, and Indian culture. Renowned artists such as Georgia O’Keeffe established their bases in Santa Fe, adding cultural legitimacy to the city.

Today, “strange little, beautiful little Santa Fe is the third-largest art center in the Excited States of America after New York City and Los Angeles,” and lists 68 galleries, studios, and museums in its downtown area, and 250 overall. (Fotheringham, 2000) The Georgia O’Keeffe Museum attracted over 300,000 visitors to this city of 55,000 in its first year of opening, and SITE Santa Fe, a non-profit “dedicated to bringing outside art into Santa Fe,” has helped to

48 attract big name artists from Los Angeles, New York, and other arts hotspots. (Mason, 1998) As might be expected, many smaller galleries and artists, as well as long-time residents, have been affected by the skyrocketing commercial real estate prices that have accompanied the cultural boom.

Category Two: Resort Towns In contrast to cities like Key West and Santa Fe, the second type of “arts town” can be identified by the relatively recent surge in the number of galleries and resident artists in their downtown areas. However, unlike the third group of cities discussed in the below comparative case studies, the emergence of a local arts scene is not based on the redevelopment efforts of city officials or local businesses. Instead, it is their existence as resort towns, catering to an affluent and commercially attractive clientele, which make these areas natural beacons for the establishment of local arts colonies. For example, Aspen, a winter resort town in Colorado, is home to only 6,000 year round residents, yet it houses a wide variety of festivals, a large museum, and over 40 galleries, which thrive largely due to the patronage of wealthy tourists. Often, the works produced in cities such as Aspen are fairly mainstream, so as to appeal to a wider range of audiences which tend not to be drawn to the area in search of art, but who visit galleries while on vacation. The cities within this category tend to develop arts colonies with little effort and without notice; in a way, the presence of foreign money tends to be a strong enough force to bring artists to the area.

Category Three: Comparable Geography and Arts-Based Revitalization Strategy The third, and only true comparative type of arts colony are those which, like Pomona, exist in urban, often industrial districts and offer physical environments suitable for adaptive reuse into artists’ lofts, galleries and studios, and accompanying retail uses. They tend to be located in older, suburban cities, and use a decentralized cultural strategy to establish a local artist community with the hopes of spurring more widespread downtown revitalization. However, while large cultural projects that require large amounts of public subsidies tend to occur mostly in large central cities such as Philadelphia and New York, Newark is discussed below as an example of such a strategy that was undertaken in a peripheral metropolitan city.

49 The other three cities followed redevelopment efforts that more closely paralleled those of Pomona.

Newark

The traditional method for attracting a commercially attractive audience has been to subsidize one or more large cultural venues, with the hope that the spin-off impacts would expand into the broader community. The revitalization and redevelopment of downtown Cleveland, Ohio is often traced back to the renovation of three theaters in the 1970’s, which helped to turn Cleveland into a regional cultural center and attract scores of new suburbanites that had recently moved away from the city. (Weber, 1997) Short-term cultural arts events can also be a boon to a city, as witnessed by the spectacular success of the Paul Cézanne exhibit at the Philadelphia Museum of Art in 1996, which brought in 550,000 visitors and generated an estimated $87 million in local spending. (McDowell, 1997)

A more recent example of this strategy in action occurred in Newark, New Jersey in the late 1990’s. Newark was long the epitome of the ravaged inner city. 1967 race riots saw the deaths of 26 people and led to white flight to the suburbs, slashing Newark’s population from 406,000 in 1967 to 259,000 in 1994. When former New Jersey Governor Tom Kean decided in 1986 to study the feasibility of creating a performing arts complex somewhere in the state, few considered Newark to be the likely choice. Not only was the political and economic situation in Newark very shaky, but the city also lies in the shadow of New York City, just 10 miles west of the entertainment giant. If people in Newark and the surrounding areas wanted to enjoy the arts, they would likely choose to visit New York. However, a consultant’s report found Newark to be the most appealing site for a new arts center, and soon the task of fundraising was undertaken to make the new center a reality.

The creation of the New Jersey Center for the Performing Arts (NJPAC), opened on October 18, 1997 on 12 acres of land in downtown Newark, yielded a 2,750-seat concert hall, 514-seat theater, 3,000 sq-ft banquet room, a restaurant, and a public plaza. Upon its opening, many skeptics and critics remained, convinced that the targeted upper middle class suburban

50 population would stay away, too afraid to venture into downtown Newark at night. However, during its first eight months NJPAC saw 357 performances attract more than 500,000 patrons (82% of capacity). Within a year of its opening, four new restaurants opened near the arts center and construction began on a 7,000 seat minor league baseball stadium, which was completed in 1999. In addition, 1999 saw the construction of a $75 million riverfront esplanade. The NJPAC now exists as a link between the city’s historic Military Park and the city’s downtown office buildings and the shores of the Passaic River. (Lampert-Greaux, 1998) And the future continues to look bright for Newark, with a proposed downtown sports arena that will house the NHL’s New Jersey Devils and the NBA’s New Jersey Nets, both of which will move down from the Meadowlands.

As noted above, Newark’s strategy is quite different from Pomona’s in one respect. Although the arts are central to Newark’s revitalization strategy, they are manifested in a mammoth “big ticket” performance center, soon to be joined by a big ticket sports arena. While the example of a successful performing arts center in a city like Newark, which had experienced decline more serious than Pomona’s, is relevant to supporters of an arts-based strategy in Pomona, the details of arts-based revitalization strategy are quite different in the two cases.

Providence Pomona’s strategy, while also based largely on subsidizing the arts, has focused on establishing an entire arts community in the city through cultivation of individual artists, galleries, and other small cultural businesses. One of the most successful examples of such a decentralized arts based revitalization effort occurred in Providence, Rhode Island in the 1990’s. Providence had seen its downtown area witness a dramatic decline since the 1950’s, when much of downtown was razed to allow for the construction of Interstate 95, built almost immediately after the passage of the 1956 Federal Aid Highway Act. I-95 cut its path directly through several vibrant downtown neighborhoods, and caused many of the remaining businesses to close up shop and follow the fleeing residents out to the suburbs. Downtown redevelopment efforts of the 1960’s and 1970’s focused mostly on razing now-blighted buildings (many of significant historical value) and replacing them with parking lots for the business district employees commuting in from the suburbs, and by the 1980’s downtown was for the most part a ghost

51 town. However, by 1998 Providence had been labeled “Renaissance City” by USA Today and was recently listed by Newsweek magazine as one of America’s Ten Best Places to Live and Work.

According to the Providence Chamber of Commerce, “another milestone in the city’s modern day rebirth came when community leaders fully recognized the value of arts, history and culture to a community,” which ultimately led to “Providence reaping the benefits of an arts- induced economic boom.” (http://www.provchamber.com/artcapital.htm) Providence leaders recognized several existing factors and resources within downtown that led them to create the downtown Arts and Entertainment District that has helped fuel the downtown’s revitalization. An abundance of vacant, architecturally-significant buildings and the presence of one of America’s premiere art schools, the Rhode Island School of Design, convinced planners and city officials that the arts could fuel a downtown revival.

Skeptics argued that Providence would be hard pressed to create a cultural atmosphere more appealing than Boston, located fifty miles to the north. It was economics, and not culture, however, that seems to have played a major role. The City established a number of economic incentives aimed at trying to lure artists and consumers to downtown Providence, and to convince downtown property owners to invest in what that City hails as the only program of its kind in the country. Sales and personal income tax exemptions were granted to artists who live in the arts district, while gallery owners were able to sell their works tax-free. To insure adequate housing for the artists, property owners who converted commercial or industrial space into residential units are eligible for tax abatements. The city also altered the zoning in the area to allow for artists to live and work in the same buildings. By 2000, Providence had more artists per capita than any American city, and the rows of galleries had come to the attention of the Greater New England populace. Since the program went into effect in the early 1990’s, more than three million square feet of office and retail space have been created through the rehabilitation of older buildings downtown, and the revitalization has been complemented by more than five million feet of new construction, totaling more than $3 billion. Like Pomona, Providence has the advantage of lower rents than the nearby large city (Boston in the case of Providence, Los Angeles for Pomona), which make them even more attractive.

Berkeley Another example of a decentralized cultural strategy is that implemented by the city of Berkeley, California. Long dominated by the prestigious University of California, downtown Berkeley has undergone a major revival in the last few years. And, according to the City website, “the Addison Street Arts District is the lynchpin of Berkeley’s downtown revitalization effort.” (http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/2002/04apr/041102artsaward.html) Extending west from the edge of the University, Addison Street was long dominated by auto body shops and light industrial uses. However, the 1990’s saw city officials propose the creation of an arts district that could take advantage of the unique cultural heritage of Berkeley.

Despite initial concerns that the city would have a difficult time attracting people to an arts district located just miles from the cultural haven of San Francisco, Berkeley officials were stalwart in their plans for Addison Street and have provided significant monetary assistance to artists and the two theaters that anchor the district- the Berkeley Repertory Theater and the Aurora Theater. Berkeley’s Director of Economic Development, Bill Lambert, estimates that the city has contributed approximately $5.7 million to the creation of the arts district, in the form of grants and tax abatements. In turn, the city’s investment has leveraged some $25 million in private investment, with many of the main art groups raising millions of dollars to build or renovate their new venues. The city has placed a high value on public art as well, and has been able to fund a variety of programs following the passage of Berkeley Measure S in 2000, which set aside some $200,000 for public art downtown.

