Top

news

Stories

 

Parks and Wreck: L.A.'s Fight for Public Green Space

In search of the Emerald City

There’s a foul smell in Pershing Square. Well, several foul smells, really. Most prominently, there’s the smell of urine. It wafts in all directions, emanating from a dozen dark, hidden recesses spread throughout the square. There’s the smell of the fountain, a giant purple modernist abomination that every so often belches a tiny stream of liquid into a stagnant brown pool below. There’s the smell of a small colony of homeless, who have made this place their bathroom. They occupy nearly every bench in sight, baking and sweating in the treeless glare of the unforgiving sun. At noon, in the largest public space in the downtown business district of the country’s second largest city, these men and women are the area’s sole occupants.

Illustration by Ronald Kurniawan

(Click to enlarge)

(Click to enlarge)

(Click to enlarge)

A rendering of a re-imagined Cornfield

Meanwhile, two blocks away, a group of businesspeople in sleek skirts and tailored suits enjoy a quiet lunch at the packed Café Pinot in the L.A. Public Library’s Maguire Gardens. Next to the café, a multiethnic band of children play in and around a series of three tastefully tiled fountains. More than a dozen homeless congregate nearby. Some inevitably work the grounds, meekly asking for change, but most take quiet naps in the shady grass. Others read library books on benches. The wealthy and the destitute, young and old, black, white, brown and yellow — coexisting and enjoying the day in peace.

Not all spaces are created equal.

That’s especially true in Los Angeles, where, when it comes to public space, the Maguire Gardens are the exception rather than the rule. The most park-impoverished major city in America, Los Angeles devotes only 4 percent of its land to public greenery. By contrast, parkland comprises 17 percent of New York City and 9 percent of Boston (where 97 percent of the city’s children have immediate access to a park — as opposed to one-third of kids in Los Angeles). Even in San Diego, often dismissed as L.A.’s cultureless, beer-buzzed little brother, parks make up 16 percent of the landscape.

Of the parks L.A. does have, many are caught in varying states of detritus. The jewel of our system, Griffith Park, is less park than wilderness area, and subject to the wildfires that devastated it last year. Elysian Park is beautiful but isolated and underused. And not only have Echo Park’s famous paddleboats been sporadically removed from service due to budgetary woes, but Echo Park Lake has become so foul that the park’s stunning lotus flowers have all but disappeared.

“Los Angeles isn’t just park-poor,” says Marta Segura of the public-space advocacy group Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust, “many of the parks we do have are failed spaces. They’re completely abandoned.”

Pershing Square is one of the worst, but it wasn’t always that way. In the 1920s, the square was lush with trees and walking paths. News kiosks had set up shop, and the elegant Biltmore Hotel had its main entrance overlooking the grounds. The square was alive. Unfortunately, a little too alive for some. City officials claimed it was a site for gay cruising, and in 1950, they bulldozed the park to make way for an 1,800-car underground parking garage. The once beautiful square was left barren, and the Biltmore moved its entrance to the Grand Avenue side of the building.

Though it received a brief face-lift in time for the ’84 Olympics, Pershing Square stayed as it was until 1993, when a public/private partnership was established to refurbish the grounds. The Community Redevelopment Agency, the Pershing Square Property Owners’ Association and Maguire Thomas Partners — the same development firm that years later built the Maguire Gardens — collaborated to build the purple nightmare we’ve come to know today.

So how is it that the Maguire Gardens and Pershing Square, two parks located only blocks apart, catering to the same patrons and built by the same developer, can have such drastically different results? Clearly, the nature of a space impacts its success.

What defines good space?

“Most importantly, permeability,” says landscape architect Mia Lehrer, designer of the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan. “For instance, you can go to Olvera Street at any time of night and feel safe — it’s well lit, it’s open, it’s easily accessible. Pershing Square is completely isolated from the street. It’s elevated and hidden behind those huge walls.

“You don’t need bells and whistles to make a park work,” Lehrer adds. “Look at Bryant Park in New York. It’s pretty simple — trees, grass and places to sit.”

If building beautiful and functional public space is so simple, why doesn’t Los Angeles have more of it?

