Downtown Fullerton Archives - Page 17 of 23 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

December 14, 2009December 30, 2009Behind Closed Doors

On the Agenda: December 15th, 2009

The Fullerton City Council has just released their agenda for December 15, 2009 and it’s a fat package!

Something near and dear to me is baseball so I take a little more interest when the subject shows up on the agenda. Item 2 of the closed session is a conference with the real property negotiator concerning 304 W. Commonwealth Avenue. It would appear that the Orange County Flyers of Fullerton want to move to downtown Fullerton to be closer to City Hall. In fact they want to have the baseball field across the street where many a young man played pony league baseball. The Duane Winters Field just might be the sight of the next Golden Baseball League Championship. In March 2007 the team gave up being the Fullerton Flyers because the new partners wanted to be more marketable. Hmm, sounds like an Arty Moreno stunt! So the changed to the Orange County Flyers. I have a t-shirt that says “Top 10 Reason’s To Be a Fan: …Reason #4: They aren’t the L.A. Flyers of Fullerton.” That’s true; they’re the O.C. Flyers. So, will Parks and Rec Director, Joe Felz, give them the field? We’ll see…

Also in the closed session is another real property whiz-bang. Rob Zur Schmiede is working on 655 W. Valencia. In 2007 this was a 63 unit condo by John Laing and the project was in plan check. 3+ years later, what could they be discussing? Price and terms with C&C Development’s Barry Cottle, according to the agenda.

In the open session you can look forward to a presentation by MWD and a few awards to people like Quirk-Silva, Dick Waltz, and – drum roll please – The Golden Bell Award, Fullerton Union High School District and (another drum roll please) Fullerton School District! How ya like dem apples?

Make sure you fill out your blue card before you yell at the council – which you will want to do…

There are a few appointments being made to the Library Board of Trustees. Your favorite Mayor, Don “Don’t Mess With Me” Bankhead and Shawn “See Ya Later Alligator” Nelson. Their terms are to expire December 31, 2012 – if they last that long.

We have a busy consent calendar to cover so hang on tight. In the mix is the amended landscaping ordinance, group insurance for city employees, the employee’s deferred compensation, more sewer replacement, a bunch of Redevelopment stuff, air pollution, SALE OF THE ORANGE COUNTY FAIR GROUNDS (seriously – item 11), Raymond Avenue grade separation, Fire Management Association agreement, Bastanchury/Valencia Mesa bike path. There is too much for me to cover here so I’ll expand a little on just a few.

First, there for Redevelopment. Item 6’s title should tell you everything you need to know… “Redevelopment Agency’s Annual Determination That Planning And Administrative Expenses Are Necessary For The Production, Improvement, or Preservation of Low and Moderate Income Housing”. Yep that’s all you need to know so don’t look into it or question it. I suggest that if you ever had a beef with Redevelopment, this is a chance for you to SCREAM at your elected officials. This “determination” is the justification for wasting your money. Because if that isn’t enough reason, read item 7, the Redevelopment Agency’s annual report. This the RA’s justification for existence to the State and Feds. If it doesn’t dazzle you with brilliance, rest assured, it will baffle you with bullshit!

Ok, enough with the Redevelopment Agency, let’s get down to real business. According to item 8, it’s time to modify the signals at Orangethorpe and Highland, as well as re-stripe the area and add some signs.

Air pollution shows up 9^th on the list. It’s actually a MSRC grant for $450,000 for a compressed natural gas station. I wonder how much money we will throw at it to get the gas station operational. How much will we sell the gas for? Are there enough customers to make it profitable or are we, the tax payers, suppose to subsidize CNG vehicle owners? I’m sure the details are all there waiting to be found.

Don Hoppe gets an appointment as the Public Works Dispute Hearing Officer. Will he get paid extra for the job?

And then we have the Fairgrounds. It appears that the council would like to request the Governator to not sell the O.C. Fairgrounds. I’m sure Arnold will read the letter and quickly cancel the whole sale.

The Raymond Avenue Grade Separation is getting a change order for AECOM. Their fee is $2,450,000. It is unclear from the agenda or staff recommendation just how much the change order will cost us, if anything. According to the recommendation, there is $63,739,000 for the project. That’s a lot of money!

