You searched for committee - Page 23 of 25 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

September 27, 2009December 28, 200972nd Election

A Tsunami of Slime Is Coming

Lest anyone believes the special election to replace scummer Mike Duvall in the 72nd Assembly seat will be a model of decorum, we will disabuse them of that misconception right now.

Chris Norby can run on his political record – because at least he has one. His principal opponent in the GOP primary, Linda Ackerman, has no record other than being married to the once-powerful, and still venomous Dick Ackerman, and she doesn’t even live in our district. But the Ackermans have an ally.

Roski

That ally is named Ed Roski. Never heard of him? Roski is a hyper-wealthy LA real estate guy (Majestic Realty) and virtually controls the City of Industry as his personal fiefdom. The City of Industry is the single biggest Redevelopment scam in the history of California, and Roski’s latest big idea is to steal a professional football team – the San Diego Chargers were a likely target for a move northward – to a new stadium at the confluence of the 57 an 60 freeways. Since Norby has openly attacked the phony City of Industry and the NFL theft, he has incurred the wrath of Roski, so the story goes, who is supposedly as vindictive as he is rich. In other words a perfect playmate for Dick Ackerman.

According to local political theorists, the plan is laid. The Ackermans keep their South County hands clean vis-a-vis Norby, and continue to show up at Central Committee meetings with smirks and innocent shrugs; and Roski does the dirty work on Norby. Nice folks, huh?

Well, get ready, Friends. Absentee ballots are mailed out in a couple weeks. A tidal wave of slime is on its way.

September 20, 2009October 20, 2009Arts & Architecture

Oh No, Brick Veneer Again!

by The Fullerton Harpoon16 Comments

UPDATE: THE CITY COUNCIL IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE UP THE MATTER OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE AND ITS DESIGN AT TODAY’S MEETING. SINCE WE REPORTED ON THIS ISSUE CITY STAFF HAS REFUSED TO CHANGE ITS LUDICROUS POSTION THAT THE FAKE BRICK SOMEHOW SATISFIES SOME SORT OF CEQA REQUIREMENT – EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE COMPLETELY DEMOLISHED THE MYTH OF BRICK AND REALITY OF BRICK VENEER IN DOWNTOWN FULLERTON.

SUCH A LAME APPROACH INSULTS NOT ONLY OUR AESTHETIC SENSIBILITIES, BUT IT ALSO TURNS THE WHOLE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS INTO A CHARADE THAT JUST SECURES FOR STAFF WHAT THEY WANT: BRICK VENEER.

CONSIDER THIS: THE MONEY SAVED BY ELIMINATING THE USELESS BRICK COULD GO TO ESTABLISHING SOLAR PANELS ON THE BUILDING AND ENHANCING ITS SUSTAINABILITY QUOTIENT.

They just can’t seem to help themselves. Not long ago the City held a “stake holder” gathering that was supposed to display three alternative plans for the proposed new parking structure on Santa Fe Avenue. No sooner had the meeting begun than it became apparent it was going to be one of those typical “here’s what we’re doing so sit down and shut up” meetings.

The image above shows what the City wants the building to look like. The architectural elements look okay except for the hideous brick veneer – that tomato soup colored stuff you see on the building. Brick veneer. The lazy Redevelopment bureaucrat’s material of choice. We recently wrote about it in a pithy post here .

Why would anybody put a brick veneer on a concrete parking structure? Who would put lipstick on a pig? Brick panels spanning impossibly long spaces look simply idiotic – even to the layman who could sense intuitively that brick has little tensile strength; but unfortunately this type of masquerade is par for Fullerton’s aesthetic course – displaying once again the curious parochialism of Fullerton’s taste makers.

But brick veneer is not only stupid architecturally, but is a big waste of money, to boot. And it contradicts the General Plan Advisory Committee’s adopted “sustainability” policy in the General Plan Update, since it serves no function and will have to be replaced when it falls off.

Fortunately it’s not too late to make the right choice here. But we’re not holding our breath.

