To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.

List of Los Angeles Dodgers owners and executives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Andrew Friedman is the President of Baseball Operations of the Los Angeles Dodgers
Andrew Friedman is the President of Baseball Operations of the Los Angeles Dodgers

This is a list of Los Angeles Dodgers owners and executives.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
  • ✪ Christopher Hawthorne
  • ✪ Our Town Hellertown PBS39
  • ✪ Jennifer Lynn Stoever: Listening To Racism in the US - Or Why Sound Matters


Good evening, everybody. My name is Diane Davis. And as chair of the Department of Urban Planning and Design, I'm here to welcome you to the GSD and to introduce tonight's speaker, Mr. Christopher Hawthorne. Christopher has worn many hats over the past several years, all of which have led him to his current post as the chief design officer for the city of Los Angeles. And I'm going to speak about that post in a few minutes. But let me just say something about Christopher's background, some of it was already up on the slide. But it's important to know that Christopher started his career in architectural criticism, after receiving degrees from Yale in both political science and architectural history. Most recently, he served as the architecture critic for the Los Angeles Times, a post he held from 2014 to 2018, before resigning that position to work with Mayor Eric Garcetti as his chief design officer. I should also mention that concurrently, Christopher is a professor of practice at Occidental College and has taught previously in the journalism department at UC Berkeley, at Columbia, and at SCI-Arc, the Southern California Institute of Architecture. He's written and directed programs for PBS, including a documentary on Frank Lloyd Wright, and a 2016 public KCET-- I think that's a public station in northern California. Is it northern or southern? Southern Southern. Series title, the Third Los Angeles Project, for which he wrote he received an LA area Emmy for his role as executive producer. And interspersed with all these accomplishments were stints at the American Academy in Rome and a position as a mid-career fellow at Columbia University's National Arts Journalism Program. So clearly when Mayor Garcetti decided that Los Angeles needed a chief design officer, he didn't have to look very far to find the right person for the job. Of course to me, all that raises the question-- all this raises the question of what exactly a chief design officer is expected to do. And how working in the public sector might require a different skill set or sensibility than that articulated through the media or third estate, where Christopher has a lot of experience. So I think we're going to hear a little more about that later tonight. But in speaking to him earlier, I want to say that he mentioned that a lot of his work is directed towards facilitating conversations between architects, urban designers on the one hand, and planners on the other. And when he said that, I have to admit that I toyed with the idea of asking him to give me some pointers, personally, as sometimes I feel that that is one of my jobs here at the GSD, because we are blessed to have one department with two different professions in it. It's not quite the same level of stakes as the city of Los Angeles. But really I understand the world that you're living in now, Christopher. So before turning the podium over to Christopher, I'd like to place his position and this job into a little more context. First and foremost, although the city of Helsinki was one of the first in the world to name a chief design officer, which it did so in the spring of 2016, this type of position is really very unique. Even now, two years after the Helsinki decision, there are very few major cities in the world with chief design officers. And in the United States, Los Angeles is the only one. So in this sense, Christopher Hawthorne's position is unique and holds the potential to change the way future cities are designed, built, and planned. Second, and this kind of follows from the idea that LA Is the only place that has a chief design officer in the United States, let's not forget that LA Is not just any old American city. When Mayor Eric said he decided in March 2018 that the city of Los Angeles needed a chief design officer, he faced a city that was growing, and it has been for a while, by leaps and bounds, both physically and with respect to global investment, much of it directed towards new architectural and infrastructural projects. Much, although not all of that development, was connected to efforts to refocus attention on downtown development or downtown areas. Much of that jump started and are motivated by such new projects, well, I guess is not so new anymore, Gehry's Disney Symphony Hall and a variety of other innovations, projects, infrastructure changes near the what one might call the center of Los Angeles, which was never really felt to be a downtown. For those of you who know LA, you know that it's a sprawling metropolis with many districts and activities that remain unconnected and fragmented. It really wasn't like a downtown like in Chicago or New York. So in fact, one of the very first important historical books on the city written in 1967 by Robert Fogelson an urban historian at MIT who I had the pleasure of teaching with several years back, is called Los Angeles, The Fragmented Metropolis. And the facts of Los Angeles' fragmentation were later addressed in a new forward to that book that was written almost 30 years later by Robert Fishman, a very major planning historian. So both of these Roberts highlighted the contested political decision making and weak