Skipping ahead to the Public Hearings we have some more Redevelopment doozies. The first one, item 15, is for 524 and 530 S. Richman Avenue where the Olson Company wants to erect 34 moderate income housing units. I believe the Honorable DR. Jones said we “…absolutely have to build these. It’s the law!” Well, sort of…not really.

Also, item 16 is the Five-Year Implementation Plan for Redevelopment Agency. The item is on the agenda so that a request can be made to have a public hearing on it and consider adopting the plan. What a racket!

Here is an interesting one. Item 17 is an appeal to install a nature/wildlife habitat along a portion of the Juanita Cooke Greenbelt (known to many who are not as up to date on official trail names as “The Equestrian Trail Behind the Court House that goes to Laguna Lake”). After looking at what they wanted to do and where, I’m not sure why the City didn’t take advantage of the situation. Here are a couple who want to improve the trail where it runs along their backyard. They wanted to make it wilder (I guess) on the slope NEXT TO the path. The fix could have been to enter into an agreement whereby they can install certain pre-approved plants in a pre-approved manner, the total costs of which would be paid by the applicant. The City could have the homeowners maintain it until such time as the agreement is cancelled in which case the homeowners could be on the hook for removal/restoration costs. The cop out from Parks that the trail has two paths and this would confuse people is silly. Are people really that stupid? Also, from what I have seen, the encroachment would be onto the slope. I don’t think the mountain bikers are on the slopes nor are the walkers or horses. So what’s the problem?

The city will also be looking at parking permit fees in certain areas. (See item 18)

Moving on to Regular Business (I said this was a big package), we have a few reports on the City’s financials as well as the Airport. Also in the Regular Business is the Commission/Committee At-Large Appointment Process.

I urge you to read through all of the supporting documents for the agenda. That is where you might find some nuggets of truth that should be brought forth. I simply don’t have enough hours in the day to do it. Thanks for reading and feel free to point out other topics that I missed or are important to you!

December 9, 2009December 9, 2009Downtown Fullerton

Fullertonians Eighty-six Table Ten

by admin26 Comments

We hear that Table Ten is no more. After moving to downtown Fullerton from Placentia several years ago, the restaurant gave it a good go, but just didn’t have the support. It always seemed like a pretty good place to go and have a drink and dinner. Maybe the location wasn’t too hot.

Oh, well, that’s life (and death) in the restaurant business. Maybe the place can become something more congenial to folks who like to socialize downtown.

Doc Jones says: "I don't look like them." — Doc Jones says: "I don't look like those people."

December 8, 2009January 21, 2010Arts & Architecture

The Questionable Promise of Technology

by Mr. Peabody11 Comments

Using computers to arrange and sort data is useful for all sorts of things – especially when in comes to creating three dimensional imagery. Nobody can deny the impact of presenting scanned data for medical diagnostic purposes; or the use of scaled multi-disciplinary construction models that can simulate a 3D environment: very useful for ascertaining “clashes” between different trades as well as presenting the architect and client with views of his proposed effort.

But despite the technology drum beater’s boosterism (think laptops for kids, FSD style) there reaches a point in every computer application where the information is either too dense or voluminous to be assimilated or analyzed by those looking at it; or is just plain non-effective compared to traditional approaches; or worst, lends itself to misinterpretation or deliberate misrepresentation. This point of diminishing returns is reached quickest when the recipients of data just don’t know what to do with it. When that occurs they’re bound to do something bad with it.

Such may very well be the case with a City of Fullerton program that promises to create a three dimensional model of downtown Fullerton. We received an e-mail the other day from Al Zelinka, who works for the Planning Department. We point out that Mr. Zelinka is very careful to explain that the pilot program is being paid for by SCAG, not the City (where SCAG got the money is obviously not a point of interest for Mr. Zelinka, or, presumably, us).

First, we are inevitably forced to ask why. Who will benefit from the necessary resources plowed into such a program? It’s hard to answer. And who will be able to use the information? We can envisage all sorts of staff (and consultant) time going into creating maintaining and manipulating such data; and then the inevitable jargon and rhetoric tossed back to the public to foist staff driven projects onto the public. The Council: aha! See? The 3D model supports (fill in the name of the Redevelopment Agency’s favored project).

Perhaps the most important question is whether, once the model is done, it needs to be tended and updated by the City. If not, the effort going into seems to be something of a waste.

In any case the public are invited to a meeting on December 16th @ 6 PM in the Council Chambers to see the wonders of 3D modeling. No doubt all of our questions will be answered with sparkling clarity.