September 19, 2009December 30, 2009Arts & Architecture

Downtown Fullerton: The Brick Myth, The Reality of Brick Veneer, and The Legacy of Schlock

by admin27 Comments

We published a couple of posts a few days ago on the new parking structure planned on Santa Fe Avenue, and how it is proposed to be faced with brick veneer here and here .

You may remember that I got to thinking about why the city staff would tell the RDRC that the $40,000,000 parking structure must have brick veneer; and that I asked one of the RDRC Board members that very same question, and the answer I got was that staff told the Committee that the City has to use brick veneer because it was a “State” requirement to meet the CEQA guidelines. (I also noted that the use of fake brick is in complete contrast to the sustainable design the General Plan Advisory Committee has spend the last 3 years discussing and recommending to the City Council).

CEQA? Yes CEQA he said, because there’s a provision in the CEQA guidelines that requires mitigation of any visual impacts. In other words, since the new parking structure was being built with structural concrete, and the surrounding downtown has many brick-looking buildings, using the brick veneer would cause no visual impact on the environment. I say “brick-looking” because so many of the buildings in downtown Fullerton are faced with fake brick veneers, facades that are not historic, and some of which, in fact, were stuck-on older buildings during the course of Redevelopment in the last 30 years. And many of these were subsidized by the taxpayers of Fullerton.

How do I know this? I did a building facade survey of downtown from the RR tracks to Chapman and from Malden to Pomona. I documented the principal “building skin” of each structure. The results didn’t surprise me, but they may surprise you; they should shock the Redevelopment and Planning Department “experts” who not only have been tolerating, but actually promoting this material over the years – seemingly in an effort to keep downtown “historical” looking. Boy, did they get it wrong.

Here are the results of the survey:

24 Brick veneer

2 Flagstone veneer

9 Real brick & clay block

3 Glazed & fluted brick

24 stucco & plaster

20 Concrete, concrete block & terra cotta

And here is a useful overhead image with the various exterior materials colored in on each of the building’s footprint. Notice how few real brick buildings there are; and of these only a couple are red brick – the crap of choice among Fullerton’s bureaucratic tastemakers. The buildings with substantial brick venerers are pink.

Using CEQA to bolster the poor design choices of the past is pretty bad. Let’s hope this post will help end the travesty of bad and cheap looking architecture based on erroneous assumptions, and that California’s environmental laws will never be used again by city staff to foist this garbage on us.

September 14, 2009December 30, 2009Fullerton's Design Standards

Abolish Fullerton’s RDRC!

by The Fullerton Harpoon7 Comments

Some folks say brick veneer is a perfect symbol of the RDRC...

In the post about brick veneer stuck on to the side of the proposed parking structure on Santa Fe (here), admin added a helpful comment that shared the minutes of the Redevelopment Design Review Committee (RDRC) meeting when the parking structure was considered by the committee. Although the members of the committee quibbled with this or that detail of the structure, none of them opposed or even questioned the project architects idiotic statement that the fake brick was there to “relate to” buildings on Harbor. One of the members even proposed the thin-set type of brick to save money

While we have to wonder if the architect had been coached beforehand by staff to pay homage to Fullerton’s obsession with brick veneer, the main point of this post is to ask why nobody on this hapless committee even bothered to question the comical notion that a concrete parking structure needed a fake veneer in order to relate to other fake brick veneer buildings in downtown Fullerton.

And so we repeat our challenge to Fullerton: ABOLISH THE RDRC!

Update: We have received word from an RDRC member that the committe was told that brick veneer was necessary as a CEQA mitigation for a Negative Declaration; that, in effect, the brick veneer would make the building compatible with other brick buildings in downtown Fullerton.

Just as we suspected. This “mitigation” is simply staff’s way of getting what they want: brick veneer. There is absolutely no need to “mitigate” a non-existent problem. If we can believe the RDRC member this was simply a matter of personal aesthetic taste – and poor taste at that.

August 28, 2009December 30, 2009Arts & Architecture

The RDRC and Jay Eastman Take A Curtain Call

by admin16 Comments

Don’t say we didn’t warn you. Because we did. In previous posts here and here, we tracked the progress (if you really want to use that word) of the strip center at Euclid and Rosecrans. Well, the scaffolding has come down and what’s revealed ain’t purty.

Our theme here was wasted space and building materials and of course, The City’s dubious commitment to the idea of sustainability. And our purpose was not to dwell upon the poor aesthetic choices made by the owner of this center. Instead we chose to focus on the City’s role in this aesthetic disaster. For some reason the Development Services Department (they serve developers) decided that this non-subsidized, private remodel needed to go to the hapless Redevelopment Design Review Committee – even though it is miles from a Redevelopment area.

Planner Jay Eastman made it clear that the RDRC intended to impress its preferences unto this site – no doubt assisted by Mr. Eastman himself. Let’s let Barbara Giasone help us with our narrative from a May1, 2008 story:

“The proposed remodel was reviewed by the Redevelopment Design Review Committee last week, but the panel felt the design was commonplace and didn’t reflect the character of the neighborhood, Acting Chief Planner Jay Eastman said. The architect was asked to look at the surrounding neighborhood with terms like “country,” “rural” and “equestrian,” Eastman added.”

Country. Rural. Equestrian. Got it?

The ensuing visual train wreck of disjointed parts, shed and gable roofs, the weird confusion of masonry veneer and stucco, and all the wasted attic space with its dinky windows provide a suitable denouement, fifteen months later, for this cautionary tale. If the property owner had been left to his own devices it is hard to conceive anything worse being done – and it could have been done a lot less expensively.

We wonder just what sort of idiots our staff and their RDRC think inhabit rural equestrian areas.

August 14, 2009December 30, 2009Arts & Architecture

The North Platform Fiasco – Allegro Molto e Vivace

by The Fullerton Harpoon12 Comments

Loyal and Patient Friends, our sad narrative of The Great North Platform Disaster now draws to a merciful conclusion. We have shared all the dismal failures of the landscape architect, Steve Rose, the Redevelopment manager in charge, Terry Galvin, and Design Review Committee members that were evidently incompetent or unqualified.

Trees and planters block the platform; staff obstruction was almost as bad.

The design failure was complete and palpable. Yet as diverse groups of citizens displayed their unhappiness with the ludicrous and costly elements of the project, the City Staff dug in their heels in a rear guard action to deflect blame by ignoring the obvious and fighting to keep the mess they had created. Newly minted City Manager Jim Armstrong led the effort to defend the indefensible. He went so far as to accuse one of the leading critics of the design mess of “making the City look like shit.”

Former Fullerton City Manager Jim Armstrong shovelling hard. — Former Fullerton City Manager Jim Armstrong doing what he did best: shovelling hard.

The City Council, to its credit, would have none of it. They ordered construction halted. Even the Fullerton Observer demanded to know who was in charge. In what may have been the last show of independence by a Fullerton City Council, the majority demanded that the incongruous and useless elements be removed. The lone dissenting vote was that of Molly McClanahan, the eternal staff suck-up, who as Mayor tried backdoor sabotage with the State – which was also providing funding for the project. City staff was going into attack mode behind the scenes.

well fed and ready to attack... — Honest citizen tastes like chicken?

In the end the Council (with the sole exception of Chris Norby) lost its collective nerve and settled on a partial removal of the worst offending aspects of the project. The huge planter was split into pieces, allowing platform access through the middle.

The miserable trees were completely removed.

Look ma, no trees... — The urban forest retreats. Civilization on the march...

The canopies were salvaged though the construction of alcoves cut out of the still useless block bulkhead wall.

Fullerton platform "alcove" designed by our City Council...

The wretched benches and comical little trash cylinders remain to this day. Go to the depot. You can check it out for yourselves.

It was never disclosed whether Steve Rose was back-charged for the cost of all the changes that had to be made, or whether he actually billed the City for remedial design work. Thousands upon thousands of dollars were wasted on building useless construction and then having to remove it. And what happened to the parties responsible for this complete fiasco? You mean you can’t guess by now?

We'll be hanging on to this card... — Oh, we'll be hanging on to this...

Nothing, of course. The proponents of sensible and functional design were blamed by staff for making the City look bad; the whistle blowers were turned into the villains of the melodrama. Chalk up another big win for the escape artists at the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency.

August 11, 2009December 30, 2009Arts & Architecture

The North Platform Fiasco – Trio & Menuetto

by The Fullerton Harpoon5 Comments

Ah, Friends! Would that we could end this sorrowful tale of the Fullerton train station north platform without taxing your delicate sensibilities further. Yet, alas, we cannot. We have already detailed the story of the useless block wall that was built right in front of an existing wall, as well as the comically useless canopies built therein. But the “designer” was far from finished with the addition of masonry!

When you're late for your train there's just nothing quite as exhilarating as leaping over a block planter!

A huge block planter was placed in the middle of the platform – blocking direct access to the trains; a smaller one was inconceivably built on the footprint of the future elevator tower without anyone noticing. The idea of placing this practical barrier right between passengers and their destination seems odd to us non-professionals, but not, apparently to landscape architect Steve Rose who drew it there on his plans, nor to Redevelopment’s in-house Master of Disaster “manager” Terry Galvin, whose job it was to review the plans; nor even to the Design Review Committee which at that time included two interior decorators.

A pallisade of block on a train platform! What were they thinking?

Good Lord! it looks even stupider from up here! — Good Lord! It looks even stupider from up here!

Well, Loyal Friends, in case you thought that things couldn’t get much worse, you would be wrong. Stay tuned as we continue the lachrymal tale of The Great North Platform Disaster!

August 9, 2009December 30, 2009Arts & Architecture

Fullerton Redevelopment History, The Gift That Keeps on Giving; The North Platform Fiasco – Introduction & Allegro

by The Fullerton Harpoon6 Comments

Before Redevelopment got a hold of it...

A few months ago when we were running our award eligible series on the manifold history of Fullerton Redevelopment boondogglery, we promised our Friends that we would relate the biggest mess of the whole kit and caboodle. We have been a bit dilatory about this and so we apologize for being remiss. But now the time has come to tell the tale of The Great North Platform Disaster.

Way back in late 1992 and early 1993 the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency, under the management of Terry Galvin and the direction of brand spanking new Director Gary Chalupsky, began construction on the north platform at the Santa Fe train depot. The work was “designed” by one Steve Rose, a well-connected local landscape architect, and was intended to “improve” the platform area for the increasing number of train commuters. The design passed through the process of staff review by Galvin as well as the scrutiny of the Fullerton Redevelopment Design Review Committee. The budget for construction was in the neighborhood of a million bucks.

The project was bid, the contract was awarded. But as construction proceeded it became very apparent that something had gone wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong.

July 31, 2009July 31, 2009Coyote Hills

“Save Coyote Hills” Movement Losing Steam?

by Travis11 Comments

In her latest post, local blogger Cindy Cotter pointed out a notable trend at the various community and commission meetings for Coyote Hills development: the Save Coyote Hills crowd appears to be shrinking.

In the beginning of July an informational public meeting drew a boisterous crowd of 200. The next two commission meetings (where public voices are actually more important) drew only 75 and then 45 citizens. That is not the kind of showing that can stop a project with over 30 years of momentum. If these folks mean business, they need to get organized quickly.

On a related note, Pacific Coast Homes responded to our last post with an updated map that more clearly distinguishes the difference between “The Preserve” and the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve. They’ve also promised to update the map on their own website, but at this point it’s still clear as mud. The co-mingling of the real preserve and the “open space” that surrounds it may not be the most honest communication effort, so hopefully they get it fixed quickly.

July 30, 2009December 28, 2009Fullerton City Council

Team Cuts; What Are Your Team’s Priorities?

by admin6 Comments

Former Mayor Clesceri walk & talk at Chambers State of City Luncheon — Former Mayor Clesceri does a walk & talk at a Chamber of Commerce/State of City Luncheon, of course sponsored by the City of Fullerton

What associations and organizations does the City of Fullerton support financially that should be cut before cutting a librarian, a police officer or a life guard? How much money does the city spend every year on contracts with lobbyists?

Isn’t it time to examine some of these relationships and analyze their effectiveness?