Long Beach: Do You Want Disneyland or a Downtown?

1st Street in Downtown Long Beach. Photo by Brian Addison.
1st Street in Downtown Long Beach. Photo by Brian Addison.

Here’s the way Cafe Sevilla owner Eric Van den Haute phrased it exactly: “Downtown Long Beach: Do you want a village or do you want a downtown?”

Van den Haute is no stranger to the way in which downtowns run. He has two other locations, one in downtown Riverside and his first in San Diego’s Gaslamp District, which was a major player in turning the area from seedy to successful. And the fact that the aforementioned Gaslamp is San Diego’s designated Dining & Entertainment District (DED) is contextual strength for Van den Haute’s grasp on what works and doesn’t because, well, he also sits right in the middle of Downtown Long Beach’s DED.

His perspective–shared by fellow Gaslamp innovator and soon-to-be Long Beach stakeholder, David Cohn–is not just randomly thrown out there. There is substantiation to his viewpoint: there is this aura about Downtown Long Beach–even amongst its own citizens if you regard some of the recent social media commentary about a gay staple moving downtown–that paints it as some downtrodden, undesirable mess.

But has this perception been promulgated by the Old Wizards of the Village itself (it was downtrodden and undesirable circa 2001) so well that people just see it that way or is it an actual reality? And do we have blatant tools and ideas right in front of our face that we are either ignoring or being hidden from?

2nd District Councilmember and mayoral hopeful Suja Lowenthal has had a thing with altering downtown’s DED for a bit, having been building up the language on new restrictions for the area for years. Often painting a picture of reducing friction between businesses and residents due to entertainment, Lowenthal seems set at reducing anything which caused noise.

She recently succeeded in passing an ordinance that halts the issuance of business licenses to AB48s, or establishments that serve beer, wine, and spirits but no food.

It is a change of tactics from Lowenthal’s previous efforts at addressing noise abatement downtown. In 2011, she suggested an entire elimination of rooftop and patio entertainment while requiring that all doors and windows be closed should entertainment be occurring inside, much to the chagrin of several business owners after holding a meeting with them in July of that year. After attempting to push through the efforts in October, it went back to the drawing board.

Finally, this August, she formally submitted her first draft of her proposal on the Council agenda. Years of developing Draconian measures turned out to create… More Draconian measures: She proposed a one-year moratorium on all new entertainment permits throughout the entirety of the downtown DED.

Oh, wait, not a moratorium but an “interim ordinance with a cap”… By which I mean, a jargon-ridden moratorium.

You got it: Zip. Zilch. Nada entertainment permits. Mind you, this is after spots like The Federal Bar, Beachwood, and Congregation Ale House have aided in bringing in businesses like… Fed Bar, Beachwood, and Congy: spaces that revitalized downtown and–heaven forbid–they would like to bring in a band to an entertainment district. (The irony: Fed Bar is a restaurant/venue as they plan on using the basement for concerts; thankfully their upcoming September 17 entertainment permit hearing didn’t conflict with Lownethal’s clean-up.)

Her justification? The complaints received from residents in regard to two poorly operated businesses, Cohiba and Lush, both now defunct.

Intriguingly, noise complaint data acquired had shown that the area never really arose until the Promenade began offering residential spaces. What this points to is a possible problem of correspondence between the city and developers, ultimately lacking the requirement for noise mitigating factors.

Janet Ballantyne, a downtown resident of the Promenade Walk Condominums at 133 Promenade, shares this feeling that no factors were put forth in requiring construction to have a direct hand in noise mitigation.

“It’s not an issue of the type of business they have,” Ballantyne said. “It’s a mutual issue between businesses and the new homes: their insulation isn’t good and my building’s insulation isn’t good. So I have no idea what barring businesses who don’t serve food has to do with anything. Food or no food has nothing to do with noise–look at [the restaurant] Allegria.”

Cohn then echoes Ballantyne.

“As residences began being developed in the Gaslamp,” Cohn said, “we brought to developers an enormous amount of requirements–we even made some put in triple-paned windows, caulking standards, and the sort.”

And even more bluntly, Cohn notes that residents–particularly those who have moved into developments post-2005, when the DED was created in downtown–knew what they were precisely getting into as they signed their rental, leasing, or mortgage contracts with the explicit knowledge that they were going to live in a DED.