At the bottom of his e-mail Mr. Zelinka (AICP) includes a quotation that ought to give pause to even the biggest Planning Department cheerleader:

“Dedicated to Making a Difference.”

“Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir [women’s and] men’s blood….” – Daniel Burnham

Ay, ay, ay!

December 5, 2009December 12, 2016Downtown Fullerton

High Culture At Last Comes to Downtown Fullerton

by Jan Florys Dog6 Comments

Brains and ambition... — Brains and ambition. The current events quiz approaches.

As the interim FFFF Life and Times Editor, I have been remiss. I guess I missed the event yesterday, but apparently a KROQ radio show turned up at the Slidebar in DTF to put on their regular Miss Double D-cember program, an uplifting show that gives its participants an opportunity to display their manifest talent(s), and the spectators (seemingly of both sexes) a chance to inspect those talents. The program also featured a Gene Simmons look-alike, a dwarf, and a bunch of Marines in dress uniform. I’m pretty sure this event was not subsidized by the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency.

Here’s a link to the thought provoking (OC Weekly, naturally) photo montage.

For me, one question remains. Why are Marines so short?

November 13, 2009Downtown Fullerton

The Bad Part of Town: A Revelation

by Travis Kiger14 Comments

A few days ago a visitor named Greg made derogatory remarks on our blog about some Fullerton neighborhoods south of Commonwealth. Admin asked Greg to take a walk through the area with him, hoping that a closer look would challenge old stereotypes and misconceptions about the area.

Following the meeting, Greg sent us this:

—————-

Ok, I admit it: I was wrong. As it turns out, the “bad part of town” is actually not as bad as I remembered it. A while back, I made some comments about the area south of the railroad tracks between Lemon and Harbor. Growing up it was known as the “Fullerton barrio”. It wasn’t a derogatory name; it’s just what it was. I had some personal experiences in the area back in the 80’s and 90’s that left a substantial impression on me. Since then, I avoided that part of town. After making my comments last week, Admin challenged me to walk the hood. I took him up on the challenge and we met last night near the train station.

On my way over to meet Admin, I drove down a few of the streets so that I could get a better idea of the area. I wanted to see the trash, graffiti, gang bangers, troublemakers, etc. while there was still some good light. I started out on Lemon and headed south to Valencia . I headed east and took it to the end and turned down what I thought was an ally but turns out it’s a street. Anyway, I looked high and low for what I knew would be there. As it turns out, Admin paid them all off to go hide while I was in the area. Ok, maybe not. The truth is, there was little graffiti. There were a few houses that needed some serious TLC but we have those everywhere. One liquor store had what I would categorize as a few gang bangers in front of it sipping there Budweiser on bikes. But by the time we walked by the store they were gone. Maybe Admin is their secret leader…? Maybe not. The reality is that the barrio has come a long way in the last 20+ years. I would even consider saying that it isn’t really the barrio anymore. Maybe it moved or just faded away, but there is very little of it like I remembered it.

Yah, baby! — It's never too late to be smart.

So I met Admin right at 5PM. We talked and walked and I got to see the good and the bad that were present. One thing I noticed quickly was that the sidewalks in the SOCO complex were not user friendly. There were fire gates all over that made the pedestrian have to limbo or walk around it through the landscaping. Poor design. The lighting was good and there were lots of kids on skateboards and bikes. The complex was free from the used condoms, trash, and tagging that I saw when the project was wrapping up. I suppose the new residents deter that sort of criminal mischief. We walked down Truslow and Valencia , eventually making a big loop. Veneer was spotted on some buildings. It wasn’t the cheap stuff that gets glued on but it was clearly a veneer cap. I thought it looked ok but until a couple of weeks ago, I would never have noticed nor cared. Now, at least I am a little more cognizant of its use and misuse. We saw some more tagging on the veneer and a window. Admin stopped to talk to a resident.