The success of the arts district, which won the 2002 Grand Prize from the California Association for Local Economic Development, has led to a revival in the downtown commercial and residential market as well. Over 400 apartments and lofts are currently under construction along Shattuck Avenue just at the edge of the arts district, while the reinvigorated retail market has focused on the needs of the academic community, and has seen several new restaurants, furniture, home and office supply and computer-related businesses open along Shattuck and University Avenues. In both the arts district and the surrounding area, the city has capitalized on the built-in population of 30,000 students and 11,000 faculty and staff members that UC

53 Berkeley houses, as well as the sizeable, well-educated, and disproportionately affluent community of UC alumni.

Santa Ana Located just 30 miles south of Pomona, Santa Ana provides interesting comparisons to both the strengths and weaknesses of Pomona with respect to revitalization, as the two cities are alike in many ways. While it is the capital of Orange County, a wealthy, conservative area located just south of Los Angeles, Santa Ana has very little in common with most of the affluent suburbs that surround it, and is thought of as one of the few urban centers in Orange County. While portions of the downtown area were able to survive due to the presence of the county’s governmental institutions (including the County courthouse, jail, and various agency offices), much of the true downtown witnessed a slow urban decay that coincided with the incredible growth of Orange County during the 1960’s, 70’s, and 80’s. Left behind were dozens of historical buildings that by the mid-1980’s had been vacant for years, resulting in an overall occupancy rate of just 10% and an area in which drugs and gangs were commonplace (Frankel, 2001).

After a period living in the SoHo district of New York City, longtime city resident Don Cribbs returned to Santa Ana in the mid-1980s. Convinced that the arts could help to revitalize downtown Ana, Cribbs founded the Santa Ana arts council in 1988, and for years lobbied hard to convince the City Council to support an arts agenda. By 1992, all seven members elected to the City Council were in favor of what would eventually become the Artists Village in downtown Santa Ana. That same year, the Bowers Museum of Cultural Art moved adjacent to the newly planned project. The first major part, and still the centerpiece of the Artist’s Village, the Santora Arts Building, opened in 1994 and houses approximately thirty studios and galleries. The next four years saw the opening of several other landmarks of the Artists Village, including the Empire Arts Building that houses a 40 seat theater and several studios, and culminated with the opening of the Grand Central Art Theater in 1998. In conjunction with Cal State University, Fullerton, the city spent $7.5 million to buy the former shopping arcade and turn it into the Grand Central, which now houses 27 residential units, three galleries, and ample studio space for Cal State graduate students and local artists. (Frankel, 2001)

Both inside and immediately surrounding the Artists Village, Santa Ana has experienced a commercial and residential revival as well. Artists have begun colonizing the numerous loft spaces located in historic buildings along Fourth Street, with many of the buildings reporting vacancy rates of 80-90% and also housing the myriad of coffee shops and restaurants that have opened in the last five years. Meanwhile, the Village has sought to attract the surrounding community by hosting an open house the first Saturday of each month, during which the public are able to visit the various galleries and studios and observe the artists in action. Typically attracting 200 to 1200 people, the event offers live music, refreshments, and is made up of mostly white middle and upper class Orange County residents (Mattern, 2001).

One of the chief criticisms of the Artists Village is that it ignores and excludes the city’s majority Latino population (approximately 80%), as the majority of the artists and the patrons are white. Such criticism must be considered when looking at Pomona, which is about 64.5% Latino, according to Census 2000 data. So, when considering such a project, it would be useful to determine if there are methods that the city can employ that might better include the surrounding community and encourage participation in the revitalization of their downtown.

55 Chapter Four: Current Revitalization Strategy and Initiatives in Downtown Pomona

The current era of downtown revitalization in Pomona began in 1992, with the announcement of a new Arts Colony initiative for downtown Pomona. The history of the revitalization effort over the last ten years has been dominated by the vision and efforts of the downtown business community through the Central Business District (CBD) organization, and of the City of Pomona, primarily through its planning and redevelopment agencies. Neither the CBD nor the City has been completely unified and unwavering in their strategic visions for revitalization, and these two primary groups of downtown actors have alternately cooperated and competed as their respective strategies and immediate tactical agendas evolved over time.

The arts, and public art in particular, have a long and rich history in Pomona. Millard Sheets, one of the most famous southern California artists of the twentieth century, was born in Pomona in 1907. Initially recognized as a watercolorist, Sheets was passionately dedicated to the Pomona Valley. He taught for sixteen years at Pomona College in Claremont and for twenty- six years he was director of fine arts at the Los Angeles County Fair in Pomona. After 1960 he concentrated his energies on architectural features, especially mosaic murals for public buildings. Sheets’ work, if not the artist himself, is best known to average southern Californians in the form of his many mosaic murals on Home Savings branches throughout the region. Of specific importance for this study is Sheets’ design of key public art installations along the Second Street pedestrian mall and arguably his inspiration of the mall’s entire design aesthetic.

Collaborative communities of artists also have a long history in Pomona, as well as a longstanding dedication to the downtown. A group of painters who met in Washington Park, Pomona, held their first exhibition in the Pomona City Library in 1948. This collaboration evolved into the Pomona Valley Art Association in 1952. The PVAA, a collective for working artists, established its home on the Pomona Mall in 1960, and currently operates the SoHo (for “South of Holt”) Gallery in the Progress Bulletin Building in the Arts Colony at 300-A South

56 Thomas Street. Many of PVAA’s member artists, and other artists, have maintained studios in and around downtown Pomona over the years.

Given this local cultural history, and the abundant, modestly priced commercial space suitable for live-work artists’ studios, Pomona was in many ways already a functional artists’ community when the Arts Colony revitalization strategy was initiated in 1992. Conspicuously absent, however, were galleries in which to exhibit artwork locally. One may speculate that galleries had not flourished spontaneously amidst the local cluster of working artists for two reasons: first, many of the artists who worked (and often lived) in Pomona had ties to galleries at the Claremont Colleges and in Claremont Village; second, the area which became the arts colony lacked the critical mass of allied retail establishments (such as boutiques), other destinations, and foot traffic that would have been required for the spontaneous development of galleries. A key facet of the Arts Colony strategy was therefore to take advantage of the pedestrian-friendly scale and the many existing small storefronts in the area to promote galleries and allied retail simultaneously.

There are four major types of entities involved in the evolution of downtown Pomona: city government, civic organizations (some of them tied to coalitions of private interests), private interests, and public/private partnerships. In the following section, each will be considered as institutions and interest groups. The section on each type of entity also includes discussion of specific revitalization and related projects in which that entity is involved.

City Government A very broad range of persons and institutions connected with Pomona city government are active in the effort to revitalize the downtown. The political leadership, including the Mayor, city council and city manager are all very closely involved in policy decisions regarding the downtown. The City Council in particular, in its capacity as redevelopment agency, rules on the expenditure/investment of redevelopment dollars in the downtown and elsewhere. They are advised and assisted in this task by the city redevelopment staff and by the planning commission. One of the more intractable problems in downtown Pomona is the division of the downtown area

57 between three of the city’s six council districts. Because the downtown is still relatively sparsely inhabited compared to the surrounding neighborhoods, this fact inevitably tends to pull resources and the attentions of council members away from the downtown. Consequently, until the CBD’s Arts Colony initiative in the early 1990s, there was little in the way of coherent redevelopment vision or directed public investment in the downtown. The initial successes of the Arts Colony initiative made it clear to those in city government who might have been doubtful, that the downtown was not a lost cause, but rather a potential source of growth in terms of both the number of residents and future tax revenue.

The Community Development Department includes the divisions of Planning, Building and Safety, and Housing. The Planning Services Division is responsible for the preparation of planning documents, including the Downtown Specific Plan, and has responsibility for

58 safeguarding environmental quality against harmful impacts from development. Planning Services works closely with the staff of the Redevelopment Agency to implement redevelopment projects in harmony with city plans and environmental regulations. The Housing Division's function is to administer and develop various housing programs designed to assist very low, low and moderate-income households. The Building Services Division administers and enforces applicable state and local codes to insure the health and safety of the public. In addition, the city Police Department’s Code Compliance Unit, which recently relocated to the Arts Colony district, issues citations to building code violators.

The Police Department, of course, also has primary responsibility for the general safety and security of the downtown area. Since October 1991, the police department has stepped up foot, bicycle and horse patrols in the downtown area. The result has been moderate decreases in graffiti and incidents involving homeless persons, and a major improvement in public perceptions of the safety of the downtown area. Given the importance of security issues discussed in chapter two, this higher police profile (or some equivalent patrol presence) is assumed to be a key ingredient in the long-term success of revitalization efforts in older urban areas. It remains to be seen whether this increased downtown presence will remain a tactical patrol priority for the Police Department in the absence of outside funding.

A final important city institution is the Cultural Arts Commission. This body has considerable latitude in planning and implementing public art and performance projects, and is instrumental in facilitating a range of exhibits and performances that enjoy total or partial city sponsorship. Not surprisingly, the Cultural Arts Commission has focused many of its public art efforts on the Arts Colony district, with involvement in murals, stencil art, artistic design features in the built environment, and freestanding public art displays.

The Downtown Specific Plan The Downtown Specific Plan for Pomona was adopted in 1994. It is designed to complement and reinforce the strategy of the downtown business community and CBD organization to develop an Arts Colony as the primary theme for revitalization of the downtown

59 area. The plan incorporates and area of about 380 acres, approximately bounded by Holt on the north, Towne on the east, Mission on the south, and White on the west (see Figure 3 in the map section). The general goals of the plan are commercial revitalization in the downtown area and the promotion of cultural activity in the Arts Colony. For the most part, specific recommendations of the plan have yet to be implemented, although key concepts have been applied in altered form where opportunity permits.

The heart of the downtown specific plan is a projected “International Fair” area within which the Arts Colony was to develop. The International Fair is to consist of a T-shaped zone, with the north-south section running along Thomas from Mission to the Rail Station, and the east-west section running along Second Street in both directions from its intersection with Thomas at the rail station to Rebecca Street in the west to Eleanor Street in the east. Because of its orientation to the commuter rail station, the plan is in essence a transport village design intended to intensify mixed uses in the immediate vicinity of an expected major transport hub (the refurbished Metrolink rail station at Thomas and First Street that became operational in February 2001). The International Fair concept consists of “visual and performing arts, international shopping, cinemas and restaurants” in a distinctively recast urban environment featuring decorative light fixtures, paving elements, street trees and flags. The unified framework design, which also extends to the rest of the plan area and perimeter, is intended to create a cohesive and inviting visual environment of public spaces for pedestrian use.

More broadly, the plan envisions the International Fair area as an anchor for the larger plan area. The downtown as a whole has been re-zoned according to the plan consistent with the intended land uses. The larger plan calls for residential developments at the corners of the plan area, expansion of Western College of Osteopathic Medicine to the east of the International Fair, office development on either side of the rail station north of the tracks, and mixed uses elsewhere. The accommodation for Western University expansion is in keeping with a fundamental strategic approach of the current era of revitalization in downtown Pomona, namely cooperation with major higher educational institutions in the vicinity.

60 Historic preservation, to capitalize on the many historic structures in the downtown area, is another cornerstone of the current strategic approach. The plan intends to preserve and enhance historical structures and districts, and to promote utilization and the adaptive reuse of existing historic structures. The plan designates four historic districts. Three of the four districts together approximately coincide with the International Fair/Arts Colony areas foreseen in the plan. A fourth, the Historic Edison district, stretches along Second Street west of the International Fair/Arts Colony, between Park and Rebecca. This was originally an area of garages and related automotive activities. The plan calls for “food courts & specialty retail” in this area.

The other three historic districts are within the International Fair/Arts Colony area. The historic downtown district was the business and banking center. The downtown district still has a major bank branch (Washington Mutual, at Second and Garey), and the plan specifically calls for retention of existing banks. Otherwise, the plan calls for “specialty retail & convenience services”. In earlier times, J.C. Penny’s and Montgomery Wards anchored the historic shopping district, which ran east along Second from Garey to Gibbs. This area is now the sizable antique district, and the plan calls for retention of the cluster of antique stores currently in the area. The historic performing arts district is the area along Third between Main and Garey and extending along Thomas approximately one block north and south of Third. This area is home to the Fox Theater and the Pomona Valley Auditorium, which the plan specifically recommends for redevelopment in the context of other performing arts uses. The plan also calls for promoting the development of homes in the downtown area. Four residential “villages”, one at each corner of the downtown plan area, are included in the zoning changes. The vision of new housing construction for these “villages”, judging from the illustrations, is relatively low rise and low density. In addition, the plan specifically endorses loft units and their incorporation in mixed-use settings under adaptive reuse.

Pomona Transcenter Administered by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, which was created in 1991 via a Joint Powers Agreement between five Southern California counties- Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, and San Bernardino- Metrolink bills itself as “a premier regional rail

61 system including commuter and other passenger services linking communities to employment and other activity centers.” (http://www.metrolinktrains.com/about) The system operates seven rail lines that deliver passengers to 51 stations throughout Southern California, and boasts a weekday ridership of some 33,000 passengers, as of May 2002. Among these lines is the Riverside Line, which extends 59 miles from downtown Riverside to Los Angeles Union Station in downtown Los Angeles, stopping at five intermediate stations along the way.

Located in the Old Pomona Depot, which formerly served as a Southern Pacific passenger depot, the Downtown Pomona station has long been viewed as integral to helping attract people to downtown Pomona. The most recent station to be built along the Riverside line, the station was open for Metrolink service on February 5th, 2001. The City of Pomona had expressed interest in a downtown station since 1992, since “although Pomona already had a station on the San Bernardino Line, it was felt that a station on the Riverside line would revitalize their downtown shopping area.” (SCTA, 1998) Work on the station began in July 1994, and included relocation of tracks, public streets, parking lots, bus area loading zones and the depot platform, as well as the addition of a 300-space parking lot for Metrolink commuters. While significant renovations were made to the station, all work was required to meet strict preservation guidelines, resulting in a historically accurate depot that blends in with the rest of downtown Pomona. Unfortunately, construction delays and right-of-way controversies significantly delayed the station’s opening, as Metrolink had initially hoped to open the platform in July 1995, some 5 ½ years before it finally opened.

The Downtown Specific Plan emphasizes the fact that all points within the planned International Fair are less than a five-minute walk from the station, with the hopes that the convenience of a mass transit accessible downtown would attract regional riders. Unfortunately, ridership trends since the station was opened tend to paint a less rosy picture. The station was served by a total of 12 weekday trains and four Saturday trains upon its opening in February 2001, a time which saw daily ridership along the Riverside line of 4,100 passengers. By May of that year, daily ridership along the line had risen to approximately 4,800, a large part of it likely due to new Pomona commuters. However, Saturday ridership on the line’s four trains (two eastward, two westward) that stopped at downtown Pomona was just 313 passengers. By late

62 2001, Saturday ridership had decreased even further, to only 229 passengers. Disappointed with the low number of riders, Metrolink held a series of public hearings in December 2001 and January 2002 regarding a proposal to end Saturday service along the Riverside line, and on January 11, 2002 voted to end Saturday service the following week. As weekends are usually considered the most active retail days, the elimination of Saturday service can be seen as a sign of the inability of downtown Pomona to attract regional shoppers. To compound these problems, May 2002 data shows that weekday ridership on the Riverside line fell to 4,288, a decline of almost 11%.

Fairplex While not strictly speaking a government entity, Fairplex is a major quasi-governmental institution in Pomona, and one that has significance for the fate of the downtown despite its peripheral location in the city. Fairplex, adjacent to the Ganesha Hills of northwest Pomona, has been the home of the Los Angeles County Fair since 1922. A private non-profit corporation operating on leased County land, the fairgrounds complex has long been home to the National Hot Rod Association (NHRA) Winternationals races as well as the NHRA museum. Since the mid 1980s, Fairplex has been evolving into a year-round cultural and entertainment destination primarily by successfully promoting itself as a venue for trade and consumer shows.

Fairplex is in the process of developing an 85,000 square foot trade and conference center. Plans are in place, and funding has been approved for the site preparation phase, scheduled to begin in October 2002. Federal Economic Development Agency (EDA) funds earmarked for approximately two thirds of construction phase costs are pending approval. In an example of creative cooperation between major institutions in the area, Fairplex has been working together with Cal Poly Pomona’s College of the Extended University to develop Trade Pacifica – a concept for an events promotion group that would operate the new center.

Fairplex has been exploring other commercial development ventures and developing cultural and entertainment offerings, including arts exhibits. These efforts raise the question of the relationship of Fairplex vis-à-vis downtown Pomona: are the two locations simply

63 competing for the same scarce retail and entertainment customers, or can they enjoy synergies due to their relative proximity and potentially complementary attractions? In fact, the Arts Colony and Fairplex have already begun cooperating to operate special excursion shuttle buses to carry arts patrons between their respective exhibits during the Second Saturday open houses and arts events at the Fairplex.

Organizations The Central Business District organization (CBD), representing business interests, is the key counterpart to city government in the decade old revitalization effort in downtown Pomona, and initiator of the Arts Colony strategy. The CBD dates from the early 1960s, and was formed as part of the effort to develop the Pomona Mall during that period. The CBD is a 501(c) (6) organization - a tax-exempt “business league”, in Internal Revenue parlance, devoted to the improvement of business conditions and the advancement of the interests of the community. It is an assessment district similar in some ways to a Business Improvement District (BID), but with more limited power to raise revenue by assessing fees to locally licensed businesses. The CBD has a total annual budget of approximately $30,000. This is not adequate to attempt some of the promotion efforts popular with the better-funded BIDs, such as private security patrols on foot or on bicycles. Nevertheless, the CBD has exerted considerable influence in the last decade, due to its consistent vision of downtown revitalization, its energy in promoting the downtown (especially in light of its limited budget), and perhaps most importantly, the fact that it can legitimately claim to represent those private interests with the capital, the track record and the inclination to help transform the downtown through investment.

The Vehicle Parking District (VPD) appears to have been the earliest collective organization of commercial property owners and operators in downtown Pomona. From its beginnings in the late 1940s, the VPD assessed fees from property owners (rather than all locally licensed businesses, as is the case for the CBD) to purchase and arrange for the operation of parking lots. Due in part to its control of property (the parking lots), the VPD was an influential organization in downtown governance. Indeed, its influence appears to have eclipsed that of the CBD until about the end of the 1980s. Around that time, major downtown commercial real estate interests shifted from the VPD to the CBD as their preferred organ of collective

64 representation. This appears to have resulted from the peculiar representation structure of the VPD, in which board members are appointed by the city council rather than elected by the assessed property owners.

At this point, the VPD is important mainly as a potential source of properties for development. As recommended by the Downtown Specific Plan, there are plans at various stages of articulation by the redevelopment agency staff to develop a number of VPD lots as commercial properties. These would involve public/private partnerships, and in most cases the projects would involve multi-use facilities including housing. Prime candidates are the VPD lots on Main, on both sides of Third Street, and the numerous VPD lots along East Third Street between Locust and Eleanor.