For example, residents–including Ballantyne–in 133 Promenade are required to sign a statement knowing so. But even beyond signing a direct acknowledgement is the fact that one but has to look around: with multiple mixed-use buildings, the development of the now-complete Promenade, and business along Pine finally growing, it is difficult to believe that no one knew the implications of what they were getting into.

And to be frank, if I know Long Beach as well as I think I know Long Beach, no one in their right mind living downtown would complain about the noise of business unless it were excessive to the point of being pervasive.

“I signed on knowing exactly what I was getting into,” Ballantyne said. “However, I didn’t know sound would be so invasive that I would clearly–clearly–hear music from 11PM to 2AM every weekend.”

Even worse–and something that Cohn was adamant about–is the fact that the city has failed to enforce its tiered conditions, ultimately resulting in bad operations (like Cohiba and Lush) having the ability to continue operating.

“You can’t just add another law when you have ones that work perfectly fine already,” said Cohn. “I believe… [if] you’re not operating correctly, you don’t operate at all.”

These points become the most painfully obvious in the bafflement that surrounds why–rather than standardizing what is already in existence–we are attempting to add onto something that isn’t already being followed.

And it is also this point that makes me question not just Lowenthal’s own agenda that, in the words of Van den Haute, is “theme-parking” downtown, but those who supported it. Specifically, the Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB) that oversees the massively popular convention center, which seemed to be the only entity in the downtown area that even knew of Lownethal’s attempt to enact such an “interim ordinance”–even outside of businesses (e.g. Cohn and his downtown eatery Bo Beau) investing millions into the precise area she was enacting prohibitions on.

In a July 18 meeting this year, the CVB’s Executive Committee and Board unanimously approved the moratorium–an irony since one would figure that such an organization as the CVB would want a vibrant downtown to attract their conventioneers to…

…or does the CVB want an all-too-perfect, little-boxes-made-of-tickytacky atmosphere that reeks of Disneyland more than a DED?

Questions lead to more questions: Who, precisely, is complaining so loudly, so vehemently within a DED that the councilmember and the city’s CVB would unite together to halt the entertainment of its entertainment district? And if it is not actual residents or visitors, who is perpetuating the idea that downtown needs to be softened through business constrictions?

“I never get a complaint saying, ‘Oh, Downtown Long Beach, we’re never going there!’ Never anything along those lines,” said Van den Haute. “We now have people–I mean bodies, visiting downtown–they’re walking around with freedom and a total sense of safety.

“What does it all come down to?” he continued. “It is this idea–downtown is horrible–it is still anchored in the mind of those who were in charge of the village ten years ago and they don’t understand the new times. Of course bad things happen; crowds of people can sometimes have problems. But in Long Beach–instead of making the news for five minutes, solving the problem, and the next morning it’s gone–you have one little thing happen–a small group of people–and the whole world needs to stop turning and there needs to be national headlines and we need to have our entire city come to a halt. I simply don’t understand.”

There are a lotta things Van der Haute could be referring to–the odd, unadvertised “public” meeting between downtown stakeholders and the LBPD regarding a supposed “bash mob” that never occurred; the fact that the CVB has funded $200,000 worth of cameras to be installed downtown and handed over full control of said cameras to the LBPD; or just the simple fact that ten police cars usually show up to the incidence of loitering downtown… He could be alluding to several incidents.

But one thing remains clear: We either A) have an obsession with overtly policing things to such an extent that it is detrimental to what we are trying to achieve economically and socially, or B) we simply don’t know how to properly spread our resources.

There is little doubt in my mind, for example, that the many unmonitored liquor stores that disturbingly pervade North Long Beach more than any area of the city would have much rather preferred the cameras than an area which sees thousands of people cross their storefronts per day–but why would the CVB care about a part of the city of which turning into Disneyland would provide them no profit other than philanthropy?

Even when faced with Lownethal’s altered language that, instead of a moratorium on entertainment licenses, proposes a six-month ban on the issuance of business licenses to AB48s… We have issues. And we have issues on an ordinance, mind you, that was changed the morning it was to face City Council.