Look No Further Than Paris 

When was the last time you made out in your front yard? I mean really went for it — tongue, teeth, sweat — neighbors be damned. Has it been a while? Has it ever even happened? Until fairly recently, public green space in Los Angeles has been dismissed as an unnecessary luxury. After all, our single-family homes have yards and gardens. What more could one possibly want?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next Page >>
 
  • park people 08/09/2008 3:29:00 AM

    um,good article but doesnt mention how Mia and her team have yet to put out the assessment report on the rec and parks - it was due in the spring.so here we spend millions on consultants who can't finish on time. but we don't spend those millions on purchasing open space or revitalize old spaces.

  • John Crandell 07/25/2008 8:37:00 AM

    Dear L.A. Weekly; your image of a "re-imagined Cornfield" is nothing of the kind. Anyone familiar with the downtown area will instantly realize that it is one person's vision for a re-imagined L.A. River half a mile to the east of the Cornfield. Oh for the days of Michael Ventura and quality journalism at the L.A. Weekly.

  • JoAnn Whitmore 07/23/2008 9:49:00 PM

    Some years ago I lived in the LA area. I read with interest Mr. Fleischer's well written and well researched article. He brought insight and perspective to troubling problems. One can only wish this information will propel government and the city to address the problems.

  • ubrayj02 07/23/2008 5:11:00 PM

    Your focus on explicit "parks" is story about a problem, but not a solution. The largest public landholdings in Los Angeles? The public right-of-way. It is relatively cheap and easy to make public areas (from private property lines to the middle of the right-of-way) into a quality space for residents to enjoy the good life promised in the Hall of Mayors atop City Hall. I recommend taking a look at what New York based advocacy group NYC Streets Renaissance has documented around the country for examples. The one thing sacrificed in this approach would be access for private automobiles. Boo hoo.

  • Matthew Fleischer 07/23/2008 12:07:00 AM

    From the Hood -- that picture was taken less than a week before the story was published. The park had been open for months. There was no one in it on that day. The situation in Park Mesa Heights is desperate enough that I have no doubt the 11th Ave. park will get plenty of use. It has the potential to be a very nice pocket park. But, as I stated in the piece, I'm of the opinion that the people of South Los Angeles deserve better than a park that occasionally smells like sewage. That's not a slight against the Neighborhood Land Trust. It's beyond admirable that non-profits are stepping up to maintain park space in areas that the city has been unable or unwilling to. The city donated the 11th Avenue land and LANLT is doing the best they can with it. But Park Mesa Heights is loaded with open space and abandoned lots. I went to 4 different locations that community leaders have been begging the city to turn into parks -- none of them had open sewer lines. I don't think I'm throwing the baby out with the bathwater by suggesting the children of South L.A. deserve better than the city's table scraps.

  • from the hood 07/22/2008 10:06:00 PM

    Youre article went out of its way to bash some really good efforts in South LA by non profits that do have a good model for community development. The 11th Ave. park has a lot of usage, great activities, community gathering and meetings and so much more. You used a picture that was before the park even opened, that's really bad journalism. It's good to comment on what's not working, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. You need try again, or not do this at all.

  • The Hollywood Jedi 07/21/2008 11:56:00 PM

    wow Matthew, You're a real fucking idiot. To think I respected you for the Bukowski article.... even Jedi make mistakes.

  • Pre-13 07/21/2008 1:31:00 AM

    Agree with everything in your article, but please don't infer that Prop 13 had anything to do with the conditions of Pershing Square. It was an eyesore in the late 50's, and had to be cleaned up for the 1960 Dem. Convention. As for the River, I remember it as a wild untamed river, beautiful but sometimes destructive as in 1937-38. But the concrete should go.