The Pomona Valley Leadership Forum is a group composed of leaders from city government, major businesses and civic institutions (including the universities). The Leadership Forum was created to bring influential representatives of major stakeholders together to advise city leaders on matters of revitalization policy and to strengthen the links between major players in the revitalization effort. A number of projects have been incubated by the Leadership Forum, including the proposed University Village (see below).

The Private Sector Private sector interests in downtown Pomona are of two primary types: the owners and developers of properties, and the tenants who lease the properties for various uses. The leaseholders themselves can be further divided into retail tenants, the increasingly numerous loft (residential) tenants, and studio tenants. As is the case everywhere, these groups of private stakeholders have interests that are sometimes in harmony, at other times at odds with each other. All share a desire for a safe, clean downtown with healthy levels of pedestrian traffic during the day and evening, and all wish for a stronger sense of community and for lively and cohesive social activity downtown. Many of the differences among private stakeholders are due to conflicting interests concerning gentrification. Chapter two discusses the possibilities of neighborhood improvement without major economic transformation (preferred by tenants, with

65 the possible exception of retail and service providers) versus gentrification (substantial increases in local property values fueled by investment – preferred by property owners).

Other differences within the community of private stakeholders are strategic. These include differences of opinion regarding strategic partners, such as Fairplex and local colleges and universities, and disagreements about the target demographic revitalization efforts should be designed to attract. The “Beer and Pretzels versus Wine and Cheese” debate continues between those who feel the vision should be of an environment designed to immediately attract well-off visitors and art collectors, while others feel that a short term strategy of catering to a more economically diverse (and more youthful) clientele is a less risky strategy for bringing pedestrian traffic to the downtown in the short term. The rationale for the latter strategy is that increased downtown traffic must come first. More signs of life in the downtown are seen from this viewpoint as the indispensable foundation for long term economic renaissance, including opportunities to serve a more luxury minded clientele in the future. This important question of strategy will be discussed further in the concluding chapter.

Private Development Initiatives The development of loft apartments, defined loosely as apartments in the upper floors of mixed use and/or converted industrial buildings, has been a major feature of the last decade’s revitalization effort in downtown Pomona. Moreover, it is a relatively recent phenomenon: nearly all the approximately one hundred permitted, privately developed loft units in the downtown area have been developed during the last few years. In addition, there appear to be a number of uncertified lofts in the downtown rental market. Plans for the Mission Promenade project, discussed below, include a further twenty-eight loft units. Loft apartments, and rental apartments generally, seem to be the fastest growing property segment in and around the downtown – a trend that would have been difficult to predict at the outset of the Arts Colony initiative ten years ago.

Downtown developers have undertaken numerous other rehab/repositioning efforts. The various interests associated with the Tessier family have invested deeply in both private and public/private development in the downtown area. The former include a rehabilitation of the

66 Press Enterprise building, while the latter include the Cal Poly Pomona Downtown Center and the Latino Art Museum, to name but a few. The Armstrong family has concentrated their efforts on Third Street, on the blocks immediately east and west of Garey, to great effect. This area includes a Juan Pollo franchise, apparently the only chain retailer of any kind in the downtown area, as well as lofts, a gallery, and retail space. The two families have joined forces to purchase the Mayfair Hotel, on the corner of Third and Garey, and are discussing plans to convert the structure into a museum of American ceramics. The Dahm family operates Yesteryears, an important blues club, and the Vault Club, both on Second Street, as well as other downtown properties.

Entrepreneurial Leaseholders Art galleries in the downtown area, and particularly in the Arts Colony district, have increased dramatically in number, size and sales volume since the beginning of the Arts Colony initiative ten years ago. The Arts Colony currently lists eighteen gallery and/or studio spaces primarily devoted to the production, display and sale of art. The tradition of Second Saturday, in which all Arts Colony galleries remain open during the evening on the second Saturday of each month, has helped to attract curious visitors to the Arts Colony from considerable distances. A glance at the dA Center’s guest registry shows gallery visitors signing in from west Los Angeles, Hollywood, the San Fernando Valley, Orange County, and all parts of the Inland Empire. The CBD/Arts Colony has also sponsored a Carnival, and will begin an ongoing series of performances and events each fourth Saturday starting September of 2002 (see gallery map on following page).

A number of boutiques and arts oriented ventures have established themselves in the downtown area, particularly along Second Street between Garey and Main. The creative and often young proprietors of these businesses make and/or sell alternative fashions, art glass, occult supplies, Celtic articles, and a variety of other artistic and often esoteric products. The presence of these creative entrepreneurs, their friends and customers have helped to make this two block stretch among the liveliest in the downtown area. A number of them are also active in the CBD organization and provide leadership particularly in the planning of promotional events.

67 Antique Row, on Second Street between Garey and Gibbs, is one of the larger concentrations of such establishments in Southern California. In theory, such a cluster of specialized retail activity is beneficial, because the sheer number of product options attracts more than enough customers to make up for the increase in competition among retailers. And there is indeed anecdotal evidence that shoppers come to the Pomona Antique Row from greater distances than they would come to visit any single shop in the district. Unfortunately, however, the proprietors of Antique Row are not especially well organized, the shop’s hours are somewhat irregular, and perhaps most disappointing, the antique dealers have not participated to any great extent in the downtown planning process or the promotional efforts of the CBD organization.

Pomona Arts Colony Gallery Map (Courtesy of Pomona Art Colony Association and Third Planet Mindworks)

(1) Avatar Center (8) Gallery Soho/PVAA (9) Glassics Studio & (2) Latino Art Museum Gallery Del Fuego (3) Cal Poly Downtown Center (10) Kinnear Studio (4) Claremont Grad Progress Building (11) Magulandia (5) Cuttress Gallery/Fine Art Framing (12) Moon Maiden Glass Studios (6) Da Center For the Arts (13) Opera Garage Day (7) Gallery 57 Underground (14) SCA Galleries

68 Public/Private Partnerships: Mission Promenade Billed on the City of Pomona’s website as the city’s “first new commercial development project within the downtown area in more than twenty years,” the Mission Promenade is a three- story mixed-use complex currently under construction at the corner of Mission Blvd and Garey Ave, just north of the Pomona Civic Center. Groundbreaking on the 93,688 square foot parcel took place on January 17th, 2002. Rezoned as Mixed Use (MU-1) by the Downtown Specific Plan, the complex will be comprised of restaurants and retail outlets on the first floor, professional offices on the second floor, and loft-style apartments on the top floor.

City expectations for the Mission Promenade are high; as hopes are that the project will “mark a new era in the development in downtown Pomona.” (http://www.ci.pomona.ca.us/ Missionthumbs.htm) Formerly the site of a US Post Office, the property has sat vacant since the facility closed in the mid-1970s, failing to capitalize on its proximity to the Civic Center and the large customer base that it potentially offers. Considering the property’s history, commercial success at this location would demonstrate the strength of downtown revitalization in Pomona perhaps more than any other parcel in the downtown area.

Cal Poly Pomona Downtown Center The Cal Poly Pomona Downtown Center, like the initiatives involving Western University, is a logical outgrowth of potential synergies between the development needs of the downtown and the various Universities’ and Colleges’ need for appropriate space for community involvement. Cal Poly Pomona, being more physically removed from the downtown, is less likely to look to the downtown as a potential site for the expansion of dormitories or other forms of student housing. But it is precisely Cal Poly Pomona’s distance from the urban community that makes a downtown center necessary as a dissemination point for cultural, social and educational services to the wider community. The Cal Poly Pomona Downtown Center, which opened in 2001 at the southwest corner of Second and Main, serves Pomona through a variety of programs, including community theater, family activities, art classes, and a collaborative art projects bringing together artists from the university and the community to create murals. The Downtown Center also serves as a meeting place, gallery and performance space, public

69 computer laboratory and a staging area for faculty health, education and cultural outreach efforts in the community.

Fox Theater The Fox Theater, with its tall tower, is perhaps the most striking architectural landmark in downtown Pomona. On the southwest corner of third and Garey, it has been poorly maintained and sparsely utilized in recent years, perhaps being best known as an occasional venue for all- night “rave” parties. The City acquired the property in 2002, and discussion of redevelopment plans is currently underway. Among observers of the downtown, opinion seems to be divided between those who wish to redevelop the Fox as a theater and/or performing arts center, in keeping with the Specific Plan, and those who would prefer to respond to recent changes in markets by redeveloping the Fox primarily as residential units.

University Village The Pomona Valley Leadership Forum, in consultation with the Redevelopment Agency, has proposed a housing development with specific appeal for faculty working in the surrounding colleges and universities. While no details have been worked out, such a development might conceivably include financial incentives to attract faculty to buy units. The property initially targeted for this project is the two square blocks of VPD parking lot between Third and Fourth Streets, with Palomares on the west and Eleanor on the east. The project remains at the discussion stage.

70 Chapter Five: Analysis

This section contains data and analysis about demographic and economic conditions in the city of Pomona and in the downtown in particular. The analysis begins with sales tax data and real estate trends, and continues with a side-by-side comparison of baseline socio-economic data for the Downtown area and the City of Pomona. A color map section follows, with a set of reference maps followed by thematic maps showing demographic and economic conditions in the neighborhoods of Pomona.

Sales Tax Data Table 1 shows sales tax data for the city of Pomona over the most recent five-year period for which annual data are available. We can clearly see that despite minor relative fluctuations, the year over year trend for sales tax revenue in Pomona closely followed the countywide trend. In absolute terms, both the city of Pomona and Los Angeles County experienced very healthy expansions of sales except during the downturn of 2001, during which interval sales tax revenue for both jurisdictions essentially stagnated (less than one percent change).

Table 1: Sales Tax Revenue Trends for Pomona and Los Angeles County

Pomona Total LA County Total Sales Tax Pomona Annual Sales Tax LA County Year Revenue Increase Revenue Annual Increase

2001 1,037,713 -0.64% 107,426,692 0.71% 2000 1,044,380 9.53% 106,673,534 9.61% 1999 953,545 5.77% 97,316,828 7.88% 1998 901,524 6.32% 90,205,600 4.41% 1997 847,923 N/A 86,397,850 N/A

Source: Taxable Sales in California (State Board of Equalization)

71 It is quite surprising that sales increased at the same robust pace in Pomona during this period as they did for all of Los Angeles County, with its tourism, convention trade and pockets of luxury consumers. By way of contrast, Pomona has no major car dealerships, no major anchored shopping malls, and only one large shopping complex (at East End and Holt). Pomona’s robust sales during the period can presumably attributed mostly to the strength of older, urban storefront retailers in the downtown area, and similar retailers along major streets such as Holt, Mission and Garey outside the downtown.

Downtown Commercial Real Estate The following section discusses ten-year trends in tenant mix, occupancy and rents for a representative sample of downtown blocks. The blocks were selected to provide a mix of use types and revitalization trajectories (including the antiques district block, which has seen little repositioning investment). The data for the selected blocks can be used as a rough guide for changes in tenant mix, occupancy and rents for other downtown blocks experiencing corresponding levels of investment.

200 Block of East Second This is the Antiques District block. In 1992, most of the buildings were occupied on both sides of the street. Typical rents were 40-50 cents per square foot. Tenant mix consisted primarily of antique dealers, but also included a sandwich shop and beauty college. In 2002, nearly all buildings are occupied. The tenant mix remains the same, and average rents are estimated at 45 -55 cents per square foot. The relatively stable rents reflect a lack of repositioning investment, and more generally an unchanged commercial strategy on the part of the antique dealers.

200 Block of West Second This is in some ways the commercial heart of the Arts Colony, and it is the block that has been most completely transformed. In 1992, the north side of block was officially entirely vacant, although there were allegedly illegal lofts on both sides of the block. A furniture company, law office, and a coffeehouse occupied the south side. Rents were 20-30 cents per square foot. In 2002, the north side is occupied by Yesteryears Café, an important venue for live

72 blues music, and a number of small retail shops. Two of the larger shops on this block specialize in the resale of distinctive and collectible modern furniture from the mid-twentieth century, creating a synergistic specialized retail cluster large enough to bring collectors and shoppers from Los Angeles on a regular basis. The south side also has the Glass House concert venue, two specialty retail storefronts without live/work occupancies, four specialty retail storefronts with live/work occupancies, and El Taco Nazo restaurant. The second floor of 248-266 West 2nd is fully occupied with six live/work units. Retail storefront rents are 55 cents per square foot. Upper floor live/work rents are 90 cents per square foot.

500 Block of West Second In 1992, the only known occupancies were M&M Electric on the north side, and Kitron Radio on the south side. Rents for this period are unknown. In 2002, Kitron and M&M are still there. In addition, there are six live/work units and a new commercial tenant at 501 West 2nd. Rents for the existing live/work spaces are 58 cents per square foot. Renovation is underway at 590 W. 2nd to create nine live/work units, with rents at 65 cents per square foot.

100 Block of East Third In 1992, tenants were the Gas Company, Southern California Edison, and Armstrong Galleries. The Women's Community Building at the southeast corner of 3rd and Garey was vacant. A cocktail lounge, dentist, and barber occupied half of the ground floor of the Mayfair Hotel. The other half was vacant. Retail rents were 40 cents per square foot. In 2002, the Gas Company and Armstrong Galleries remain. There is a specialty retail next to Armstrong (150 E. 3rd), and the upper two floors have been converted into eight live/work units, all of which are occupied. The Women's Community Building is occupied by Juan Pollo restaurant, the Latino Chamber of Commerce, and an herb shop. There is one retail storefront vacancy. The Mayfair Hotel is scheduled for renovation, and the existing ground floor tenants will soon be moving out. Rents on live/work units are estimated at 80 cents per square foot. Retail rents are approximately 55-60 cents per square foot.

73 100 Block of West Third In 1992, El Merendero Bakery and El Merendero Restaurant were the only retail tenants. The Fox Theater was occupied by a church. The Progress Building (300 S. Thomas) was entirely vacant. Rents for this period are unknown. In 2002, the two Merenderos remain. The Fox is vacant, but has been purchased by the city and is scheduled for renovation. The Progress Building is completely occupied, with seven first floor specialty retail storefronts (including three live/work retail storefronts), fourteen upper floor live/work units, one commercial office, four day studios (workspace for artists), and three basement level galleries. The retail storefronts are a Latino party supply shop, teenage-oriented clothing store, alternative record store, postal service business, deli, Mexican import shop, and African import shop. Retail storefront rents are 55 cents per square foot. Upper floor live/work rents are 75-80 cents per square foot. Day studio rents are $1 per square foot.

The foregoing analysis of selected blocks makes it clear that there is an improving market for downtown real estate in Pomona, judging from declining vacancies and increasing rents. There is also a clear connection between investment, particularly loft conversions, and increasing rents even for nearby commercial properties (e.g. on the same block). The tenant mix indicates demand for loft (residential) space, artist’s studio space (including live/work space), performance space, and specialty retail including galleries, boutiques, and other aesthetically oriented retailers such as music stores and collectible furniture stores. These findings are consistent with an emerging culture and arts district. Conspicuous by their relative absence are restaurants, cafes and pubs, all of which require regular high levels of evening traffic. It should be noted that the considerable success of loft housing downtown is a quite recent phenomenon, and that as the population of loft dwellers continues to increase (as seems inevitable), market thresholds for dining, pubs and cafes will soon be exceeded and such establishments will begin to appear. In addition, businesses catering specifically to Hispanics, or that are likely to attract large numbers of Hispanics from Pomona’s neighborhoods are not found downtown in great abundance, with the exception of the 100 block of West Third.

74 Socio-Economic Profile of Pomona and the Downtown Table 2 displays key socio-economic measures for the city of Pomona and for the census tract (#4088) that corresponds very closely to the downtown specific plan area (see Figure 3 in the map section for the correspondence between these two areas). We can see that population growth for the city was quite rapid during the 1990s at 13.6%; almost twice the Los Angeles County growth rate of 7.4%. Tract 4088 grew much more slowly, at 4.5%. The population density for the downtown tract was only slightly lower in 2000 than that for the city as a whole; it is quite possible that the proliferation of loft housing units downtown in the two and a half years since the census was taken has raised the population density to, or above, the level of the city. Since neither the area of the city nor of the tract increased during the 1990s, the rates of change in density are identical to the rates of change in population.

Table 2: Comparison of Key Socio-Economic Measures, City of Pomona and Downtown Census Tract #4088 Tract 4088: Pomona, Pomona: % Tract 4088, % Change, 2000 Change, 90-00 2000 90-00 Total Population 149,644 13.6% 3571 4.5% Population Density/sq. mi. 5985.19 - 5159.28 - Percent White* 16.8% -11.7% 10.2% -4.1% Percent Black* 9.0% -4.9% 10.0% -3.9% Percent Asian* 7.1% 0.6% 5.6% 2.1% Percent Hispanic 64.5% 13.9% 73.0% 5.5% Percent Foreign Born 36.7% 5.1% 43.15% 0.08% Median Household Income $40,021 24.6% $19,885 15.8% Median Home Value $134,000 0.2% $107,000 -3.3%

*White, Black and Asian categories do not include Hispanic persons of these races

The city of Pomona was nearly two-thirds Hispanic in 2000; up from around fifty percent in 1990. Simply stated, Hispanics now dominate the city demographic after two decades of explosive growth. The downtown area itself is even more overwhelmingly Hispanic (73%). The slower proportional gains for Hispanics in tract 4088 during the 1990s (relative to the 13.9% proportional gain for the City) is simply evidence that the proportion of the population that is

75 Hispanic is stabilizing at very high levels in the downtown2. By contrast, the Non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black populations of Pomona are in decline. Non-Hispanic whites are down sharply to less than 17% of all residents, while non-Hispanic blacks have declined to 9%. This represents a 41% rate of decline in population proportion for whites during the 1990s, and a 35% rate of decline for blacks. The rate of decline for both blacks and whites living in tract 4088 was similar to citywide rates of decline in proportion. Non-Hispanic Asian proportions were virtually unchanged for the city during this interval, and Asian proportions for tract 4088 were up 2.1%. While this modest proportional increase represents a more than 50% rate of increase in proportion Asian in the tract, the figure is misleading due to the small proportion of Asians present in the tract population in 1990.

Median household income for the city was a respectable $40,021 in 2000, nearly a 25% increase over 1990. This increase is not likely due to increased earning power of residents who were present in 1990, but rather is almost certainly due to an influx of better-paid newcomers during the course of the decade. It seems likely that many of these better-paid newcomers were home buyers, in many cases Hispanic, who were attracted from other parts of the eastern San Gabriel Valley and Pomona Valley by Pomona’s relatively affordable home prices. Median household income in tract 4088 was much lower – at $19,885, less than half the citywide figure; the 1990 to 2000 increase was a more modest 15.8%. Here again, the very recent burst of loft housing conversions since the census enumeration in April 2000 has doubtless begun to move median income upward, and will continue to do so as loft dwellers become a more significant proportion of the downtown population.