The point about policing costs seems moot given there are solutions: Look at the Belmont Business Association, as it receives 100% of the profits gained from parking meters in the Shore. Why not bump up the Downtown Long Beach Association’s gathering of parking meter coins and dollars–which sits at 50%–to 100%? I am pretty convinced the DLBA would be willing to put that money towards policing considering its investment in downtown.

The point about what businesses desire and the conflict with residential desires becomes moot given there are solutions: Ignoring the possibility of proposing–like a vast amount of DEDs ranging from the mid-sized Glendale to the far larger Gaslamp–instituting conditional use permits (CUP) that tailor each business’s need to a specific request from the city.

It’s the ignoring of possibilities that essentially makes the situation deeply irksome–including initially ignoring downtown residences, as Joe Ganem, part of the Downtown Residents Council, noted.

And it points to a disturbing idea that Lowenthal and the CVB seem intent on blanket-laws that want to quiet a place like downtown–a similar sentiment expressed by a downtown resident two years ago.

“In my North Hollywood locations [for The Federal Bar and Bow & Truss],” said The Federal Bar owner and operator Morgan Margolis, “we have CUPs for each–and they are night and day compared to one another despite each business being close to one another. And that’s because they have different needs.”

“It’s not rocket science: develop properly and use your resources and we’ll be fine,” Ballantyne said. “We absolutely love downtown. Love it. We dine. We shop. I want to live in harmony.”

Margolis–who was openly gushing about how well the city has treated him with the opening of his Long Beach location–and Ballantyne echoed what so many are thinking.

And this long, rambling diatribe still leaves me with a post I should have just left to one word: Why?

Councilmember Lownethal’s office did not return repeated requests for comments on this article.

  • Downtown Resident

    Unfortunately the Police were not enforcing the existing Downtown Ordinance on places like Cohiba and apparently they were told not to enforce the rules.

  • Further proof to my point that we are not using the resources we have or following the ordinances we have in place–just adding more in the blind hope that they’ll be fixed. Counterintuitive to the point of absurdity.

  • Daniel

    From what I was able to discern, it sounds like Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal was concerned with growing noise for current and potential residents, lack of police resources to patrol the district, and the absence of retail space in the district. While I may not agree with the way she went about this, I think you do have to agree that downtown Long Beach would benefit from more residents, and it sounds to me as if she had their interests in mind when drafting this. Current residents may leave if the noise level does not improve and potential residents may not come if they fear they will not get a good night of sleep. In addition, you have to keep all of these residents safe, and if fewer police are present (I believe some police departments were consolidated in the area due to budget concerns), again current residents may move away and potential residents may be deterred. As a councilmember, it’s her responsibility to ensure the safety of the residents in the area and attempt to resolve residents’ complaints (the noise issue) in the near term. I’m not saying that she’s doing it in the best way possible or that I even agree with how she is going about it, but they are valid points and concerns that you ought to acknowledge even if you do not agree with them. You know, it might be nice to hear from a party who actually agrees with what she is doing so that your readers can judge for themselves the merits of the arguments. Lastly, the lack of retail space in the district is a constant complaint I hear from residents and visitors. I know the East Village has great shopping and boutiques, but not everyone knows or is willing to wander through the current dead zone from Long Beach Blvd to Elm/Linden to get there. The increasing number of restaurants and bars that are willing to pay more for commercial space prevents retail from moving into the district. Should we care? Should we try to zone in retail over restaurants and bars? Or do we believe that retail will organically occur without the local government stepping in with use restrictions? I think these are the types of questions she wanted to ask before the district was a sea of restaurants and bars and there was no going back. Was this the right approach? Maybe not, but again, I think it should be acknowledged that there are valid points and arguments behind her actions even if you disagree with them.

  • Of course: as the article ends, there needs to be a harmonious balance between residents and businesses. But if you read one of the original pieces I linked to (http://www.lbpost.com/business/2000002713-under-criticism-lowenthal-alters-request-to-cap-entertainment-permits-downtown#.Uhwwv2TXhe5), Gaslamp innovators noted that–and I agree–DEDs have to have restaurants and entertainment before retail has the desire to move in. That is how the Gaslamp finally turned from seedy area to desirable: with over 100 restaurants and 10 clubs, they _now_ have retail coming in, with over 30 retail outlets now in the area.