Ok, I have to back up a bit. Before meeting Admin, I thought I should do a little investigative work. Using top secret classified resources, I looked up properties held by people with Admin’s last name. There were several dozen such properties in Orange County with all but maybe two in Fullerton . The majority of the properties were in the SOCO area. A lot of different ideas crossed my mind as I reviewed the records. These holdings could mean that Admin was trying to monopolize the area. It could mean a lot of things. Not knowing what it all meant, I decided to go along for the ride and see what happened. As it turns out, Admin was very upfront with the properties he had; there were no secrets, no shades of grey. I had to conclude that his significant investment in the success of the area was directly related to how much the area had improved in the last 20 years. He had taken run down lots and built new homes. He had taken an area that actually had blight and turned it into a quiet and peaceful place. I credit Admin with the amazing transition of this area. And to top it off, NO TAX-PAYER DOLLARS WERE EVER USED. (ok one minor exception back in the 80’s but it didn’t make a difference in and of itself)

In the end, I must thank Admin for opening my eyes to what has been slowly taking shape for many years and giving me the opportunity to be proven wrong!

Sincerely,

Greg

November 7, 2009November 7, 2009Brick Veneer, Fake Old, And Other Horrors

Silk Floss Trees on Harbor Boulevard Symbolize Downtown Redevelopment

by admin10 Comments

Why did I (and many others) advocate the removal of the Silk Floss trees in downtown Fullerton? Damaged and dangerous sidewalks for one thing. And slimy-skinned, scrotum-shaped pod bombs, giant wafting cotton swabs, and naked spike armored monstrosities, depending on the season, for another. And let’s not forget the blocked architectural elevations, signage, etc.

About ten years ago the City started removing a few of the worst offending silk flossers and replacing them with some other brand of tree. Of course they plopped the new ones right back in the same holes as before – rather than plant them at property lines where they wouldn’t block architectural elevations and business signs so badly.

And of course it never occurred to the clever folks in Redevelopment that these trees, wedged into the narrow sidewalk space would never develop proper crowns and generally look like wretched half-trees.

Now that the big Harbor Boulevard redesign (you know the one that killed on-street parking, created a traffic tunnel, and doomed regularly functioning storefronts) is nearing its 30th birthday it seems like a good time to readdress the mess that Redevelopment has caused on Harbor and talk about a different model.

A picture, as they say, is worth a 1,000 words.

November 7, 2009July 13, 2010Big Brother

Laying Down Tracks

by admin7 Comments

The Orange Line is comming to town, perhaps at the wrong time. Not only did the OCTA use eminent domain to grab 8 acres of property from my brother, but they also removed much-needed parking at the Transportation Center before the new parking structure was built. Talk about a bumbling construction schedule. Oh well that’s government for you.

November 4, 2009December 28, 2009Arts & Architecture

Some History Behind Architectural Veneers

by The Fullerton Harpoon40 Comments

We’ve made a pretty big deal on this blog about the use of brick veneer, specifically, the way our Redevelopment Agency has always insisted on slathering it on to stuff to try to give the false appearance of historic structure, or under the guise of matching what is supposed to be the building material par excellence of downtown Fullerton: red brick.

We thought it was about time to get an historical perspective on the uses of architectural veneer – particularly masonry veneer, and so we have once again called upon the good offices of Dr. Ralph E. Haldemann, Professor or Art History (Emeritus) at Otterbein College, and our adjunct Arts and Architecture Editor. Doc?

haldemann-500x332 — When you want to find out, go to the best...

The question of the role of veneers in architectural history is really quite fascinating, but requires an amount (admittedly minimal) of erudition. I will try to sum up some thoughts on the subject.

In pre-modern times the nature of building materials basically necessitated that structural materials were de facto finished materials as well – although historical exceptions are not uncommon: we know of course, that the Romans during the Imperial Era were fond of using stone veneers on brick buildings to dress them up. Such uses of marble veneer were often used in the Western Mediterranean basin countries in Romanesque and Italian/Venetian Gothic buildings.

The use of plaster cement or lime-based coatings on brick, especially non-fired brick, has an ancient lineage that reaches forward into the adobe buildings of California’s own Mission period; however neither this application nor the modern use of lath and plaster on studs can be considered a veneer.

Medieval Europe, particularly in the non-deforested climes of the north, saw a rise in timber construction in which the structural members were exposed and the interstitial areas filled with plastered wattling. Again, such fill even though non-structural, cannot rightly be called a veneer.

With the advent of structural iron and steel, fill materials in modern commercial architecture remained brick (for practical and fireproofing reasons). However, terra cotta facings with ceramic finishes attached to the underlying structure became the norm from the 1890s through the 1920s; the wide adoption of moderne styles in the 20s and 30s often replaced highly detailed terra cotta with simpler and smoother concrete and even ceramic tile finishes. These uses generally applied a finished masonry surface over an unfinished substrate of common brick. These are veneers.

It was really in American domestic architecture that brick veneers (almost exclusively brick) captured the imagination of a growing bourgeois sensibility. After the industrial age had ushered in standardized lumber, machine made nails and mass produced balloon-frame wood houses, a longing for the perceived hominess and historicity of brick set in. This was aided by several cultural American Colonial Revivals, particularly in the early 20th Century that coincided nicely with eras of vast suburban expansion. It was all mostly a real eastate come-on.

The use of phony brick surfaces continued unabated in the little cracker box houses of the ’50s and persists happily to this very day, particularly in subdivisions where an emotional attachment to American historical antecedents is being peddled.

The use of fake brick fronts in commercial areas followed the same suburban trajectory as the use of the material in domiciles. It too persits today, particularly where city fathers and chambers of commerce wish to deal out a conjured up historical image for their otherwise unremarkable and humble burgs.

Modern architectural theory held that this sort of use of non-structural masonry veneer is fundamentally non-truthful, meretricious and basically a middlebrow (or lower) affectation. And so it is! And yet the Robert Venturi school of Post-Modernists embraced such use for its exuberance, color and tactile properties, as well as potential (often ironical) historical connotations. However it must be said that when the historical connotation is wrong, or the deployment is meant to be deceptive or even slavish, a real aestheic problem exists; and can, if left uncontrolled, lead to real civic embarrassment.

Ralph E. Haldemann, Ph.D.

October 23, 2009December 29, 2009Arts & Architecture

God-awful “Fox Village” Gets Even Worse!

by The Fullerton Harpoon13 Comments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUWTXt0TRkQ

Remember those horror movies when the outraged villagers grabbed their pitchforks to have at the monster? What the “Fox Village” monster could use are a few more angry villagers.

At the City Council “workshop” on Tuesday the new plans for the existing city-created empty space behind the Fox Theater were rolled out. And while the reception by the public wasn’t pretty it wasn’t enough to kill off the monster, either.

What was rolled out were several elevations that raised the curtain on a hideously confused jumble of themes and materials that were supposed to be modernish, but that had that certain flavor of architectural renderings done by crazy people.

A hodgepodge of shapes and veneers with no apparent cohesion and not a whiff of aesthetic originality. Stone veneer on the first floor obligatory.

Have Fox Villagers gone insane? What a mish mash!

Why are they still trying to move McDonald’s? Didn’t the Council put that idea to rest? And yet here it is again! Can anyone say “insubordination”? Guess not – in Fullerton! And look a parking lot on the corner. Just what downtown needs – another permanent hole in the building fabric of downtown Fullerton.

Ah, the inevitable “pedestrian paseo.” Just lookit all the happy, bedazzled consumers. And that fountain! Precious. Makes you want to make a wish and toss three coins in.

Folks if you aren’t ready to go grab your pitchforks by now, we suggest that we stick a fork in you – because we think you’re done.

October 19, 2009Downtown Fullerton

Fox Block Rises from the Ashes

by Travis Kiger20 Comments

City staff is back to hustle the infamous Fox Block project after it was killed by city council earlier this year. The project was shot down by a suddenly-fiscally-conservative council majority because it included a $6 million dollar giveaway to the McDonalds corporation that would be used to build a brand new fast food restaurant and hand it over to the corporation in exchange for a lesser property that the Redevelopment Agency “needs” to complete the project.

An email from the Fullerton Historical Theater Foundation urges supporters to show up at the study session on Tuesday night to voice opinions on the project. The email also included a first glimpse at the redesigned project:

The rest of the drawings do not seem to be available yet, probably because staff prefers the public to be disarmed of the facts when the meeting begins. That way it’s easier to control the presentation: wax the upsides, minimize the downsides and keep those pesky residents from vocally questioning the dubious aspects of this project.

Judging from the angry crowd that attended the last study session on the Fox Block, the discussion will center around:

The height of the buildings and parking structure and their impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
The McDonalds move, which still appears in the new plans.
The use of empty promises and taxpayer subsidies to control the type of non-viable businesses that residents and staff would prefer to see in the complex.
Fake McSpanish architecture
The inconsequential relationship of this project to the actual restoration of the Fox Theatre.

So come on down to the Police Department Mural Room on Tuesday, October 20, 2009 at 5:00 p.m. It should be interesting.