I really hope that the manchester/vermont project works out good so that more nice development like this happens. I cant even imagine a target in south LA
Thank you for your videos brother. Your intelligence, articulation, studying of the subjects as well as facts shown are very appreciated & i'm grateful for your efforts. I intend on visiting south la in the future & i will be using your videos as a tour guide especially the food videos. Your presence is appreciated....Peace & Love
Hey, Davila! This note really means a lot! Thank you so much for watching. This whole channel is about knowledge and I really hope it will be beneficial to your trip. Really glad I could help!
South LA needs to be Gentrified. That’s what’s best for the people living there. After 70 years of being overrun by gang violence, drugs and crime, it’s time. No one wants to live like this.
Give south LA another 20 years and it will be nice. Unfortunately many people will be forced to move because with gentrification comes high rents and the working class wont afford it anymore.
Give south LA another 20 years and it will be nice. Unfortunately many people will be forced to move because with gentrification comes high rents and the working class wont afford it anymore.
Gentrification is a loaded word and now has a negative connotation. The issue is getting the kind of development that can be both profitable and meets the needs of the existing and future residents. That requires comprehensive participation of the current residents to help form a positive form of gentrification for most of the community. I'm not fully informed about the changes Inglewood has been going through over the last several years, but on the whole it seems to be going well for a large portion of the community. Inglewood is going through a modern Renaissance.
0:48 They need to allow large developments somewhere other than huge arterial roads. I would never live on Vermont Ave or Manchester Ave let alone the intersection of both of them. Arterials and noisy, polluting, and dangerous. These large developments should be allowed on the quieter surface streets. Because that's where it's actually safe for people to live.
The problem with that is you end up destroying the smaller density single family home aesthetic that current residents moved there to begin with. Having a huge development on a regular residential street would not work and those streets are not made to deal with the potential increase in traffic. That is why there are building zones like R1 & R2. The better answer is to make these commercial streets safer and more conducive to walking and biking. Mixed use developments like these will become more common in the future. It makes sense on a lot of levels.
@@mrxman581 I agree they need to make commercial streets safer. But dense living does not cause more traffic, low density sprawl does. There are many cities with midsize 10-12 story towers on quiet surface streets with little to no traffic. And we definitely need to incrementally upzone those Single Family neighborhoods. Single Family Zoning is intentionally exclusionary. I could understand a compromise where first only quadplexes and townhouses are allowed instead of going all out with high rises right off the bat.
@@mariusfacktor3597 I believe that LA changed the zoning parameters or at least they are proposing allowing R1 & R2 to allow multiplexes. I think up to six units. Which is the kind of density best suited for LA neighborhoods. LA has a history of the single family home. It's a unique aspect of an international city that's the 2nd largest in the wealthiest country in the world. We don't want to be NYC or Tokyo. Losing part of what makes LA special to have more housing would be a huge mistake. BTW, one of the reasons for the zoning LA has had for a very long time was because there was a time that big beautiful homes in cherished historic neighborhoods were being torn down and replaced with huge apartment buildings many without even adequate parking. What resulted were single family homes and even classic duplexes or courtyard bungalows having to exist with multistory apartment buildings that resulted in residents losing their privacy especially in their backyards. You can still the result of this all over LA. Also, the cities like NYC and Tokyo have very comprehensive public transit systems so people can function relatively well without a car. That's still not the case in LA. So the solution to increase housing in LA is to do what they are doing allow low level smaller multiplexes. The much taller structures are best left to commercial streets. LA already has very good examples of that like the Wilshire corridor or around Westwood. And these areas will soon be serviced by a subway line We can do both types of construction to build more homes which are desperately needed. In my neighborhood they just built a 32 unit townhome complex and it's on one of the first commercial streets next to a park after a residential neighborhood. So you walk one block and you're in a R1 & R2 neighborhood. You walk one block in the other direction and you're on a main commercial street. I'm ok with that because it leaves the original neighborhood aesthetic relatively intact and still significantly increased the number of homes in a much smaller foot print and it's not right next door to a single family home. Sorry this was so long.
@@mrxman581 " Losing part of what makes LA special to have more housing would be a huge mistake." Single Family Zoning which is a policy intentionally designed to keep minorities out of white neighborhoods (see Redlining), does not make LA special. Those same exclusionary policies were enacted in nearly every US city in the mid 20th century. Here in LA it has caused a housing shortage, mass homelessness, and horrible traffic. So no, it doesn't make us special, it makes us a disaster, and our city is literally in an official state of emergency right now because of it.