    And it hasn’t been until recently that Long Beach’s dining and entertainment has finally been upped with the addition of Congregation, Beachwood, Michael’s, and Federal Bar (who will soon open their underground speakeasy music venue).

    I agree: retail is needed. But retail won’t come into a DED without dining and entertainment firstly.

  • Daniel

    My point is more that your article lacks objectivity, which your response here echoes. I know this is a blog with its own politics and biases, but Streetsblog articles tend to demonstrate a tad more objectivity than you have here. I appreciate that you report on local issues with so much enthusiasm, but I think it’s a disservice to the community when the arguments are reported in such a one-sided fashion. But maybe I should not expect so much from blogs.

  • Ugh

    Hmm, the Suja for Mayor team joins the convo.

    Lacks objectivity? It might be commentary but it’s NOT one sided. He uses businesses, residents, other DEDs, and links to reinforce his point. He brings up the fact there ARE noise issues but that the city went about it the wrong way.

  • I feel I am one-sided given my citing of multiple perspectives, from business to residential; it is not my fault that Lowenthal’s office failed to respond to multiple requests for comments so I could showcase their side. And yes, this is a commentary piece.

  • Daniel

    I’m not from the Suja for Mayor team. I actually support another candidate.

    While he cites businesses and residents, they all seem to disagree with the way the ordinance was drafted. If it were to be objective, he would have shown the issue from a perspective that supports it. It doesn’t have to come from Lowenthal’s office. In that sense, it’s one sided. You’re right, he brought up the noise issue. I’ll give you that even though he painted the issue as illegimate. (“But even beyond signing a direct acknowledgement is the fact that one
    but has to look around: with multiple mixed-use buildings, the
    development of the now-complete Promenade, and business along Pine
    finally growing, it is difficult to believe that no one knew the
    implications of what they were getting into.”)

    Regardless, he buried the public safety issue toward the end without even explaining that it was a reason for the drafted ordinance and ignored the retail issue. Yes, the retail issue was mentioned in a cited article, but a writer cannot expect a reader to look for opposing arguments hidden in cited articles.

    For the record, I don’t even necessarily agree with the ordinance, and I probably agree more with Brian’s stance. But that doesn’t mean that issues ought to be presented in such a one-sided manner even in a “commentary” piece.

  • Anonymous

    Pine Avenue is a downtrodden, undesirable mess. Other parts of downtown long beach have turned around, but Pine has, if anything, continued its descent.


Long Beach’s Leap Towards Livability Part III

(If you’re not familiar with the infrastructure innovations in Long Beach, you should read this article first.  In 2009, Joe Linton wrote a two part series on Long Beach’s “Leap Towards Livability.”  Today and tomorrow’s stories are both part of our Annenberg School of Journalism Public Health Fellowship and a continuation of that series.) Sometimes, […]

Long Beach: The (Simple) Art of Beautification

Oftentimes, we feel far too overwhelmed with the act of bettering our neighborhoods. There’s a sense of futility, particularly paired with the economic crisis, that overshadows creative and innovative ways to handle even the most simplest of beautification tasks. Say, for example, a sidewalk. Many of us know that fences, barriers, bridges, and sidewalks serve […]

The Tech Boom Comes to Everywhere in SoCal–But Long Beach

In a brilliant series examining venture capital (VC) investments–money largely invested in technology-based sectors–urban guru Richard Florida has taken data from Dow Jones and broken it down in maps and context. The macro-point is–in Floridian style–quite simple: though San Francisco/San Jose still account for an enormous chunk of VC investment, said investment is spreading into […]

Bike Boulevards Coming to Long Beach

It’s roughly 25 miles from downtown Los Angeles to downtown Long Beach, but the thinking when it comes to urban planning is light years apart.  First came Long Beach’s bike share program.  Then came a city bike plan.  Now comes Bike Boulevards. The Long Beach Press-Telegram reports that Long Beach officials are planning two new […]

Planning Commissioner Reflects on Life in the O.C.

Back in December, Hunting Beach Planning Commissioner Joe Shaw wrote an op/ed for Street Heat about the challenges in trying to do smart growth planning in the O.C.  Now that Shaw is a candidate for Huntington Beach City Council, it seemed like a good time to blow the dust off this excellent piece for all […]