The city’s median home value of $134,000 in 2000 was only about half the Los Angeles County median, making Pomona affordable particularly for first time home buyers. The low home prices, however, reflect the perception (not always accurate) of a lack of amenities in some Pomona neighborhoods. Prices in tract 4088 were even lower, with a median of $107,000. Equally important, the trend in home prices during the 1990s was essentially flat for the city and

2 The ten-year percentage change values in the third and fifth columns of Table 2 refer to the proportional gain for the ethnic proportions and percent foreign born, not the rate of increase in proportion. For instance, the citywide proportion Hispanic grew from 50.6% to 64.5% - a 13.9% increase in proportion Hispanic but a 27.6% rate of

76 actually slightly negative for tract 4088. These figures, however, fail to capture the volatility in markets for Pomona homes, which declined significantly in the early 1990s and have been slowly but steadily rising for the last several years. Indications are that prices have risen at a brisk pace since enumeration in early 2000; yet homebuyers remain somewhat wary of Pomona because the memory of significant house price declines a decade ago is still relatively fresh.

Map Section - click here for maps Figure 1, included for reference, shows Pomona’s location in the greater Los Angeles region. Figure 2 shows the census tracts of Pomona, with their numerical codes. These codes will be used to refer to locations and patterns in the thematic maps that follow. It should be noted that census tract 4024.04, which includes the campus of Cal Poly Pomona, is a know bug in the 2000 census and includes a number of errors and missing counts. Figure 3 shows the high degree of overlap between the Downtown Specific Plan area and census tract 4088. In Table 2 above, and in the maps of socio-economic levels that follow Figure 3, tract 4088 is treated as synonymous with the Downtown Specific Plan study area.

Figures 4 through 14 show the geographic distributions of key social and economic variables in Pomona in 2000, as well as selected changes in those variables between 1990 and 2000. For reference, tract 4088 (corresponding closely to the Downtown Specific Plan area) is highlighted in these maps, and roads are included. Figure 4 shows median household income for Pomona tracts. At the highest levels, over $55,000 per year, are tracts 4022 (which incorporates the Ganesha Hills neighborhood in the north) and 4033.11 (which includes the Phillips Ranch subdivisions in the southwest. As is customary in California, topography correlates with class: both these neighborhoods are built on hills, while the lower income triangle between them opening out toward the east lies lower, on flat ground.

Figure 5 shows that, in percentage terms at least, people in the most prosperous neighborhoods are not getting richer as fast as people in the formerly solid blue collar neighborhoods of tract 4027.01, in the far east of the city, and in tract 4030, across the Chino

increase over the 1990 proportion Hispanic. The percent increases given for total population, median income and median home value are rates of increase over 1990 levels.

77 freeway from Phillips Ranch. Incomes appear to be collapsing in tract 4027.02, in the neighborhoods adjacent to east Holt. Figure 6 shows the most expensive housing (still quite reasonable by Los Angeles County standards) in the Phillips Ranch neighborhood (Tract 4033.11). Elsewhere, the map shows the lowest home values oriented along an east-west axis through central Pomona, following the Holt and Mission corridors and surrounding the industrial areas along the central rail corridor. A notable exception is tract 4026, which corresponds to the Lincoln Park neighborhood immediately northeast of downtown. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this area, which contains a number of large and beautiful homes in Craftsman, Mission Revival and other early twentieth century styles, has seen a larger influx of homebuyers from farther away (Los Angeles, Orange County) seeking what realtors call character homes at affordable prices. Figure 7 shows the highest population densities in the relatively low-income tracts west of downtown, and in the economically rising northeastern tracts on the border with Claremont. It seems likely that high densities arise from very different causes in these two areas; specifically, from overcrowding (more than one family per housing unit) in the tracts west of downtown, and from a combination of low vacancy rates, families with numerous children, and multifamily housing in the northeastern tracts.

Figures 8 through 13 display proportions of Pomona tract populations belonging to the three largest and most volatile ethnic groups, and changes in these tract proportions; Figure 14 shows the distribution of tract proportions that are foreign born. In Figure 8, we can see that the concentration of Hispanics is, for the most part, highly and negatively correlated with tract median household income (refer to Fig. 4 for comparison). In other words, we see the lowest Hispanic proportions in the most well-off tracts (those containing Phillips Ranch and Ganesha Hills), and the highest proportions of Hispanics along the (low income) central east-west axis. The exceptions to this pattern are the southern tracts 4029.01 and 4030, which are 75 to 80% Hispanic but relatively prosperous (median household incomes in the $40,000 to $55,000 range). In fact, tract 4030 had one of the largest increases in median household income during the 1990s, a jump of over 51%, while median household income for tract 4029.01 increased 33%. Unless these increases in income are primarily due to income gains by the small non-Hispanic minority (which is most unlikely), it seems this southern area of the city is home to an emerging Hispanic middle class. Figure 9 shows the largest proportional increases for Hispanics during the 1990s in the northeast of the city, followed by more modest gains on the west side. Both these areas were

78 below the citywide proportion Hispanic in 1990, whereas most areas with very high proportions Hispanic in 1990 experienced smaller proportional gains. The outstanding exception is tract 4025.01, west by southwest of downtown, which increased from 75% Hispanic in 1990 to 85% in 2000, tract 4027.02, which went from 53% to 78% Hispanic, and tract 4023.01, which went from 57% to 76% Hispanic 3.

Figure 10 shows that there is remarkably little segregation of blacks in Pomona. Making up only nine percent of the city population in 2000, no census tract is more than 25.2% black (tract 4021.02). Conversely, only the far southeastern tract 4029.01, characterized above as Hispanic middle class, and the low income central east-west corridor have fewer than five percent black in their population. More generally, the black population is not concentrated in low-income parts of the city, nor are blacks absent from more affluent areas. Indeed, blacks live in the highest income Ganesha Hills and Phillips Ranch neighborhoods (tracts 4022 and 4033.11) in proportions somewhat higher than their citywide concentration. Figure 11 rounds out this picture with trend evidence of black de-concentration and upward social mobility: The greatest proportional loss for blacks was in tract 4021.01, an area of black concentration in 1990 that went from 43% black to 22% black during the 1990s. During the same time period, while blacks were declining by almost five percent as a proportion of the city’s population, this group made a slight proportional gain in Pomona’s richest tract (4033.11, the Phillips Ranch tract).

Figure 12 shows the proportional distribution of non-Hispanic whites (Anglos) in 2000. While Anglos maintain a slim majority (56%) only in sparsely populated tract 4032, west of the 57 freeway, the group remains a significant minority in the prosperous Ganesha Hills (4022) and Phillips Ranch (4033.11) tracts, making up 39% and 35% of these tract’s populations, respectively. Anglos also remain a significant minority in 2000 in some less affluent tracts: 4017.02 (34%), and the Lincoln Park tract, 4026 (28%). Figure 13 shows Anglos experiencing proportional losses during the 1990s most rapidly in the same (4026) tract and in the west side

3 It should be noted that proportional gains always decline as a group’s proportional share reaches 100%. For example, a group that already includes more than 80% of an area’s population simply cannot experience a 20% proportional gain during a given time interval, because to do so it would have to have more group members present in the area than the area’s total population. In a sense, this is the opposite of exaggeration caused in rates of increase over a time interval when initial group populations are very small, as in the Asian population of tract 4088 in Table 2 above.

79 tract 4024.02, while making a small proportional gain locally (in the context of a nearly twelve percent proportional loss citywide) in tract 4021.01, on the border with Claremont. This latter tract is unique in Pomona inasmuch as Anglos appear to be moving into a previously heavily black neighborhood, with the result that the area is becoming less segregated. Also during the 1990s, Hispanic proportion in this tract has increased from 46% to 62%, similar to the citywide trend. Perhaps (non-Hispanic) whites are more willing to live together with blacks when both groups are a minority locally.

Figure 14 shows the distribution of tract proportion foreign born in 2000. Overall, these proportions are very high (nearly 37% citywide, see Table 2). We might expect to see a strong and visually evident correlation between this statistic and proportion Hispanic, but the situation is more complicated. The connection is in fact evident in the low-income central areas south and east of downtown, and extending east to the Montclair line. But in heavily Hispanic tracts that are more prosperous, such as the southern tracts 4029.01 and 4030 discussed above, the foreign born proportion is only about half Hispanic proportion, with the implication that a large number of Hispanics in these areas are U.S. born. In some ways, the pattern of concentration of the foreign born population more closely follows the pattern of low median household incomes than the pattern of Hispanic concentration. The conclusion is that in a city where Hispanics predominate almost everywhere, the socio-economic divide among Hispanics is one between the native born, who tend to be more prosperous, and immigrants (especially more recent immigrants) who tend to have lower incomes.

We can now summarize the socio-demographic data and analysis presented in Table 2 and in the map section. Overall rapid population growth was accompanied by fairly dramatic ethnic change in which the bare Hispanic majority of 1990 grew much larger, while non- Hispanic black and white proportions declined and Asians held steady in proportional terms. Incomes rose strongly, while home prices remained essentially level and very affordable by southern California standards. Contextual indications are that rising incomes were the norm for at least some segments of the Hispanic, black and non-Hispanic white communities, and that these diverse and newly prosperous Pomona residents were in large measure newcomers who lived outside the city in 1990. We can draw several conclusions from these trends: first and

80 foremost, that the combination of rising population and increasing purchasing power for city residents (given flat home prices) makes the local (as opposed to regional) market more potentially attractive to retail, service and entertainment providers. Second, that this increasingly affluent, increasingly attractive local market is now two-thirds Hispanic. This fact suggests that a partial reconsideration of the downtown redevelopment strategy may be in order, to determine if a market district catering to Pomona residents, and perhaps specifically local Hispanics to some degree, might not be feasible in some part of the downtown that is slower to develop along the lines of existing strategy.

81 Chapter 6: Summary and Findings

Strategy and Efforts Toward Revitalization in Downtown Pomona Pomona, an older industrial city on the periphery of metropolitan Los Angeles, experienced a cycle of downtown growth, decline and revitalization efforts typical of such communities in twentieth century North America. A formerly thriving central business district, anchoring the region’s government, retail and entertainment services and serving as a major transport hub for rail passengers and light industry, went into decline in the decades following World War II. The decline intensified after the opening of the San Bernardino Freeway in 1954 diverted traffic away from downtown retail and toward emerging shopping centers oriented to the new road. Loss of industrial jobs in adjacent parts of the city, beginning in the 1970s and continuing into the early 1990s, aggravated the downtown’s economic decline.

Early attempts to revive Pomona’s commercial downtown, notably the Pomona (pedestrian) Mall of 1962, were unsuccessful. In 1992, a new strategy to revitalize downtown Pomona was announced by downtown commercial interests, represented by the Central Business District (CBD) organization, and by city government. The revitalized downtown was to be anchored by an Arts Colony; a decentralized but geographically concentrated cluster of studios, galleries and boutiques built around an already present community of working artists. A broader plan for the downtown area was articulated in the City’s Downtown Specific Plan of 1994. The plan incorporated elements of a transit village (to be built around the Metrolink station at First Street and Thomas Street) and of an urban entertainment district.

While most of the details of the Downtown Specific Plan have not been realized to date, the city government has provided resources, notably signage, increased police patrols and public art, toward the downtown revitalization effort in general and the Arts Colony vision in particular. The City has also worked together with the CBD organization, commercial real estate interests, and other stakeholders including local universities to pursue investment through public/private partnerships, the most dramatic being the Mission Promenade mixed use development currently

82 under construction. Local commercial real estate interests with strong ties to the community have extensively invested in the adaptive reuse of existing structures in the downtown area.

The Impact of Revitalization Efforts in Downtown Pomona There has clearly been a commercial revival in Downtown Pomona during the ten years since the Arts Colony strategy was announced. There is much more activity and foot traffic, at least during daylight hours and on nights, such as second and fourth Saturdays, when activities are scheduled in the Arts Colony. The community of artists has continued to thrive and grow, not least because of the increase in affordable, high-quality live-work studios. Specialized, style- oriented stores, such as clothing boutiques, record shops, and collectible modern furniture shops represent a solid beginning for niche urban retailing. The numbers support this impression of commercial revival: downtown Pomona has higher commercial lease rates and much lower vacancies than ten years ago. Perhaps the most dramatic and unexpected turnaround has been in downtown housing. Dozens of loft conversions have been developed in older commercial and industrial buildings, and there is a strong residential component in the mixed use Mission Promenade development.

Moreover, the momentum of investment in downtown Pomona seems to be picking up, both in terms of aggregate dollar amounts and also in terms of the long overdue construction and rehabilitation of major landmark structures. In addition to the Mission Promenade project, adaptive re-use of the Fox Theater and Mayfair Hotel are imminent. The downtown housing boom is also a very recent phenomenon. Almost all the downtown housing units constructed since 1992 have been developed in the last two or three years – too recently, in most cases, to appear in the 2000 census.

On the other hand, much remains to be done. There are still very few dining options downtown, no gourmet coffee house with evening hours, and no neighborhood pub or similar gathering place that could serve as an evening destination. The absence of these services is not due to any lack of marketing vision on the part of downtown commercial property operators, but rather to the market thresholds of the hospitality industry: There is simply not enough traffic, especially foot traffic, within an effective radius of the downtown area to support these services.

83 Many potential evening visitors, in turn, are not drawn to the downtown largely because such services are absent. The resulting standoff is difficult to resolve; yet finding ways to increase traffic and visits is the key unanswered question with respect to downtown Pomona’s continued economic recovery. Potential solutions are discussed in the recommendations below.

Demographic, Socio-Economic and Other Market Trends The authors have identified several significant trends that are relevant to ongoing revitalization efforts in downtown Pomona. At the local level (i.e., the city of Pomona), population growth has been rapid (13.6% during the 1990s). During the same period, the Hispanic majority has grown significantly (to 64.5%) while non-Hispanic black and white proportions declined. Simultaneously with these ethnic changes, city median income increased by almost 25%. The overall trend citywide is toward a larger, much more prosperous and more predominantly Hispanic population. Readers are therefore cautioned not to mistake ethnic change for economic decline. Further, developers and policy makers are advised to consider augmenting the de facto current use mix strategy that is oriented toward a regional clientele with services, and perhaps a service district, intended to serve local residents. Considering such a diversification in market targeting makes sense in the context of a local (city) population that has approximately 42% more aggregate income in 2000 than in 19904, provided local market- oriented new developments would not detract from the Arts Colony and related existing downtown initiatives.

At the regional level, two trends bode well for the long term future prospects of downtown Pomona. Population growth in the southern California region remains rapid, and the inland areas are the fastest growing within the region (Riverside County grew at 32% during the 1990s while San Bernardino County grew at over 20%; rates in adjacent areas of eastern Los Angeles county are also much higher than the 7.4% Los Angeles County-wide growth rate). There is every reason to expect that explosive inland growth in southern California will continue for the foreseeable future. Growth of the inland area means a larger market for retail and entertainment. This increase in the size of the market means not only greater demand for retail and

4 In fact, this statistic understates the growth of potential local retail demand during the 1990s: since housing costs in Pomona remained virtually flat, household discretionary income likely more than doubled.

84 entertainment centers generally, but also better opportunities for niche marketing of these services, such as the urban entertainment and arts district envisioned for downtown Pomona. Another trend favoring urban entertainment districts, as opposed to new, ready-made urban entertainment centers is the recent resurgence of “urban chic” identified by real estate experts (Urban Land Institute, 1998):

Consumers crave the functionality of the city: dense, eclectic, spontaneous, pedestrian environments where entertainment, dining and retail options are in close proximity. This comes as a rejection of the sprawling and homogeneous suburbs…(p.19)

Since downtown Pomona is one of the few truly urban built environments in inland southern California, and since the ongoing explosion of growth in this region overwhelmingly takes the form of “sprawling and homogeneous suburbs”, we can conclude that downtown Pomona is well placed, perhaps uniquely well placed, to meet what appears to be the latent need for natural, organic urban experiences in the growing inland population. Given this geographic competitive advantage, it is extremely likely that downtown Pomona will continue to prosper in some form. The remaining questions are, how much will the downtown prosper? In which ways, specifically? And, how long will the downtown take to reach its full potential? The answers to these questions depend largely on current and future revitalization strategy.

A final trend that bears discussion is the eroding resistance to multifamily housing among southern Californians. Until very recently, apartments and condominiums have been associated with deprivation and hardship by southern Californians, whose American dream of home ownership (unlike those in many eastern U.S. cities) overwhelmingly featured the unattached single family home, however small. In the last decade, however, momentum has been building in Southern California real estate markets for apartments and condominiums at all market levels, from affordable to luxury. Partly, this trend is a consequence of the closing of southern California’s suburban frontier: Quite simply, we have run out of suitable open space within commuting range upon which to subdivide. The resulting supply squeeze has led to rapidly rising costs of land and housing in developed areas, which place single family homes beyond the

85 reach of many households. The only economically viable solution in the face of growing populations is to increase densities (i.e., for people to live in multifamily structures).

In part, however, the rapidly growing acceptance of multifamily housing options among southern Californians at all income levels also represents a change in consumer preferences, reflecting the back-to-the-city sentiments discussed above. It is no coincidence, for example, that some of the largest (and most luxurious) concentrations of new multifamily housing are within easy walking distance of Old Pasadena and the Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica. Given this market trend, we can expect continuing strong demand for market rate multifamily housing in central Pomona, and strong synergies between new housing and the revitalizing downtown commercial district.

Target Demographics and the Evolution of Urban Entertainment Districts It is relatively easy for redevelopment officials, real estate professionals and ordinary southern Californians to visualize a successful, mature and fully gentrified urban entertainment district. The streets and structures are well tended, almost manicured; occupancy approaches 100% with a tenant mix of trendy restaurants, cafes, bars, movie theaters, and high-end retail establishments including (but not completely dominated by) fashionable national and regional chains. Most importantly, the streets (and possibly the alleys and squares) teem with well groomed, well heeled workers on weekdays, and with equally prosperous revelers on evenings and weekends. Could downtown Pomona attain this goal? Given the progress already made, and the relevant market trends, the answer is that it certainly could. Will downtown Pomona attain this goal? In all likelihood it will, but change may not be as rapid as some might hope.

Despite the relatively rapid success of some efforts, the evolution of urban entertainment districts tends to be gradual and to go through several stages. It should be recalled that revitalization efforts in what is now the Old Pasadena district began in the 1970s. Moreover, emerging urban entertainment districts typically go through a phase in which new establishments have an independent, bohemian flavor, and coexist well with remaining older down-market tenants. During this stage, foot traffic increases markedly, the district gets a reputation as fun

86 and a little bit wild without being dangerous, and local sales revenues increase significantly. Only later do rising commercial rents drive out some newer bohemian and older down-market tenants, and only at this later stage do upscale commercial tenants, whether independents or chains, make their appearance. Even at this successful, mature stage it is not necessary for down-market tenants to disappear completely in order for the district to be economically successful. For example, Old Pasadena still prominently features several distinctly working class bars, a pawn shop and a sex shop, all of which date from before the push for revitalization. Judging from the enormous and conspicuously prosperous crowds in this district, none of these older uses detracts from the appeal of more upscale nearby commercial establishments.

In downtown Pomona, an awareness of this typical pattern of gradual evolution has strategic implications for investment decisions. The greatest short term obstacle to more rapid growth in the downtown is the lack of traffic, particularly pedestrian traffic. In the authors’ opinions, developers and redevelopers should (within reason) invest for retail and entertainment uses that will bring the largest number of people downtown, and keep them there the longest, regardless of their incomes or purchasing habits. In keeping with the discussion above, the resulting increase in activity and change in perceptions of the area (i.e., that it is a vibrant center of activity, even if it is not upscale), and the accompanying surge for local businesses, is the first stage of a two-stage evolution. The second stage is the development of upscale uses, which are much easier to graft onto an already thriving, more moderately priced entertainment district than to develop, as it were, in a vacuum. The two-stage approach would likely be the fastest and least risky way to promote retail and entertainment revenue generators in downtown Pomona, while simultaneously positioning the area for eventual upscale development.

87 Recommendations:

· Pursue a two stage approach: a use mix initially designed to maximize downtown traffic, with the understanding upscale uses will become feasible at a later date

· Consider catering to growing local demand, including but not limited to the numerically predominant, and increasingly prosperous, Hispanics

· Consider designating a special district downtown designed to attract visitors (i.e. consumers) from Pomona’s neighborhoods. Such a district must be designed to complement, rather than compete with, the Arts Colony

· Promote foot traffic and more intensive use of the downtown area by building more multifamily housing locally. A variety of product types and tenure options is recommended (rentals and condominiums in mixed use developments and redevelopments, loft conversions of industrial buildings and single purpose residential developments)

· Create a ready-made base of restaurant customers by building movie theaters. An “art house” movie theater showing thoughtful films with relatively broad appeal would perfectly complement the Arts Colony. An option is a bi-lingual movie house, with screens devoted to English language “art” films and to Spanish movies

· In order to secure adequate revenue for more ambitious security, esthetic and promotional efforts, the CBD organization should be transformed into a Business Improvement District

· When the city redraws its Council districts, it should include the area of the downtown specific plan in a single district, rather than maintaining divided representation as at present

88 Sources Cited

Axtman, Kris. 2001. In Southwest, More Whites Find Big-City Life Appealing. Christian Science Monitor, 93(99): 4.

Banovetz, J.M., Dolan, D.A., and Swain, J.W. 2000. Overview of Local Economic Development. In R.L. Kemp (Ed.), Main Street Renewal: A Handbook, pp. 16-31. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company.

Beauregard, R.A. 1993. Voices of Decline: The postwar fate of US Cities. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Blau, J. 1989. The Shape of Culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bradley, Richard. 1995. Downtown Renewal: The Role of Business Improvement Districts. Public Management, 77: 9-13.

Burayidi, M.A. 2001. Introduction: Downtowns and Small City Development. In M.A. Burayidi (Ed.), Downtowns: Revitalizing the Centers of Small Urban Communities, pp. 1-6. New York: Routledge.

Campbell, T., Clarke, L., and Ochoa, E. 1990. Mobilizing Pomona’s Human and Physical Resources: A Comprehensive Development Strategy. Commissioned by the City of Pomona.

Cleland, R.G. 1947. California in Our Time. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Coates, Dennis and Humphreys, B.R. 2000. The Stadium Gambit and Local Economic Development. The Cato Review of Business and Government Regulation, 23(2): 15-20.

Crouch, W.W. and Dinerman, B. 1963. Southern California Metropolis: A Study in Development of Government for a Metropolitan Area. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Fogelson, Robert M. 1993. The Fragmented Metropolis: Los Angeles, 1850-1930. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Fogelson, Robert M. 2001. Downtown: Its Rise and Fall, 1880-1950. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Fox, Kenneth. 1986. Metropolitan America: Urban Life and Urban Policy in the United States, 1940-1980. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi.

Fotheringham, Allan. 2000. Where History Meets Art. MacLean’s, 113(6): 64.

Frankel, Karen. 2001. Attracting Artists: A Tale of Two Cities. American Artist, 65(713): 12.

89 Frieden, B.J. and Sagalyn, L.B. 1989. Downtown, Inc.: How America Rebuilds Cities. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Goldfield, D.R. and Brownell, B.A. 1979. Urban America: From Downtown to No Town. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Greuling, J.E. 2000. Tax Increment Financing. In R.L. Kemp (Ed.), Main Street Renewal: A Handbook, pp. 209-217. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company.

King, W.F. 1990. The San Gabriel Valley: Chronicles of an Abundant Land. Chatsworth, CA: Windsor Publications.

Lampert-Greaux, Ellen. 1998. Cultural Cachet. TCI, 32: 38-41.

Lockwood, Charles. 1997. Onward and Upward in Downtown Santa Monica. Planning, 63(9): 123-27

Longstreth, Richard. 1997. City Center to Regional Mall. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Lothrop, Gloria Ricci. 1988. Pomona: A Centennial History. Northridge, CA: Windsor Publications.

Mason, M.S. 1998. More Art than Ever in Santa Fe. Christian Science Monitor, 90(193): B1.

Mattern, Mark. 2001. Art and Community Development in Santa Ana: The Promise and the Reality. Journal of Arts Management, Law and Society, 30(4): 301-315.

McDowell, E. 1997, April 24. Tourists respond to lure of culture. New York Times, pp. D1, D4.

McNamara, K. and Kriesel, W. 1993. Assessing Local Industrial Development Potential. Journal of the Community Development Society, 24(1): 61-71.

McWilliams, Carey. 1946. Southern California Country: An Island on the Land. New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pierce.

McWilliams, Carey. 1998. California: The Great Exception. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Milder, N.D. 1997. Niche Strategies for Downtown Revitalization. New York: Downtown Research and Development Center.

Mitchell, Jerry. 2001. Business Improvement Districts and the 'New' Revitalization of Downtown. Economic Development Quarterly 15(2): 115-123.

Moe, R and Wilkie, C. 1997. Changing Places. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

90 Myers, D. and J. Park. 2001. Racially Balanced Cities In Southern California, 1980- 2000. Public Research Report No. 2001-5, Population Dynamics Group, School of Public Policy and Development, University of Southern California.

O’Flaherty, Joseph S. 1978. Those Powerful Years: The South Coast and Los Angles, 1887- 1917. Hicksville, NY: Exposition.

Palma, D.P. 2000. Downtown Safety Strategies. In R.L. Kemp (Ed.), Main Street Renewal: A Handbook, pp. 164-168. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company.

Ovnick, Merry. 1994. Los Angeles: The End of the Rainbow. Los Angeles: Balcony Press.

Pierce, N.R. and Steinbach, C.F. 1990. Enterprising communities: community based development in America. Washington D.C.: Council for Community-Based Development.

Robertson, K.A. 1995. Downtown Redevelopment Strategies in the United States: An End of the Century Assessment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 61(4): 429- 438.

Robinson, W.W. 1939. Ranchos Become Cities. Los Angeles: San Pasqual.

Rolle, Andrew. 1998. California: A History. Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson, Inc.

Schlinkman, Mark. 2002, March 16. Aldermen approve spending for new stadium. St. Louis Post Dispatch, p. A16.

Scott, A.J. and Soja, E.W. 1996. The City: Los Angeles and Urban Theory at the End of the Twentieth Century. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Security Pacific National Bank. 1968. Growth and Economic Stature of the San Gabriel Valley and Pomona Area.

Soja, E.W. 2000. Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Starr, Kevin. 1985. Inventing the Dream: California Through the Progressive Era. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Starr, Kevin. 1990. Material Dreams: Southern California Through the 1920’s. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Starr, Kevin. 1995. Endangered Dreams: The Great Depression in California. New York: Oxford University Press.

Stoecker, Randy. 1997. The CDC Model of Urban Redevelopment: A Critique and Alternative. Journal of Urban Affairs, 19(1): 1-22.

Stoffel, Gregory and Associates. 2002. Old Towne Orange Customer Intercept Survey. Commissioned by the City of Orange Economic Development Department. Orange, CA.

Strom, Elizabeth. 2000. Let’s Put on a Show! Performing Arts and Urban Revitalization in Newark, New Jersey. Journal of Urban Affairs, 21(4): 423-25.

Thompson, W.S. 1955. Growth and Changes in California’s Population. Los Angeles: The Haynes Foundation.

Urban Land Institute. 1992. Downtown Development Handbook. Washington, DC: The Urban Land Institute.

Urban Land Institute. 1998. Developing Urban Entertainment Centers. Washington, DC: The Urban Land Institute.

Weber, B. 1997, November 18. Cities are fostering the arts as a way to save downtown. New York Times, pp. A1, A24.

Wegner, D. 2000. Long Beach, CA: The Making of a Tourist Town. Parks and Recreation, 35(9): 116-124.

Zdenek, R. 1987. Community Development Corporations. In S.T. Bruyn and J. Meehan (Eds.), Beyond the Market and State: New Directions in Community Development. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

About the Authors

Michael Reibel is an urban geographer on the faculty of Cal Poly Pomona. His expertise is in neighborhood economic, racial and ethnic change, and in economic development and redevelopment in North American cities. Dr. Reibel has published refereed articles on immigration, demographic techniques, and financial disinvestment in inner city neighborhoods. He has been a senior analyst at George Smith Partners, a commercial real estate investment bank, and consults with organizations in the private, public and non-profit sectors.

David Levitan is a graduate student in Urban Planning at Cal Poly Pomona. Originally from Orange County, he is a graduate of the University of California, Berkeley. David currently works in the planning department of the City of South Pasadena.