  • Atwater Oldie 07/20/2008 3:52:00 AM

    Great piece. A few points: * We need to have a city that doesn't just build parks, but maintains them * We need to be sure that Sacramento money is spent in park-poor areas, not just in the hills that are wealthier areas * Villaraigosa needs to step up--he was a great green speaker and is just so-so on this stuff * Councilmembers need to step up in their districts, especially on QUIMBY fees (only a couple of them have been open and accountable and on top of them--Reyes and Garcetti) * There is very uneven leadership on parks in the city--Garcetti has been great (he was the driving force in the city government behind the Neighborhood Land Trust and his girlfriend is chair of the board or something, he has built like 20 new parks in his district alone and is helping clean up the water in Echo Park lake with tens of millions of dollars), Reyes is great (he deserves as much credit for the LA River Report as my friend Mia Lehrer does and he got both Cornfields and Taylor Yard and Vista Hermosa to be open space--the most in a generation and he has done a very good job with neighborhood-based plans--I kind of feel like the author hasn't hung out in the new Taylor Yard park which is exactly the kind of vision I think he is for, unless he is opposed to soccer players and old grandmothers going on walks), Perry has done well (not downtown, which still lags, but in South LA, where she built one wetlands and is doing another), and Greuel is good too (she bought some of the biggest swaths of open space in Northeast SFV in a long time). Other councilmembers aren't doing much at all. The supervisors particularly suck--they are hands off about the Grand Ave park and besides Molina, who is pretty good on helping fund some parks, they couldn't care less about collaborating with the city. * Parks need to have better maintenance and better hours. I live in Atwater Village (where I have fished by the way and talked to Garcetti about it with his approval--don't know where you heard he was ticketing folks) and we need to have all parks open until late at night like in Glassell Park. The mayor's night lights program is a great start. * The City's Rec and Parks Department is a big problem. They actually do have a list of city-owned property--I have it from the city. They just don't do anything about it and the DWP land (which is a lot of it), DWP won't let anyone touch. I think this Rec and Parks Department has almost no vision, though the Commissioners seem to realize that. Keep up the drum beat. Maybe when Garcetti is mayor or when Villaraigosa is running for governor and needs some accomplishments we will get some of what you want. But in the meantime, there are some good things happening, just not enough money to sustain them with groups like FOLAR and the Neighborhood Land Trust.

  • McRib 07/20/2008 12:21:00 AM

    My esteemed father-in-law used to say: "Don't make love by the garden gate; love is blind, but the neighbors ain't."

  • Sam 07/19/2008 12:58:00 AM

    Interesting history. And I've only made out in my front yard once.

  • Developerscumafiosi 07/18/2008 6:31:00 AM

    ...but they love to build expensive new schools [where the education remains decidedly piss-poor], now don't they. Speaking of clusterfux... Was Griffith Park's a "wildfire" or was it arson? Wasn't there a bum to blame? Has there ever been a definitive report?

  • Eric 07/18/2008 5:30:00 AM

    The Mayor's claim to have more parks is simply a re-election stance to curry public favor. This is the same mayor who said, "The construction crane is the official bird of Los Angeles." In my relatively short time living in Los Angeles I've seen three different administrations out of City Hall and this current administration is by far the most developer-friendly of the lot. The current City Council also shares the blame for their ridiculous rules governing development in this city. They changed the laws regarding the amount of parking spaces required for new apartment/condominium complexes, lowering the amount considerably if there was a bus stop or train station nearby. The developers got their campaign contribution's worth with that change. Public transportation continues to be pathetic in this city. As for the present of the city's children, it is really bleak with the lack of parks coupled with LAUSD's school property gated and closed during and after school AND their complete absence of any extracurricular sports in its elementary and middle schools.

  • McRib 07/18/2008 2:00:00 AM

    It was ever so. Having lived here since 1936, I say the interest is in development for profit, not public use. Observe the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy - Millions and Millions of Dollars for land purchase. Used for walking and viewing only. It's run by a bureaucratic Nazi with his own Jack-booted police force. He lays taxes on the homes surrounding the "park". No campgrounds, motorcycle trails, gun ranges or facilities useful to the general public. The "River Restoration Project" - Har de Har Har! The Los Angeles River is a pathetic trickle except when it's raining and very dangerous. The project is to beautify the river's surroundings so the dingbat apartments around it can be torn down to be replaced by expensive condos developed by the mayor's friends and other connected folks.

  • rocketman3.5 07/18/2008 12:33:00 AM

    hey when do we get a chance to get rid of villagross anyway? orwellian is right, he and his fellow pigs that walk like men are turning l.a. into a sty.he is an adulterous bastard who deserves to have his ass kicked out of town. but then we get the pig we deserve don't we. so goes the dumbing of l.a. so goes the dumbing of america.

 

Most Popular Stories

Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy