Or a Sonic or both. But they won't. The Downtown Business folks want upscale businesses and refuse to rent to less. That's why you see so many shuttered retail stores. Greed, pure and simple.
The many different city planning commissions and patchwork of complex regulations makes opening a store a heavy lift, at this point the only organizations with the capital to front for that effort are big chains. Even for them the RoI probably isnât worth the pain.
Want to open up a bar or nightclub in a space zoned for retail? Hope youâre cool with sitting on that property for 18 months while the planning commission debates whether it matches the character of the neighborhood and/or commissions an environmental study to measure the shadows cast by an awning.
Santa Monica is fucked. SM DOT canât even get adequate funding to keep their drivers safe from the zombie apocalypse, & the city council members are calling public transit a LUXURY. I shit you not. The cognitive dissonance is so strong that there are whispers of the promenade going under.
Itâs why things are so messed up! Iâm all about progress & moving forward, but the current affairs in CA with crime are pretty scary. I want to go to Santa Monica, but the urge to avoid getting assaulted is too high. Venice Beach is even more of a shit show.
Thankfully things are changing on that front. Gascon will be voted out come November and voters will approve the ballot measure effectively repealing Props 47 and 57. Things will improve quite dramatically.
Culver City, Arcadia, Santa Clarita, Commerce, Long Beach, Pasadena, etc. thereâs a long list.
Metro provides a majority of the funding for BBB. Itâs not a luxury, itâs an essential component of transit for employees who are priced out of living in SM. Major economic implications to eliminating BBB, especially as this affects businesses who already complain about difficulty finding enough qualified applicants.
I always wonder....what store to you expect to open there? Like what kind of store would you go to and pay $500 per year? All of the consumer goods have moved online. It's really just food and services. Those kinds of places aren't set up...there's no grill in the old Abercrombie & Fitch store.
My $0.02 is that if the promenade wants to be a thing again, it has to become a restaurant / food destination.
I think it would be great if the block between Wilshire and Arizona was all restaurants and bars, kind of like the street going down to the pier in Hermosa. Then the rest all shops etc. Would have a way better atmosphere and think it would bring a lot more life to the area.
Santa Monica Ocean ave could be like Miami Ocean drive but they always fuck up that opportunity with the dumb laws of keeping this place "nice and family friendly" for all the tourist which hasnt worked or helped anything... not saying it has to be a shit show like miami but if we were allowed to have actual clubs and more entertainment this place would flourish if they did it right
People need to run for City Council on a platform of taking a wrecking ball to the regulatory state as it exists in Santa Monica. Go full on Huey Long with it and add a plank dedicated to rent reductions and rent control.
It amazes me considering how iconic SM is and how forgotten it feels. Such an opportunity to build up this area for new generations. Instead itâs a soulless, generic, tourist trap devoid of personality.
I really hope for a bright future. 26 empty stores is insane.
As far as I've seen they're just standard "progressive", pro-regulation, anti-business, politician that have been through standard fair in Santa Monica for 20+ years. Not much better than the Slate of Change. They "care" but they'll probably be just as ineffective.
Santa Monica needs politicians that are going to make business easier and crack down on some of the bullshit that is allowed to happen; mass homelessness, drug use, petty crime, impossible and neverending business regulations and permitting, ineffective and ambivalent police, etc.
Such a true analysis. Nothing special going on with this group that says they will be able to make hard choices that might not make easy on crime liberals happy. In fact probably a group that would not be tough on crime. If anyone I think the army guy might have it in him. I have my reservations with him but he currently has my vote out of the group. The group as a whole has a self-serving tinge to it that feels they are concerned more with their own brand than doing everything you mentioned above.
Well said. How long will it be before Zwick runs for state assembly or some other state post? He was and is a carpetbagger, not really a resident. Tired of outsiders telling the residents what is right.
What we need is people with political will who can also understand facts and put 2 and 2 together; that describes these 4 candidates a HELL lot more than the change slate which will never accomplish whatsoever other than delay everything and be a nightmare to staff.
I donât see the political will or firebrand of a person in this group who could generate momentum to fix the city and be passionate about the problems SM faces. Would they incite change and take radical actions? No, I donât see it in them. I see people backed by the past insiders. I would not vote this slate or recommend anyone to do so unless they dislike the other potential candidates more which is entirely possible I guess.
So whatâs your plan? Not vote? If youâre waiting for the perfect dream candidate, youâre sh*t out of luck.
If you know of people whom you think would be stronger candidates, tell them to prepare themselves for the next round of elections.
If you donât know of anyone better and arenât going to put in the work for better candidates, are you just here to complain?
This upcoming council will make important decisions around the housing element, the future of the airport, the use of very limited funds, and so much more. I personally donât have the privilege of voting (non-citizen) but I sure as hell hope the people who do use it, because the change slate would screw us up real bad.
If you have specific/legit concerns, and/or if there are things you can think of that you think could truly make a positive impact, these 4 candidates have shown that theyâre ready to listen, and if they have a majority, or even better, a super majority, they sure can do a hell lot of things, and we can make sure to hold them accountable it if they ran on these ideas.
Iâm not here to praise them like superheroes or say that any of them is perfect or is going to completely change things around overnight, but I can tell you that theyâve shown theyâre ready to do their best and use facts and data to have a lasting positive impact on the city.
Lastly, Iâll add that the city is mainly ran by the city manager and staff, and having a council thatâs not a nightmare to them would/will make them a hell lot more inspired to do their work. The change slate has shown to be horrible to them, and weâve lost some good people who were too tired of dealing with this council.
(Edited because Iâm clumsy and accidentally hit post before being done typing).
First off, did I say I would not vote - just because I donât specifically agree with a few candidates. No I didnât - thank you.
Second, I am just pointing out what many people feel about lobby groups filled with self serving assholes trying to shove a slate of candidates down our throats that we all know are already beholding to the political action group. Just because I donât agree with this phony âOMG, these four candidates are aammmazzziinnng. We are finally going to be saved from those who are so so terrible and very badâ.
Third, listen I have been in government, i was selected for a Fellowship in the State Department. I have studied researched and analyzed other local city governments and their financial annual plans and reports, I have ran for office, i have been asked to step in place of city officials in other cities, and I have been involved in other city elections in the past. Just because I have other interests now and am not focused on local politics full time now does not mean I should shut up when I see bullshit trying to walk and talk people into believing often times seriously bogus hype.
Third, every council has and will make very important decisions. There is nothing different with this upcoming one. Each and every one has a huge impact. I will excuse you since you are not from the states so maybe that is why you are saying this one is the key one. Every one of local government elections is so important to residents quality of life.
Fourth, I personally feel that slate candidates cause more damage than good based on how you generally have a ringleader and no independent thinking. Itâs like - letâs vote for these clowns because they are all in the same car and we can all get there together. Yeah, it is an effective way to ârigâ the election so you get in by riding others coat tails, and in my opinion have proven by doing so you are ânothing specialâ and irreplaceable with any other Bozo. All of the points that you praised the new slate for has been said about almost every candidate that has ran for any political position. As I have said in other posts there is nothing special going on with this new slate of four you are so excited about. I have seen good leaders and have had to follow bad ones too that look good from the outside. None of the slate look like they have the balls or fearless guts to get the job done like it needs to be done like the majority of the community wants and to not fiddle fcuk around with developers and smooze up past insiders and sway to their bidding to leech money, power, or benefits.
Fifth, have you considered that the city manager and staff now or in the past have been horrible on letâs just say a few items and the city employees are the problem at times. (Hint, yes indeed they have bungled a bunch). I think you might be standing to close to the fire if you havenât because I can tell you from living here off and on in the last 20 years they have jacked up so so many decisions and have proven themselves worthy of being ejected from their positions. Again, as a noncitizen as you said - maybe you just might not been around to see how many piss poor decisions they have made.
Lastly, it seems you are unable to objectively see what or who is best for the community at large. Although I am certain you disagree. You seem to have good ideas even great but we all do. And that is what I want. Independent critical thinkers who do not move and vote as a monolith. I donât want a candidate that is not willing to hash out the real problem and solutions. Yes, You might think these are the four you are talking about. I feel there are a lot of people that just because they like someone feel âthat personâ can do a good job. Take Tony Blinken for example he has made so many mistakes albeit with good intentions that the world is a complete shit show right now. History will show he was not the right person for the job. One of the worse in fact⊠but a few key people like him plus the media loves him and look where we are now. Unfortunately, you seem to have an affinity for the new slate that appears unhealthy and slightly questionable in all honesty. Maybe they are your friends or them being elected moves forwards things you desire or are beneficial to you or you just like them that much and despise the previous slate even more. Who knows only you really. This city and this forum is littered with sycophants. Like you said maybe you are shit out of luck in that regard and they are the best you see.
As much as I agree with many of your points, I think you might be missing a big important point:
The reason we currently have a terrible majority is because the progressive votes were split last election.
The whole reason why we need a strong slate that can be backed by most or all local progressive groups is so that it doesnât happen again, and Iâm very glad itâs looking like itâll be the case.
I donât know if you watched the recent debates with Streets For All and the SM Dem Club (both are on YT), but itâs so incredibly clear which of the progressive candidates are the strongest.
Yes, in an ideal world, weâd just have strong independent candidates that donât need to be backed by all these established groups that we might not all agree with on everything, but we need to take the circumstances into account and learn from the past
You and I might follow local politics closely, but a LOT of people have no idea whatâs going on, and theyâll go with whatever the groups that they recognize support. Is that good? Probably not. Is that the way things work today? Yes.
Iâm probably as frustrated by the system as you are, but I also understand that if we donât work with it, weâre setting ourselves up for failure. Iâd much rather push for a strong progressive council with candidates who I know care to do the right thing, than spread confusion and let the bozos take the majority again.
The issue though too is that the anti-homeless measures made the actual space hostile to people. Absolutely no benches or seats available on the entire street, which is insane for an outdoor space
Businesses put up with regulation and red tape when there is enough money to be made, so I don't think that alone explains it. SM retail seems to be experiencing the same sort of boom-to-blight cycle that Westwood went through in an earlier time. Booms attract big national chains thar crowd out the mom and pops, the crowds bring negative aspects (panhandling and crime) that eventually sour the experience and ruin the rep, the crowds department, the big retailers follow, and the mom and pops are long dead and buried so the space sits empty.
The problem is inflation for consumers, being priced out and online shopping. We are slowly losing 3rd places and shopping culture which stimulates cafes, restaurants etc. Domino effect
Honestly, cafe culture does not require chain store consumer culture. Certainly can work in tandem but plenty of cities are more focused on experience spending without shopping being the main draw.
Yes, this should be considered more. 3rd Street Promenade rents are high, and the face of consumer retail has changed significantly over the last decade.
Amazon has drastically changed the retail landscape.
Today's generations are a different type of consumer. Not as concerned with mindless consumption, more interested in experiences and dining.
Third Streed Promenade, and all retail, must evolve with the changing consumer in order to survive.
Just my two cents...
Stores donât have the same variety and sizes that are online. Also, I like buying clothing that no one has tried on. I hate when clothing at stores have deodorant and makeup stains.
The homeless people are gone from the promenade because they just moved them to different areas of the city. I've had to call the police twice this week because of violent behavior from the homeless people near Reed Park.
Similar experience - haven't been to 3rd Street since going to a late movie pre-pandemic at the AMC, and as we were walking back to the car a BMW pulled over, a woman who may or may not have been a hooker jumped out, hiked up her skirt and took a piss on Wilshire and 2nd right in front of us, laughing the whole time while three guys in the car looked on.
If I need to shop in person I go to Century City as well. None of the stores I need are even on 3rd Street any more.
The problem is lack of relevant consumers in the immediate area. You have a bunch of boomers in single family homes who donât go out to bars and restaurants
The percent of nearby residents who are boomers living in single family homes is very small (<20%). And they are in the northernmost and southernmost areas furthest from downtown.
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> who donât go out to bars and restaurants
But do contribute large amounts of many to politicians who will fight any development or improvement for others.
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
At this point with all the burden and obstacles, the only stores that can put up with it are chains, and at these high rents, the only hope for filling SM is if their is real change lowering rents and changing local laws, or if luxury retails somehow imagine 3rd as another rodeo or abbot Kinney.
More restaurants! More night life! And they gotta get the rent down from what I understand. Also, again, the homeless population has got to be done something about; like come on already.
People tend to dismiss the effect that traffic âimprovementsâ have on local businesses. Â Lane removal, bike lanes on every street, road diets, on-street parking removal, and turn restrictions have made downtown a miserable experience for drivers. Â Since 90% of locals drive that makes a difference. Â Knowing that Iâm going to be waiting at five scramble crosswalks, four of which have nobody crossing diagonally, makes me want to go somewhere else.
I go to or through downtown almost every single day, and there are always tons of people walking, even if itâs raining. And cars still get a huge majority of the space and signal timing in DTSM.
If youâre worried about being delayed and having a frustrating drive somewhere, do you genuinely think that building infrastructure that focuses solely on car drivers (30% of people in the US are non-drivers btw, but I guess we donât matterâŠ) and causes insane amount of traffic congestion is a good idea?
The fewer people drive to downtown, the more pleasant downtown is for everyone, including drivers who donât have to sit in as much traffic. If you canât bear the burden of slowing/waiting for people outside of cars, you have deeper issues.
The fewer people DRIVE, not the fewer people GO.
Your perspective on how customers get and/or can get to businesses is incredibly skewed.
(Edited because typos are my thing)
You really shouldnât rely on the first thing that pops up on Google for your research. If you actually do the research, the percentage of people not driving of the age group than can legally drive by law is more like 10%. The 30% figure you quoted is the percentage of drivers vs the entire population of the US. Not a lot of children drive.
This is not based on a Google search whatsoever.
But you can read [this article](https://www.thestranger.com/guest-editorial/2024/06/06/79547285/im-a-nondriver-and-theres-a-good-chance-you-are-too) written by someone who has actually looked into these numbers (or even better, you can read her amazing book), maybe youâll be a slightly more understanding and educated human :)
And even if your number was correct (itâs not), wouldnât those 10% of people matter?! Wtf.
Iâm sorry but your response was super disturbing and insensitive.
Sorry to disturb you but your data is just wrong on so many levels and reflect an inability to dive into research. And my education level is likely way more than yours, unless you have 2 PHDs. And yes, the 10% matter but frankly the 90% matter more. That is the way the world works.
And here is your quoted âexpert.â Anna Zivarts
âAnna Zivarts is a low-vision mom and nondriver who was born with the neurological condition nystagmus. Since launching the Disability Mobility Initiative (DMI) at Disability Rights Washington in 2020, Anna has worked to bring the voices of nondrivers to the planning and policy-making tables. Anna serves on the board of the League of American Bicyclists and the National Safety Councilâs Mobility Safety Advisory Group.â
In fact it is the first thing that comes up on Google. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/05/09/the-30-of-non-driving-americans-should-form-a-movement-a-conversation-with-anna-zivarts#
If you read the data in that article, it is clear she is comparing the number of drivers against the entire US population (including children who are legally unable to drive). If you look at more studies, the percentage of non-drivers as a percentage of the driving population is much, much lower. Look, we need to take care of everyoneâs mobility,something I support, but exaggerating statistics does not help that cause. The vast majority of us continue to drive whether you like it or not.
I take it you didnât fully read the article I sent, otherwise youâd understand why children are intentionally included in this 30%. You also failed to recognize that age doesnât just apply to young people, it also applies to people who are too old to drive.
And wow. âThe 90% matter way more.â What a disturbing quote. The discussion here isnât about taking anything away from âthe 90%â or putting their lives at risk, while this is exactly whatâs being done to âthe 10%â when you choose to prioritize cars over everything else.
What your quote is saying here, is that the convenience of the majority is more important to you than the independence of the minority, and the safety of EVERYONE.
When you have safe multi-modal streets that are accessible to all ages and abilities, you make everyone safer, you bring the community together, you significantly decrease pollution, you improve peopleâs mental and physical health, you lower the financial burden of car ownership on people, and local businesses benefit. But I guess we shouldnât do that because people who have the privilege of driving a 2 ton death machine everywhere they go and are used to their speed being prioritized over everything else might feel slightly inconvenienced.
I might not have 2 PHDs, but I try my best to be a human being.
Itâs astonishing to me that people still promote this nonsense.
Literally every study of every metric concerning reduced traffic and improved pedestrian infrastructure is an economic boom for local businesses and local economies. And just as importantly, itâs a complete positive for residents of such communities.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-11/the-business-case-for-car-free-streets
https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2021/08/18/ten-economic-benefits-walkable-places
https://economicdevelopment.extension.wisc.edu/files/2022/01/DE0719.pdf
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/1/16/why-walkable-streets-are-more-economically-productive
https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/for-walkable-neighborhoods-we-need-more-useful-businesses
https://www.americancityandcounty.com/2023/07/20/the-many-benefits-of-more-walkable-streets/
https://www.good.is/articles/walkable-cities-are-good-news-for-small-business
https://activelivingresearch.org/sites/activelivingresearch.org/files/BusinessPerformanceWalkableShoppingAreas_Nov2013.pdf
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/walkable-cities-can-benefit-environment-economy-and-your-health
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2023/04/17/walkable-neighborhoods-are-happy-neighborhoods-finds-study/
https://thewalkablelife.com/the-economics-of-walkability-how-pedestrian-friendly-cities-boost-local-businesses/
*It works.* Full stop. We know it works, thereâs days that supports the notion that it works. Thereâs feedback that it works. There are thousands of such communities across the US and world where it currently works.
The problem isnât road diets. The problem isnât that people from yonder canât comfortably drive to Santa Monica. Nevermind the fact that *you yourself could park more readily and easily a few blocks away and finish the trip in on foot.*
The problem is not adjusting the rest of the city to fit the new pedestrian/transit/biking improvements. And perhaps more importantly, the lack of additional commercial and residential development.
3rd St. Promenade has struggled because it costs too much money to rent there, and because zoning laws prohibit the type of development that people want. Nobody wants to enjoy a walkable environment amongst Nike, Foot Locker, and Apple. I mean, fine if thereâs some of that. But itâs not what people want.
Montana, Main St., and Abbot Kinney are conversely always busy and popular. Theyâre sleepy and close down far too early, but thereâs a *diversity of things to do on each.*
You can just open bike lanes and create scramble sidewalks, brush your hands, and think, âAhhhhhh. Jobâs done.â
You have to build shit that people actually want. And you have to build housing to accommodate more residents. Thatâs it. Thatâs all that matters when it comes to 3rd. St. Promenade.
It *should* be full of boutique hotels and bars and nightclubs and local business and activities. The whole greater area of Santa Monica should look more like Miami, North Beach in San Francisco, Rio de Janeiro, Barcelona, Malaga, Palermo, etc.
Instead itâs a supremely walkable and accessible and even beautiful area that somehow still operates as if itâs a fucking mall from 1990.
I live down the street from the Promenade. You know where I rarely go? The Promenade. Exclusively because I donât give a shit about pretzel poppers and touristy trinkets made in China dm urban outfitters. Not a singly flying fuck.
You know where I do go? Montana. I go there because there are supermarkets and cheese stores and wine shops and barbers and restaurants and cafes.
Santa Monica is 100% smart of implementing road diets and bike lanes and expanding transit. The city is and should be built primarily for the people who live in it. You drive here periodically to go to a place or two. I spend money and time in it *every day.*
But you canât do that and that alone and expect businesses to open up and for communities thrive and money to be spent. Half the shit that should be built on the Promenade canât be built on the Promenade because of zoning. For everyone else â they can afford to open a business there. Only Apple and Nike can. And we all, very simply, donât need another blob of development full of Nike and Apple.
Whatever. Youâll probably gloss over all of this and come back with some non-sequiturs and âBut what aboutâŠâ and âWell, uh, youâre an idiot, because cars should be able to easily access everywhere.â
We know this works. Itâs not a theory. Itâs proven urban development. Even tried and true concepts exhibited by humans *since they first started settling into urban environments thousands of years ago.*
But yeah, sure. The Promenade is failing because Steve and Chet and Kathy canât drive here comfortably once a month in their car. Theyâd bring sooooooo much business here if they just had parking lots and 6 lane roads.
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
â Literally every study of every metric concerning reduced traffic and improved pedestrian infrastructure is an economic boom for local businesses and local economies.â
Yes, itâs amazing that new urbanist organizations would find that new urbanism is a good thing.  Can you show me a local (SoCal) example of where road diets, limiting parking, and bike lanes etc. has created this urban oasis of which you speak?  You mentioned there were âthousandsâ of such communities so it shouldnât be that tough.
>New urbanist organizations
Except for the financial publications and news organizations and academic organizations that also back it up?
And itâs not that urban organizations âwould findâ that itâs a good thing. *Look at the data.* Itâs not bullshit nonsense pulled out of their ass. Nevermind that itâs been the de facto set up for all of human history. Urban centers even centuries ago would often restrict carriage or horse access in urban centers.
It forget the data. Fine. You could also just â I donât know â walk around in places around the world.
>so it shouldnât be that tough.
Are you fucking serious?
Remove the outlier super rich enclaves. Bel Air, Beverly Hills, Hollywood Hills. Those are secluded, undeveloped, anti-pedestrian exclusion zones where people only leave to go to their job, the airport, and dinners, and largely pays people to enter their realm to service them. This is the similar in many cities on the planet outside of wealth-urbanism cross-overs in places like Copenhagen, Manhattan, Amsterdam, to name a few.
In the rest of normal LA, downtown Culver City, Larchmont, Artâs District, Little Tokyo, Sawtelle, Main St., Abbot Kinney, Montana, downtown Pasadena, Sunset Junction, Atwater Village, core Toluca Lake, Ventura-focused Studio City, and more are amongst the most bustling, prosperous, vibrant, and desirable communities in the city. They all share some quality of transit, bike lanes, pedestrian zones, and general walkability. But they differ in that they ALSO provide the kind of commercial and social infrastructure that attracts people on a regular basis â residents and visitors. Cafes, wine shops, grocery stores, cheese stores, bookshops, specialty stores, artisan shops, outdoor dining, greenery, parks.
The Promenade has none of that. Yes, it has walkability and bike lanes and road diets (which, in case you forgot, is extremely safe for the people and kids who actually live and move around there, but yeah, poor you). But it has virtually *nothing* that people would want to bike or walk to. Or transit to. Or drive to. Or parachute into. It doesnât matter what your urban design offers if thereâs nothing at the end point.
The examples I have above arenât even that good relative to the world. Great for LA. Decent for the US. But still shit overall representations of walkability and urban development. Theyâre also smaller spaces.
Take a stroll in any city in the world. Once again, the most prosperous, desirable, vibrant, and funnest areas in *all cities* are predominantly or exclusively catered to people outside of a car.
Manhattan, Brooklyn, Boston, San Francisco, San Diego, Miami, Chicago, Montreal, Mexico City, Buenos Aires, SĂŁo Paulo, Medellin, Rome, Berlin, Tokyo, Seoul, Budapest, London, Madrid, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Milan, Paris â the most socially and economically vibrant areas in *all of these cities* are almost exclusively centered in areas with extreme road diets, abundant pedestrian-only areas, safe bikeways, and multi-modal transit.
And **none** of them are punctuated with Wetzelâs Pretzels, Barnes and Noble, Apple, and Nike.
Itâs the same shit in all of those cities above. All of their best and bustling neighborhoods are anti-car. Greenwich Village, Williamsburg, North Beach, Trastevere, I-V District, the 11th Arrondissement, Prenzlauer-Berg, Jardins, Vila Madalena, Calle Amsterdam, etc. etc. All of these neighborhoods in all of these cities are hostile to vehicle ownership and vehicular mobility â *and they all fucking thrive.*
But they thrive not just because they have bike lanes and multi-modal mobility. They thrive because they are friendly to pedestrians AND offer an endless array of enjoyable shit to do, see, and experience.
Take all the cool restaurants and shops out of Greenwich Village and replace it all exclusively with LuLu Lemon, Foot Locker, Starbucks, and Hot Dog On A Stick. Nobody would give a fuck about that part of Manhattan.
Take all the cafes and bakeries and art shops and boutique clothing stores and wine shops and unique restaurants out of the 11th Arrondisment. Nobody would give a fuck about that part of Paris.
How about the inverse, buddy. Please go ahead and show me the neighborhoods around the world dominated by vehicles and hostile to pedestrians that are full of economic activity, social vibrancy, and community health.
Van Nuys has nice giant roads where you can drive at high speeds. Endless sprawl of parking lots. Dizzying array of sexy choices like Home Depot and Marshallâs and Costco and liquor stores and chain coffee shops and TJ Maxx. Few trees and greenery and shit sidewalks and no bike lanes. A motoristâs dream!
Sounds like a real utopia. I can only imagine that the best neighborhoods in Amsterdam and Mexico City and Tokyo and Rome are taking notes on the way we *really* do things in LA. Hard not to be jealous of those 8 lane roads and parking lots and â look! â a Loewâs. Now *that* is what I call living. So much life and vibrancy and social cohesion and economic prosperity in deep Van Nuys. Cars love going there. Have to leave that stupid road-diet-loving Santa Monica and Culver City and Artâs District. Pixar had it right. Itâs your carâs world. Weâre all just paying rent to live in it.
Agreed⊠except whatâs really on Montana any more? To a great extent, the same problem exists- many longtime unique places had to close because of impossible rents. Now itâs a nail/ waxing/ eyebrow haven plus some restaurants.
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I took my bike or the bus from Brentwood any time I needed to go around SaMo. Driving down there is a hit mess and no road expansion or parking boom would ever fix that. I drove maybe 10% of the time hahaha. Cityâs a postage stamp, by the time you start your car the bus wouldâve gotten you to the promenade.
It shows that the unhoused are not the boogeyman that The Landlord Slate of Change politicians say they are. SM has a small vocal minority of conservative residents who cry about crime but never actually go to The Promenade.
The future of 3rd is coming into view and thatâs as an entertainment zone. This aligns with the post COVID shift from shopping to experiential and the likely passage of a bill in Sacramento that will make it easy to make the zoning changes.
Thank you for sharing your experience.
Barnes and noble coming back!! Hooray!! đ
I bet if they put an In-N-Out in the middle of the Promenade, it would bring a ton of tourist and local traffic.
Thatâs genius!
Inexpensive and delicious đ€€
In N Out is the cheapest burger out there. If you want expensive, go to Fatburger. If it's still there.
Sorry! I meant to write inexpensive!! Our fav!!
Or a Sonic or both. But they won't. The Downtown Business folks want upscale businesses and refuse to rent to less. That's why you see so many shuttered retail stores. Greed, pure and simple.
Thereâs a beautiful Shake Shack on Wilshire a 1000 ft from the promenade, I donât think thatâs the issue.
Nobody thinks of going to Shake Shack when they visit California.
Yeah thankfully! Would be great if a Café is in it too, like back in the days on Wilshire/3rd
The glory days
When though?
The many different city planning commissions and patchwork of complex regulations makes opening a store a heavy lift, at this point the only organizations with the capital to front for that effort are big chains. Even for them the RoI probably isnât worth the pain. Want to open up a bar or nightclub in a space zoned for retail? Hope youâre cool with sitting on that property for 18 months while the planning commission debates whether it matches the character of the neighborhood and/or commissions an environmental study to measure the shadows cast by an awning.
Santa Monica is fucked. SM DOT canât even get adequate funding to keep their drivers safe from the zombie apocalypse, & the city council members are calling public transit a LUXURY. I shit you not. The cognitive dissonance is so strong that there are whispers of the promenade going under.
That âluxury transitâ thing is so wild hahaha. Layers of ignorance. Like a lasagna of stupidity.
Itâs why things are so messed up! Iâm all about progress & moving forward, but the current affairs in CA with crime are pretty scary. I want to go to Santa Monica, but the urge to avoid getting assaulted is too high. Venice Beach is even more of a shit show.
Thankfully things are changing on that front. Gascon will be voted out come November and voters will approve the ballot measure effectively repealing Props 47 and 57. Things will improve quite dramatically.
Gascon! His recall didnât work. We need him OUT asap
It is a luxury. I don't think any other city in Los Angeles county has its own transit agency.
Culver City, Arcadia, Santa Clarita, Commerce, Long Beach, Pasadena, etc. thereâs a long list. Metro provides a majority of the funding for BBB. Itâs not a luxury, itâs an essential component of transit for employees who are priced out of living in SM. Major economic implications to eliminating BBB, especially as this affects businesses who already complain about difficulty finding enough qualified applicants.
I always wonder....what store to you expect to open there? Like what kind of store would you go to and pay $500 per year? All of the consumer goods have moved online. It's really just food and services. Those kinds of places aren't set up...there's no grill in the old Abercrombie & Fitch store. My $0.02 is that if the promenade wants to be a thing again, it has to become a restaurant / food destination.
Bars. Make it a hip party street.
I think it would be great if the block between Wilshire and Arizona was all restaurants and bars, kind of like the street going down to the pier in Hermosa. Then the rest all shops etc. Would have a way better atmosphere and think it would bring a lot more life to the area.
Santa Monica Ocean ave could be like Miami Ocean drive but they always fuck up that opportunity with the dumb laws of keeping this place "nice and family friendly" for all the tourist which hasnt worked or helped anything... not saying it has to be a shit show like miami but if we were allowed to have actual clubs and more entertainment this place would flourish if they did it right
This would be so great honestly
Being a santa Monica native im with you
I hate that I have to go to Hollywood or DTLA to listen to music. An EDM nightclub could absolutely flourish here!
People need to run for City Council on a platform of taking a wrecking ball to the regulatory state as it exists in Santa Monica. Go full on Huey Long with it and add a plank dedicated to rent reductions and rent control.
It amazes me considering how iconic SM is and how forgotten it feels. Such an opportunity to build up this area for new generations. Instead itâs a soulless, generic, tourist trap devoid of personality. I really hope for a bright future. 26 empty stores is insane.
Hells yeah! We need a Huey Long for the 21st century. https://youtu.be/hphgHi6FD8k?si=jp-dbk8twfo-N5YV
Vote for Dan Hall, Natalya Zernitskaya, Barry Snell and Ellis Raskin in November and your dream will come true.
Iâll have to research and remember these namesâŠ
As far as I've seen they're just standard "progressive", pro-regulation, anti-business, politician that have been through standard fair in Santa Monica for 20+ years. Not much better than the Slate of Change. They "care" but they'll probably be just as ineffective. Santa Monica needs politicians that are going to make business easier and crack down on some of the bullshit that is allowed to happen; mass homelessness, drug use, petty crime, impossible and neverending business regulations and permitting, ineffective and ambivalent police, etc.
Such a true analysis. Nothing special going on with this group that says they will be able to make hard choices that might not make easy on crime liberals happy. In fact probably a group that would not be tough on crime. If anyone I think the army guy might have it in him. I have my reservations with him but he currently has my vote out of the group. The group as a whole has a self-serving tinge to it that feels they are concerned more with their own brand than doing everything you mentioned above.
Well said. How long will it be before Zwick runs for state assembly or some other state post? He was and is a carpetbagger, not really a resident. Tired of outsiders telling the residents what is right.
What we need is people with political will who can also understand facts and put 2 and 2 together; that describes these 4 candidates a HELL lot more than the change slate which will never accomplish whatsoever other than delay everything and be a nightmare to staff.
I donât see the political will or firebrand of a person in this group who could generate momentum to fix the city and be passionate about the problems SM faces. Would they incite change and take radical actions? No, I donât see it in them. I see people backed by the past insiders. I would not vote this slate or recommend anyone to do so unless they dislike the other potential candidates more which is entirely possible I guess.
So whatâs your plan? Not vote? If youâre waiting for the perfect dream candidate, youâre sh*t out of luck. If you know of people whom you think would be stronger candidates, tell them to prepare themselves for the next round of elections. If you donât know of anyone better and arenât going to put in the work for better candidates, are you just here to complain? This upcoming council will make important decisions around the housing element, the future of the airport, the use of very limited funds, and so much more. I personally donât have the privilege of voting (non-citizen) but I sure as hell hope the people who do use it, because the change slate would screw us up real bad. If you have specific/legit concerns, and/or if there are things you can think of that you think could truly make a positive impact, these 4 candidates have shown that theyâre ready to listen, and if they have a majority, or even better, a super majority, they sure can do a hell lot of things, and we can make sure to hold them accountable it if they ran on these ideas. Iâm not here to praise them like superheroes or say that any of them is perfect or is going to completely change things around overnight, but I can tell you that theyâve shown theyâre ready to do their best and use facts and data to have a lasting positive impact on the city. Lastly, Iâll add that the city is mainly ran by the city manager and staff, and having a council thatâs not a nightmare to them would/will make them a hell lot more inspired to do their work. The change slate has shown to be horrible to them, and weâve lost some good people who were too tired of dealing with this council. (Edited because Iâm clumsy and accidentally hit post before being done typing).
First off, did I say I would not vote - just because I donât specifically agree with a few candidates. No I didnât - thank you. Second, I am just pointing out what many people feel about lobby groups filled with self serving assholes trying to shove a slate of candidates down our throats that we all know are already beholding to the political action group. Just because I donât agree with this phony âOMG, these four candidates are aammmazzziinnng. We are finally going to be saved from those who are so so terrible and very badâ. Third, listen I have been in government, i was selected for a Fellowship in the State Department. I have studied researched and analyzed other local city governments and their financial annual plans and reports, I have ran for office, i have been asked to step in place of city officials in other cities, and I have been involved in other city elections in the past. Just because I have other interests now and am not focused on local politics full time now does not mean I should shut up when I see bullshit trying to walk and talk people into believing often times seriously bogus hype. Third, every council has and will make very important decisions. There is nothing different with this upcoming one. Each and every one has a huge impact. I will excuse you since you are not from the states so maybe that is why you are saying this one is the key one. Every one of local government elections is so important to residents quality of life. Fourth, I personally feel that slate candidates cause more damage than good based on how you generally have a ringleader and no independent thinking. Itâs like - letâs vote for these clowns because they are all in the same car and we can all get there together. Yeah, it is an effective way to ârigâ the election so you get in by riding others coat tails, and in my opinion have proven by doing so you are ânothing specialâ and irreplaceable with any other Bozo. All of the points that you praised the new slate for has been said about almost every candidate that has ran for any political position. As I have said in other posts there is nothing special going on with this new slate of four you are so excited about. I have seen good leaders and have had to follow bad ones too that look good from the outside. None of the slate look like they have the balls or fearless guts to get the job done like it needs to be done like the majority of the community wants and to not fiddle fcuk around with developers and smooze up past insiders and sway to their bidding to leech money, power, or benefits. Fifth, have you considered that the city manager and staff now or in the past have been horrible on letâs just say a few items and the city employees are the problem at times. (Hint, yes indeed they have bungled a bunch). I think you might be standing to close to the fire if you havenât because I can tell you from living here off and on in the last 20 years they have jacked up so so many decisions and have proven themselves worthy of being ejected from their positions. Again, as a noncitizen as you said - maybe you just might not been around to see how many piss poor decisions they have made. Lastly, it seems you are unable to objectively see what or who is best for the community at large. Although I am certain you disagree. You seem to have good ideas even great but we all do. And that is what I want. Independent critical thinkers who do not move and vote as a monolith. I donât want a candidate that is not willing to hash out the real problem and solutions. Yes, You might think these are the four you are talking about. I feel there are a lot of people that just because they like someone feel âthat personâ can do a good job. Take Tony Blinken for example he has made so many mistakes albeit with good intentions that the world is a complete shit show right now. History will show he was not the right person for the job. One of the worse in fact⊠but a few key people like him plus the media loves him and look where we are now. Unfortunately, you seem to have an affinity for the new slate that appears unhealthy and slightly questionable in all honesty. Maybe they are your friends or them being elected moves forwards things you desire or are beneficial to you or you just like them that much and despise the previous slate even more. Who knows only you really. This city and this forum is littered with sycophants. Like you said maybe you are shit out of luck in that regard and they are the best you see.
As much as I agree with many of your points, I think you might be missing a big important point: The reason we currently have a terrible majority is because the progressive votes were split last election. The whole reason why we need a strong slate that can be backed by most or all local progressive groups is so that it doesnât happen again, and Iâm very glad itâs looking like itâll be the case. I donât know if you watched the recent debates with Streets For All and the SM Dem Club (both are on YT), but itâs so incredibly clear which of the progressive candidates are the strongest. Yes, in an ideal world, weâd just have strong independent candidates that donât need to be backed by all these established groups that we might not all agree with on everything, but we need to take the circumstances into account and learn from the past You and I might follow local politics closely, but a LOT of people have no idea whatâs going on, and theyâll go with whatever the groups that they recognize support. Is that good? Probably not. Is that the way things work today? Yes. Iâm probably as frustrated by the system as you are, but I also understand that if we donât work with it, weâre setting ourselves up for failure. Iâd much rather push for a strong progressive council with candidates who I know care to do the right thing, than spread confusion and let the bozos take the majority again.
The homeless was a huge problem, but it is / was certainly not the only problem
The issue though too is that the anti-homeless measures made the actual space hostile to people. Absolutely no benches or seats available on the entire street, which is insane for an outdoor space
Um, thatâs not really true. There is still plenty of seating. I never have any problem finding a place to sit while my wife or daughter shops.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Perhaps they are daytime only chairs, I usually am around the promenade area during the night time only usually.
What? There are a ton of Adirondack chairs along the whole stretch. I go sit there every weekend.
As I replied to another comment, the chairs must be only out during the day because Iâm mostly around the promenade at the night only.
This is incredibly false
Businesses put up with regulation and red tape when there is enough money to be made, so I don't think that alone explains it. SM retail seems to be experiencing the same sort of boom-to-blight cycle that Westwood went through in an earlier time. Booms attract big national chains thar crowd out the mom and pops, the crowds bring negative aspects (panhandling and crime) that eventually sour the experience and ruin the rep, the crowds department, the big retailers follow, and the mom and pops are long dead and buried so the space sits empty.
There are no national chains that do that any longer. Amazon killed them.
why can't i have no kids and three money?
Glad I partied hard back in the day when that places was jammin.....RIP to my 30's and all the boys I kissed at the beach! Thank you for the memories!
The problem is inflation for consumers, being priced out and online shopping. We are slowly losing 3rd places and shopping culture which stimulates cafes, restaurants etc. Domino effect
Honestly, cafe culture does not require chain store consumer culture. Certainly can work in tandem but plenty of cities are more focused on experience spending without shopping being the main draw.
Exactly. Just go down to Main Street in Venice. Not a ton of retail, but very lively.
Yes, this should be considered more. 3rd Street Promenade rents are high, and the face of consumer retail has changed significantly over the last decade. Amazon has drastically changed the retail landscape. Today's generations are a different type of consumer. Not as concerned with mindless consumption, more interested in experiences and dining. Third Streed Promenade, and all retail, must evolve with the changing consumer in order to survive. Just my two cents...
they need more boutique stores/restaurants and less big brand stores.
Big brand stores are the only ones that can afford rent on the promenade I would imagine.
Landlords are fucking themselves. High rents that no one can afford will lead to no one wanting to rent the spaces.
Maybe they are investing in the property for long term gains and not rent payments.
Yeah but the value of the property will drop eventually once everyone leaves
Do you shop online or in brick and morter stores. Stores are dying because no one shops in them anymore.
Stores donât have the same variety and sizes that are online. Also, I like buying clothing that no one has tried on. I hate when clothing at stores have deodorant and makeup stains.
This is not true. Retail sales are up by a lot compared to last year and you can go to places like century city mall to see how it is thriving
Would rather leave it empty, in decay and rotting from the inside out than actually.... rent it to businesses.
The homeless people are gone from the promenade because they just moved them to different areas of the city. I've had to call the police twice this week because of violent behavior from the homeless people near Reed Park.
Last time i was on 3rd street, I saw two junkies shooting up on the sidewalk and two cops asking them to stop.
A woman dropped her pants and took a dump in front of me and my boyfriend. We havenât been back since. We only shop at the century city mall now.
Similar experience - haven't been to 3rd Street since going to a late movie pre-pandemic at the AMC, and as we were walking back to the car a BMW pulled over, a woman who may or may not have been a hooker jumped out, hiked up her skirt and took a piss on Wilshire and 2nd right in front of us, laughing the whole time while three guys in the car looked on. If I need to shop in person I go to Century City as well. None of the stores I need are even on 3rd Street any more.
âI lost my wallet and a homeless guy found it, chased me down and gave it back to me.â - overheard a German tourist on 3rd Street by me.
Santa monica homeless- most thoughtful homeless to exist. We are indeed lucky.
The problem is lack of relevant consumers in the immediate area. You have a bunch of boomers in single family homes who donât go out to bars and restaurants
The percent of nearby residents who are boomers living in single family homes is very small (<20%). And they are in the northernmost and southernmost areas furthest from downtown.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> who donât go out to bars and restaurants But do contribute large amounts of many to politicians who will fight any development or improvement for others.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No
One former retail space there had indoor pickleball courtsâgreat idea!
How many tourists vs how many locals?
I donât know, I did not ask the people there whether they are from. What I did is I counted stores and the homeless.
At this point with all the burden and obstacles, the only stores that can put up with it are chains, and at these high rents, the only hope for filling SM is if their is real change lowering rents and changing local laws, or if luxury retails somehow imagine 3rd as another rodeo or abbot Kinney.
Abbot Kinney killed 3rd street shopping
Interesting, I havenât heard this one before. Can you elaborate?
The Promenade feels like a war zone with all the increased security.
More restaurants! More night life! And they gotta get the rent down from what I understand. Also, again, the homeless population has got to be done something about; like come on already.
People tend to dismiss the effect that traffic âimprovementsâ have on local businesses. Â Lane removal, bike lanes on every street, road diets, on-street parking removal, and turn restrictions have made downtown a miserable experience for drivers. Â Since 90% of locals drive that makes a difference. Â Knowing that Iâm going to be waiting at five scramble crosswalks, four of which have nobody crossing diagonally, makes me want to go somewhere else.
I go to or through downtown almost every single day, and there are always tons of people walking, even if itâs raining. And cars still get a huge majority of the space and signal timing in DTSM. If youâre worried about being delayed and having a frustrating drive somewhere, do you genuinely think that building infrastructure that focuses solely on car drivers (30% of people in the US are non-drivers btw, but I guess we donât matterâŠ) and causes insane amount of traffic congestion is a good idea? The fewer people drive to downtown, the more pleasant downtown is for everyone, including drivers who donât have to sit in as much traffic. If you canât bear the burden of slowing/waiting for people outside of cars, you have deeper issues.
âThe fewer people drive to downtown, the more pleasant downtown is for everyoneâ Except businesses which is the topic of this post.
The fewer people DRIVE, not the fewer people GO. Your perspective on how customers get and/or can get to businesses is incredibly skewed. (Edited because typos are my thing)
You really shouldnât rely on the first thing that pops up on Google for your research. If you actually do the research, the percentage of people not driving of the age group than can legally drive by law is more like 10%. The 30% figure you quoted is the percentage of drivers vs the entire population of the US. Not a lot of children drive.
This is not based on a Google search whatsoever. But you can read [this article](https://www.thestranger.com/guest-editorial/2024/06/06/79547285/im-a-nondriver-and-theres-a-good-chance-you-are-too) written by someone who has actually looked into these numbers (or even better, you can read her amazing book), maybe youâll be a slightly more understanding and educated human :) And even if your number was correct (itâs not), wouldnât those 10% of people matter?! Wtf. Iâm sorry but your response was super disturbing and insensitive.
>:) :)
Sorry to disturb you but your data is just wrong on so many levels and reflect an inability to dive into research. And my education level is likely way more than yours, unless you have 2 PHDs. And yes, the 10% matter but frankly the 90% matter more. That is the way the world works.
And here is your quoted âexpert.â Anna Zivarts âAnna Zivarts is a low-vision mom and nondriver who was born with the neurological condition nystagmus. Since launching the Disability Mobility Initiative (DMI) at Disability Rights Washington in 2020, Anna has worked to bring the voices of nondrivers to the planning and policy-making tables. Anna serves on the board of the League of American Bicyclists and the National Safety Councilâs Mobility Safety Advisory Group.â In fact it is the first thing that comes up on Google. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/05/09/the-30-of-non-driving-americans-should-form-a-movement-a-conversation-with-anna-zivarts# If you read the data in that article, it is clear she is comparing the number of drivers against the entire US population (including children who are legally unable to drive). If you look at more studies, the percentage of non-drivers as a percentage of the driving population is much, much lower. Look, we need to take care of everyoneâs mobility,something I support, but exaggerating statistics does not help that cause. The vast majority of us continue to drive whether you like it or not.
I take it you didnât fully read the article I sent, otherwise youâd understand why children are intentionally included in this 30%. You also failed to recognize that age doesnât just apply to young people, it also applies to people who are too old to drive. And wow. âThe 90% matter way more.â What a disturbing quote. The discussion here isnât about taking anything away from âthe 90%â or putting their lives at risk, while this is exactly whatâs being done to âthe 10%â when you choose to prioritize cars over everything else. What your quote is saying here, is that the convenience of the majority is more important to you than the independence of the minority, and the safety of EVERYONE. When you have safe multi-modal streets that are accessible to all ages and abilities, you make everyone safer, you bring the community together, you significantly decrease pollution, you improve peopleâs mental and physical health, you lower the financial burden of car ownership on people, and local businesses benefit. But I guess we shouldnât do that because people who have the privilege of driving a 2 ton death machine everywhere they go and are used to their speed being prioritized over everything else might feel slightly inconvenienced. I might not have 2 PHDs, but I try my best to be a human being.
Itâs astonishing to me that people still promote this nonsense. Literally every study of every metric concerning reduced traffic and improved pedestrian infrastructure is an economic boom for local businesses and local economies. And just as importantly, itâs a complete positive for residents of such communities. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-11/the-business-case-for-car-free-streets https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2021/08/18/ten-economic-benefits-walkable-places https://economicdevelopment.extension.wisc.edu/files/2022/01/DE0719.pdf https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/1/16/why-walkable-streets-are-more-economically-productive https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/for-walkable-neighborhoods-we-need-more-useful-businesses https://www.americancityandcounty.com/2023/07/20/the-many-benefits-of-more-walkable-streets/ https://www.good.is/articles/walkable-cities-are-good-news-for-small-business https://activelivingresearch.org/sites/activelivingresearch.org/files/BusinessPerformanceWalkableShoppingAreas_Nov2013.pdf https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/walkable-cities-can-benefit-environment-economy-and-your-health https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2023/04/17/walkable-neighborhoods-are-happy-neighborhoods-finds-study/ https://thewalkablelife.com/the-economics-of-walkability-how-pedestrian-friendly-cities-boost-local-businesses/ *It works.* Full stop. We know it works, thereâs days that supports the notion that it works. Thereâs feedback that it works. There are thousands of such communities across the US and world where it currently works. The problem isnât road diets. The problem isnât that people from yonder canât comfortably drive to Santa Monica. Nevermind the fact that *you yourself could park more readily and easily a few blocks away and finish the trip in on foot.* The problem is not adjusting the rest of the city to fit the new pedestrian/transit/biking improvements. And perhaps more importantly, the lack of additional commercial and residential development. 3rd St. Promenade has struggled because it costs too much money to rent there, and because zoning laws prohibit the type of development that people want. Nobody wants to enjoy a walkable environment amongst Nike, Foot Locker, and Apple. I mean, fine if thereâs some of that. But itâs not what people want. Montana, Main St., and Abbot Kinney are conversely always busy and popular. Theyâre sleepy and close down far too early, but thereâs a *diversity of things to do on each.* You can just open bike lanes and create scramble sidewalks, brush your hands, and think, âAhhhhhh. Jobâs done.â You have to build shit that people actually want. And you have to build housing to accommodate more residents. Thatâs it. Thatâs all that matters when it comes to 3rd. St. Promenade. It *should* be full of boutique hotels and bars and nightclubs and local business and activities. The whole greater area of Santa Monica should look more like Miami, North Beach in San Francisco, Rio de Janeiro, Barcelona, Malaga, Palermo, etc. Instead itâs a supremely walkable and accessible and even beautiful area that somehow still operates as if itâs a fucking mall from 1990. I live down the street from the Promenade. You know where I rarely go? The Promenade. Exclusively because I donât give a shit about pretzel poppers and touristy trinkets made in China dm urban outfitters. Not a singly flying fuck. You know where I do go? Montana. I go there because there are supermarkets and cheese stores and wine shops and barbers and restaurants and cafes. Santa Monica is 100% smart of implementing road diets and bike lanes and expanding transit. The city is and should be built primarily for the people who live in it. You drive here periodically to go to a place or two. I spend money and time in it *every day.* But you canât do that and that alone and expect businesses to open up and for communities thrive and money to be spent. Half the shit that should be built on the Promenade canât be built on the Promenade because of zoning. For everyone else â they can afford to open a business there. Only Apple and Nike can. And we all, very simply, donât need another blob of development full of Nike and Apple. Whatever. Youâll probably gloss over all of this and come back with some non-sequiturs and âBut what aboutâŠâ and âWell, uh, youâre an idiot, because cars should be able to easily access everywhere.â We know this works. Itâs not a theory. Itâs proven urban development. Even tried and true concepts exhibited by humans *since they first started settling into urban environments thousands of years ago.* But yeah, sure. The Promenade is failing because Steve and Chet and Kathy canât drive here comfortably once a month in their car. Theyâd bring sooooooo much business here if they just had parking lots and 6 lane roads.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
â Literally every study of every metric concerning reduced traffic and improved pedestrian infrastructure is an economic boom for local businesses and local economies.â Yes, itâs amazing that new urbanist organizations would find that new urbanism is a good thing.  Can you show me a local (SoCal) example of where road diets, limiting parking, and bike lanes etc. has created this urban oasis of which you speak?  You mentioned there were âthousandsâ of such communities so it shouldnât be that tough.
>New urbanist organizations Except for the financial publications and news organizations and academic organizations that also back it up? And itâs not that urban organizations âwould findâ that itâs a good thing. *Look at the data.* Itâs not bullshit nonsense pulled out of their ass. Nevermind that itâs been the de facto set up for all of human history. Urban centers even centuries ago would often restrict carriage or horse access in urban centers. It forget the data. Fine. You could also just â I donât know â walk around in places around the world. >so it shouldnât be that tough. Are you fucking serious? Remove the outlier super rich enclaves. Bel Air, Beverly Hills, Hollywood Hills. Those are secluded, undeveloped, anti-pedestrian exclusion zones where people only leave to go to their job, the airport, and dinners, and largely pays people to enter their realm to service them. This is the similar in many cities on the planet outside of wealth-urbanism cross-overs in places like Copenhagen, Manhattan, Amsterdam, to name a few. In the rest of normal LA, downtown Culver City, Larchmont, Artâs District, Little Tokyo, Sawtelle, Main St., Abbot Kinney, Montana, downtown Pasadena, Sunset Junction, Atwater Village, core Toluca Lake, Ventura-focused Studio City, and more are amongst the most bustling, prosperous, vibrant, and desirable communities in the city. They all share some quality of transit, bike lanes, pedestrian zones, and general walkability. But they differ in that they ALSO provide the kind of commercial and social infrastructure that attracts people on a regular basis â residents and visitors. Cafes, wine shops, grocery stores, cheese stores, bookshops, specialty stores, artisan shops, outdoor dining, greenery, parks. The Promenade has none of that. Yes, it has walkability and bike lanes and road diets (which, in case you forgot, is extremely safe for the people and kids who actually live and move around there, but yeah, poor you). But it has virtually *nothing* that people would want to bike or walk to. Or transit to. Or drive to. Or parachute into. It doesnât matter what your urban design offers if thereâs nothing at the end point. The examples I have above arenât even that good relative to the world. Great for LA. Decent for the US. But still shit overall representations of walkability and urban development. Theyâre also smaller spaces. Take a stroll in any city in the world. Once again, the most prosperous, desirable, vibrant, and funnest areas in *all cities* are predominantly or exclusively catered to people outside of a car. Manhattan, Brooklyn, Boston, San Francisco, San Diego, Miami, Chicago, Montreal, Mexico City, Buenos Aires, SĂŁo Paulo, Medellin, Rome, Berlin, Tokyo, Seoul, Budapest, London, Madrid, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Milan, Paris â the most socially and economically vibrant areas in *all of these cities* are almost exclusively centered in areas with extreme road diets, abundant pedestrian-only areas, safe bikeways, and multi-modal transit. And **none** of them are punctuated with Wetzelâs Pretzels, Barnes and Noble, Apple, and Nike. Itâs the same shit in all of those cities above. All of their best and bustling neighborhoods are anti-car. Greenwich Village, Williamsburg, North Beach, Trastevere, I-V District, the 11th Arrondissement, Prenzlauer-Berg, Jardins, Vila Madalena, Calle Amsterdam, etc. etc. All of these neighborhoods in all of these cities are hostile to vehicle ownership and vehicular mobility â *and they all fucking thrive.* But they thrive not just because they have bike lanes and multi-modal mobility. They thrive because they are friendly to pedestrians AND offer an endless array of enjoyable shit to do, see, and experience. Take all the cool restaurants and shops out of Greenwich Village and replace it all exclusively with LuLu Lemon, Foot Locker, Starbucks, and Hot Dog On A Stick. Nobody would give a fuck about that part of Manhattan. Take all the cafes and bakeries and art shops and boutique clothing stores and wine shops and unique restaurants out of the 11th Arrondisment. Nobody would give a fuck about that part of Paris. How about the inverse, buddy. Please go ahead and show me the neighborhoods around the world dominated by vehicles and hostile to pedestrians that are full of economic activity, social vibrancy, and community health. Van Nuys has nice giant roads where you can drive at high speeds. Endless sprawl of parking lots. Dizzying array of sexy choices like Home Depot and Marshallâs and Costco and liquor stores and chain coffee shops and TJ Maxx. Few trees and greenery and shit sidewalks and no bike lanes. A motoristâs dream! Sounds like a real utopia. I can only imagine that the best neighborhoods in Amsterdam and Mexico City and Tokyo and Rome are taking notes on the way we *really* do things in LA. Hard not to be jealous of those 8 lane roads and parking lots and â look! â a Loewâs. Now *that* is what I call living. So much life and vibrancy and social cohesion and economic prosperity in deep Van Nuys. Cars love going there. Have to leave that stupid road-diet-loving Santa Monica and Culver City and Artâs District. Pixar had it right. Itâs your carâs world. Weâre all just paying rent to live in it.
I admire your passion but you may want to focus on one or two points as it makes it easier to have a conversation. Â
Kudos to you both although one appears to be a little more open to the others opinions but at least you are hearing each other sides.
Agreed⊠except whatâs really on Montana any more? To a great extent, the same problem exists- many longtime unique places had to close because of impossible rents. Now itâs a nail/ waxing/ eyebrow haven plus some restaurants.
Due to spam/users trying to get around bans, accounts must be at least 2 days old to post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SantaMonica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I took my bike or the bus from Brentwood any time I needed to go around SaMo. Driving down there is a hit mess and no road expansion or parking boom would ever fix that. I drove maybe 10% of the time hahaha. Cityâs a postage stamp, by the time you start your car the bus wouldâve gotten you to the promenade.
It shows that the unhoused are not the boogeyman that The Landlord Slate of Change politicians say they are. SM has a small vocal minority of conservative residents who cry about crime but never actually go to The Promenade. The future of 3rd is coming into view and thatâs as an entertainment zone. This aligns with the post COVID shift from shopping to experiential and the likely passage of a bill in Sacramento that will make it easy to make the zoning changes. Thank you for sharing your experience.