planning institutions that contribute to the city's sprawl and spatial development. It is in this historical context-- oh, let's not forget the Olympics is coming around the corner as well. So it is in that historical and spatial context that Mayor Garcetti identified the need for more purposeful collaboration among the variety of actors and institutions across the scale of the metropolis, whose actions combined have ended up making Los Angeles the city that it is today, for better or worse. And I'm talking about here architects, city officials, urban designers and planners, and including in their ranks, those with engineering, law, and ecology backgrounds. So with this mandate, Christopher Hawthorne has thrown himself squarely into the vortex of competing professionals who do not always see eye to eye. Yet, I would say it could be precisely his background in political science and architectural history that gives him a vision and a platform to draw, I mean, he can kind of rise above and draw from all these different approaches and find the ways that these different experts and their commitments can be reformulated so that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And I really can't think of a better person to be triangulating, encouraging, and inspiring a new design vision for the city of Los Angeles. In some of the articles I read that either Christopher has written or about him, it's clear that he's already called out the need to think about beauty in all projects, whether big or small, for poor or rich. He's also identified the importance of thinking about the public realm and the city's potential to activate a sense of civic duty in its residents through various design and planning projects. And finally, he's shown himself to be tethering these and other ambitions to larger sustainability commitments in areas of transportation and the environment. And I know a little bit about these latter efforts because I had the pleasure of meeting and starting conversations with Christopher about a joint GSD, City of Los Angeles initiative focused on the future of streets that will have an option studio connected to it in the spring and that is being shepherded by Andres Sevtsuk and myself along with other faculty and students in the Urban Planning and Design department. And one thing that impressed me about Christopher's enthusiasm for this rather experimental effort to rethink how streetscapes could and should be reconfigured was his understanding that the world would be looking to LA for leadership in this and other innovative design regards. After all, one wonders if LA can change its reputation as an overly fragmented motorway, in many ways the car capital of the world. And I have to say that just as an anecdote, when I moved to Los Angeles from Chicago many decades ago to start graduate school in urban sociology, the first thing I complained to my friends at home was that this was not a city, it was a parking lot. But now, it's going to be a city. And I would say that my overly dystopian view at that time was actually very quickly demolished when I learned about the varieties of neighborhoods, cultures, and spaces that LA already was nurturing decades back. But they were kind of hidden in the context of sprawling freeways to nowhere and the near absence of a downtown. So what I've seen in the last six months that Christopher has been in his office-- and it's not really very long considering the ambition of the task at hand-- is that he's leading the charge to change the practices of architecture and urban design to serve both public and aesthetic purposes, to reverse fragmentation, and to start to fashion a city out of whole cloth, to guarantee the dignity of the urban experience for all the city's residents. So thank you, Christopher for joining us here tonight and helping us understand the challenges you are facing, the accomplishments you already have under your belt, and your plans for the future. [applause] Thank you Diane, for that extraordinarily kind introduction. You've really set out the challenges for me. Reversing the fragmentation, creating a real city, I will do my best. It's a pleasure to be back. I was here about three years ago for a conversation on criticism in my old life as a critic at the LA Times with Michael Sorkin, Michael Hays, Olly Wainwright, Florencio Rodriguez. It was really a terrific conversation. And it's really great to be back. It's so nice to have seen some faces from Los Angeles, also and to be able to spend some time with Mark Lee, a friend, and see him in action here in Cambridge. So we will come back to this slide in a bit. I start with it to really emphasize, to a certain extent, the work that I have ahead of me in terms of rethinking the public realm. And also to emphasize that all the projects that are coming out of my office will really begin with an emphasis on climate change and equity, I think first and foremost. And I think both of those challenges are suggested by this image and suggest the poverty of much of how we've designed the public realm. But we do have a longer history and I want to get into that a little bit too. Before I move ahead, a quick question. How many of you were born or spent any part of your childhood in Southern California? OK. Anybody who has never set foot in the city of Los Angeles? OK. A small handful. OK, great. So most of you are somewhere in between, which is typically how all of this works. So I'll talk a little bit about this transition and how I decided to make this leap and why I decided to make this leap at a particular moment of transition for Los Angeles, which I think is fraught in some ways but also full of tremendous potential, as a sort of hinge moment as Mayor Garcetti has described in this city's civic and architectural history. And then talk in the second half of my remarks about a handful of projects that I'm working on. And I'm just about, as Diane mentioned, at the six-month mark and that has given me-- it's an interesting time to take stock. There's certainly a lot of projects that are still undercooked and not ready for a public introduction, but I do have a much better sense than even six weeks ago about what I'm hoping to make a priority. So let me move on to an image that most of you probably will have seen and be familiar with. This is Julius Shulman's image of Pierre Koenig's Case Study House, #22, also known as the Stahl House in the Hollywood Hills. Probably, perhaps the most famous architectural image in American history, certainly the most famous in Los Angeles history. But the version of this series of images by Julius Shulman that I've become much more interested in, in recent weeks is this one, which suggests a sort of different perspective maybe about how the sausage is made and certainly the degree to which boosterism and the kind of manufactured and carefully packaged glamor have always been central to LA's global image and its self-image. And this is one of Julius's assistants here holding up a tree branch in the foreground. And I was lucky enough to get to know Julius at the very end of his life, toward the end of his life when I started at the LA Times in 2004. And he was not shy about agreeing to that charge of being a salesman and sort of packaging LA's myth and selling it to the world. I also loved the way that he's hanging off this wall the way that the house sort of hangs off the hillside. And he was known for going to those sorts of lengths to get just the shot that he wanted. So in general, I'm skeptical of the notion of LA exceptionalism which is to say the idea that Los Angeles occupies a category of one in American urban studies, that it stands entirely apart from other cities or to Diane's part that it maybe doesn't qualify as a city at all. But one thing that did become clear to me in nearly 15 years of studying, writing about this city as the critic at the LA Times, was that we do wrap together utopia and dystopia, promise and peril, in a singular way in Los Angeles perhaps best epitomized by the way that our palm trees, universal symbols of a certain idea of benign climate and the good life in Los Angeles, tend to be torched every 4th of July by wayward fireworks, sometimes well aimed fireworks, suggesting that disaster is never far away. And sometimes we even set our waterless Los Angeles river on fire over the 4th of July weekend as well. And keep in mind that in-- sorry, go back-- Yeah. Keep in mind that in Nathanael West, The Day of the Locust, which remains among the very best novels of Los Angeles and Hollywood, the painting that stands near the center of the story is called The Burning of Los Angeles. And often we don't even let the paint dry on our most important cultural and architectural landmarks before we set fire to them, at least on canvas. This is Ed Ruscha's, one of a series of paintings he made between 1965 and 1970 called the Los Angeles County Museum on Fire, not long after William Pereira's collection of buildings for LACMA on Wilshire Boulevard was finished. So all of that is to say is that by the time Mayor Garcetti asked me to take on a new position at City Hall, a little bit of what you've heard about from Diane, as chief design officer, not design czar as the New York Times had it, I did already have a sense of both the political contours of the city and I would say the exceptionally wide and perhaps peculiar range of ways in which architecture and landscape have helped shape LA's sense of itself and perhaps what it owes its citizens. So the job really came out of a series of conversations that I had with the mayor beginning actually before he was elected. In 2013, when he was running for office, the LA Chapter of the American Institute of Architects put together a series of conversations with all of the mayoral candidates, not a debate, but a conversation with each of them. And the then planning director-- sorry then, president of the Planning Commission, Bill Roschen and I, conducted a series of conversations about architecture, urban planning, urban design with all of the candidates. And it became clear, even in those early conversations, that Eric Garcetti, then the president of the City Council representing Hollywood and Silver Lake, was exceptionally interested in and well-versed in matters related to those subjects and very interested in the future of the built environment in Los Angeles. So after he was elected, he asked me if we could continue that conversation at greater length. And so I put together a conversation at Occidental College in which we actually stopped the conversation midway through to hear a couple of songs from the musician you see at left, Gabriel Kahane, for whom I had just written my first and only batch of liner notes to accompany a record of his called The Ambassador, which has 10 songs, each of which is connected to one significant architectural or historical address in the city. It's a terrific record. So you can imagine my conversations with the mayor's advance team, letting them know that the mayor and I would talk for a while and then we would stop and a musician would come out and play a couple of songs about LA architecture, and then we would go back to talking. But that's precisely what we did. And actually it worked out rather well. And that's the mayor putting a photograph of Gabriel on Instagram from the stage. So when the mayor was re-elected in 2017, he asked if I would consider doing another conversation at Occidental which we did, this time in a bigger venue, and had an opportunity to talk about the promise of his second term. And it's important to mention that mayors in LA are term-limited to two four-year terms. But because we changed the electoral calendar in Los Angeles-- we used to elect our mayors in the spring of odd years and now we do so in the fall of even years, his second term, despite the fact that he was term limited, would stretch an extra 18 months or so. So it would be five and 1/2 years instead of four years. And it was happening at a moment of significant transition and change, some of which I will get into, in Los Angeles. And the combination of the mayor's interest, enthusiasm about these subjects and the length of that second term and all of the consequential decisions that we face about the future shape of this city, convinced me that it was worth making the leap from really, the only job that I ever aspired to have which, is to say as an architecture critic, to this newly created position. So it comes officially through the planning office. It's attached to the Mayor's Office. And I work with one of the deputy mayors. But my work-- I'm a bit of an outlier to the extent that my work also overlaps with work of some of the other deputy mayors in Garcetti's administration. There is a model. There was a model for the position to a certain extent. The mayor has a chief sustainability officer and a chief data officer. And so there are these so-called chief positions in the administration. But mine is a little bit different because it crosses over from, I think it touches on more departments than some of those other jobs and is a bit of an experiment in that sense. And so, as I mentioned, by the time that we had had this conversation and the one the followed in 2017, it had become clear that something fundamental is shifting in Los Angeles. So this is a pairing of images that I've often used in lectures to suggest that transition. So again, the Shulman photo of the Case Study #22, the Stahl house at left, with models wearing white dresses. And then at right, image from a really remarkable series of immigration rights marches that took place not long after I arrived in Los Angeles. This is in the spring of 2006. There was immigration reform legislation pending in Congress and, organized largely by Spanish language radio, hundreds of thousands, somewhere between 400,000 and 500,000 people likely took to the streets. This is an image along Broadway. And also on Wilshire Boulevard, really what had been the capital of car culture in Los Angeles. So announcing what had by that point was a really significant demographic shift, this was right at the moment that Latinos were becoming the majority in LA county and they have since reached that milestone in the city of LA as well after many decades of immigration from Latin America and also from Asia that really peaked in the early 1990s. I think really accelerating after immigration law was changed in 1965 and really peaking in the early 1990s. And that really changed the city in some basic fundamental ways. And these marches announced a kind of political interest, but also I think announced that this new emerging city was interested in using the spaces of Los Angeles in new and different ways. And so over the subsequent years that I was at the Times there were other examples of that transition beginning in 2010. It's easy to remember when this started because the first CicLAvia was on 10-10-10, October 10, 2010, an event that's modeled after Ciclovia in Bogota, Colombia, which closes several miles of streets to car traffic and opens it up to cyclists and pedestrians. This is an image from the most recent one, which is just a couple of weeks ago, which was a partnership with the Los Angeles Philharmonic to mark the centennial of the LA film, which included a lot of musical programming along the route. It was a route that went from Grand Avenue, where I took this picture, in a part of the city Bunker Hill, which will get back to in a little bit that has not, to put it mildly, been known for active street life, to see these buildings-- that's The Broad in the foreground and Walt Disney Concert Hall. At the center of the image, to see this part of the street animated, activated in this way was really remarkable. And there have been several of these CicLAvia over the years which closely match the so-called open streets projects that are happening in other cities around the country. And there was also a moment when we began, in really dramatic fashion, these parades, for lack of a better word, that brought significant cultural and technological objects back from the edges. I actually wrote a piece about this. This was when we brought the Endeavor space shuttle, which had just been retired. And we paraded it through the streets of Los Angeles to Exposition Park, where it is now on display at the California Science Center, just south of USC next to where the Lucas, new Lucas Museum by MAD Architects will be located, for those of you who know that part of Los Angeles. I wrote a piece in the LA Times comparing this to a Roman triumph, which is to say, these are objects that Los Angeles was famous for making and sending out into outer space. And we had begun to collect these objects from the edges of empire, as it were, and parade them through the city. This was really a remarkable day. I took one of my daughters out to see the space shuttle come through the streets of Los Angeles. And it also attracted a gigantic crowd and produced this, which is also one of my favorite images of Los Angeles by one of my colleagues at the LA Times. Similarly, when LACMA was installing Michael Heizer's project, Levitated Mass, and colloquially known as The Rock, it too paraded it through this city in this sort of special occasion that triumph like in terms of bringing this object again out from the periphery into the center, geographical center of Los Angeles where it could be displayed. In this setting, just north of Renzo Piano's Resnick Pavilion, the second of two Renzo Piano projects at LACMA. And I always recalled for me this image, which I saw first I think at the Architectural Biennale in Venice, at ARENA's Biennale two years ago, which is a Filip Dujardin image, which suggests sort of the challenge of infill, the peculiar challenge of infill development in Los Angeles. Which is to say, it's been a city so connected to notions of the uncanny and sort of rule-breaking architecture, that when we talked about infill, I think it's useful to keep images like this in mind in terms of what we're squeezing back into the middle of the city, to go back to The Rock, Michael Heizer's project. And that transition in terms of infill was really a way from something too. It was a way from this notion of the single family house with garden and often a swimming pool, which had been popularized not only by the Case Study projects, of course, but also the paintings of David Hockney and others. And was a kind of combination of architecture and lifestyle that had been wrapped together more seamlessly than perhaps in any other American city. And it's important to say, was enabled by an entire infrastructure of, let's say, privatization across the entire region. So this kind of an image, to say nothing of the Case Study program, was really only made possible because we were investing so dramatically in freeway construction after the war, was a moment, of course, when the federal government was practically insisting that cities take funding to build those freeways. But in Los Angeles, it produced a really singular kind of combination of architecture climate and landscape really best epitomized by these Hockney paintings. And so infill, as it happens in Los Angeles, doesn't always look the same as it does in other cities. This is an important project by Michael Maltzan called One Santa Fe. Many of you probably will have seen. It's directly across the street from SCI-Arc from the position of this photograph. And then on the backside is along the Los Angeles river in the Arts District neighborhood, the Arts District section of downtown. And it is, I think, really significant in what Michael, as I wrote about it, was trying to do, which is to take sort of typical new apartment block, which is often wood frame, over a parking podium which produces a lot of architectural banality across the city and stretch it horizontally in the direction of monumentality, which is to say pull it like taffy until it becomes a monumental presence. And of course, Los Angeles has a great tradition of these horizontal skyscrapers sort of tipped on their sides. Think of not just the buildings up on Bunker Hill, but the Blue Whale by Cesar Pelli in West Hollywood, these sort of monumental horizontal projects. So that was also part of what was happening at this moment, this return to the, if not the center, to Diane's point about a lack of a center perhaps in Los Angeles, at least a city that was turning back on itself and where the important activity and change was happening in a city that was turning inward again. So Mike Davis in City of Quartz which was published in 1990, famously said that Los Angeles was the city that ate the desert, that dreamt of being infinite, which is to say, was always fixated on the periphery in terms of that sort of expansion. But what we've seen in recent years is a city really turning back toward its midsection and thinking about how to build more densely in those parts of the city. Perhaps most significantly of all is the transit expansion that is now underway in Los Angeles. This image on the left is the Metro Rail network as it existed in 2000. And this is essentially as it existed when I got to Los Angeles. We had added a gold line to Pasadena by the time I got to LA in 2004. But it was really just a kind of sketch, a hint of what a mature transit system might look like. And by 2028, we will have many of the projects that you see and others will be under way, paid for by the most recent sales tax measure that we've passed countywide, which is Measure M, which was passed in 2016. It followed on the heels of Measure R, which was in 2008. Both of those, because they're tax measures in the state of California, require a super majority, which is to say a 2/3 vote, which is a very high bar to clear. Measure M wound up getting almost 71% of the vote. So very, very clear suggestion of a kind of mandate for transportation investment. But as you can see, we have a long way to go. And I will point out this line here, which will be, is a proposed sort of putative train through the Sepulveda Pass under the 405 Freeway, which will really be, I think the project connecting the west side of Los Angeles and Santa Monica with the Valley, San Fernando Valley. And I think when that project is finished, although it will probably require many years and a public-private partnership to get finished, will suggest that this network is finally, finally complete. So we have accelerated in looking ahead to the Olympics in 2028, 10 years from now, a number of projects that we have a-- Metro has a 28 by 28 initiative underway to accelerate or finish 28 major projects by the time the Olympics arrive. So you get a sense of what's happening and Measure M will raise, in the next 40 years, something like something like $120 billion, not all of which will go to public transit, the lion's share of it will. There are also a lot of roadway improvements, the kinds of things that you have to include in that kind of a package to get the super majority that I talked about. But, if you add that number and the investments that we're making in new parks, housing, open space, investment connected to the Olympics is somewhere in the magnitude of $200 billion. The mayor has described Measure M itself as our transit expansion itself, as the biggest public works project in American history times two. And you get a sense from this map of the scale of what is underway. It's also important to say, given the longer history that I mentioned, that we have in our civic DNA, a significant transit system that existed before we put that freeway network in. And so this is a map of the streetcar network that existed and really peaked in the 1920s and could take you from Riverside all the way to Venice and from the San Fernando Valley and Mount Lowe all the way down to Long Beach and had a number of neighborhood stops. It was a private network. It's important to say it was paid for by Pacific Electric, by train tycoons like Henry Huntington. And it was often done-- it was often intimately connected with real estate speculation, which is to say, many of these streetcar car lines were extended into empty space where a new subdivision was about to be built in hopes of attracting buyers and connecting that subdivision to the rest of the city. So Diane mentioned very briefly a project of mine called Third Los Angeles, which is to suggest that this new LA that we're moving into is best understood as actually the third major phase of civic development in Los Angeles. And that this era of Los Angeles, before the war, when we had this remarkable transit network, is the first LA. And second LA is that post-war Los Angeles, that postwar city that created all of those tropes and stereotypes that are familiar around the world about swimming pools and movie stars. So, but it's important to say, and I think important as we plan this new transit future that, as I mentioned, the civic DNA of the city is a Los Angeles before the freeway, before the dominance of the car, and to a certain extent, before the single family house as well. This is one of those street cars which began to be torn out before World War II. Los Angeles, like most cities, bet very heavily that the car was the future. The kind of conspiracy theory about the car companies and the tire companies being responsible is not quite accurate. I think it's fair to say that Los Angeles saw the car on the freeway as the future like so many other places did and began tearing out these tracks. But in terms of the expansion that I mentioned, it's important to say that the Expo line and other train lines, Expo connects downtown Los Angeles to the beach in Santa Monica, a lot of these new train lines actually follow the old rights of way that the street cars followed. And so there is what Reyner Banham called the "transportation palimpset" of the city, which is to say the freeways were written on the lines of the old streetcars, which were themselves sometimes written on the lines of the old boundaries of the ranchos, which were subdivided, the Great Basin of Los Angeles. That palimpsest is getting another series of lines on it, traced by new transit lines like the Expo Line across the city. And so in some ways from a political point of view, this expansion has been made easier by the fact that we do have in our DNA that earlier city before what Reyner Banham called autopia sort of descended on. Los Angeles And so that earlier city, this first Los Angeles, also had a really vital street life. And the number of photographs that you can find suggesting what we would now think of as a multimodal street experience is practically endless. These are all pictures from Los Angeles Public Library collection. This is the corner of 8th and Broadway, probably late '20s. This image is probably in 1928 or 1929. This is the Tower Theater, which is now being converted by Foster and Partners into an Apple store as the changes in downtown accelerate. But there are a number of images like this from downtown that suggest just how vital the street life was and how significant the pedestrian culture was in, predominantly downtown, but really many parts of Los Angeles. This is one of my favorite images from that period, suggesting again this sort of negotiation among street cars, private cars, pedestrians. You'll often see a lot of cyclists in these images. We also built the beginnings of a bicycle superhighway from Pasadena that was meant to be an elevated bikeway leading all the way to downtown. Sadly, it was never completed. But there was a really active bike culture in this moment as well. And I mentioned that there is a city before the single family house. There were, in this first Los Angeles, remarkable experiments in multifamily architecture. This is Irving Gill's Horatio West Court from 1919. A six-unit project in the Ocean Park neighborhood of Santa Monica, very close to the beach. And it suggests that there is a model even now as we think about densification and moving past the single family house, there is a model in our own history. This is a remarkably progressive project in all sorts of ways architecturally, but also in terms of site planning. It's six units. Four larger units in the front, two smaller units in the back here, sorry, and then it's arranged around a central drive with parking bays for smaller cars than we have now in the back. Really remarkable project and suggests again that there was a Los Angeles before the single family house of those Hockney paintings. And lots of other prominent modernist architects and other architects were working in the same vein in this first Los Angeles, Richard Neutra and Schindler and the anonymous architects of bungalow courts and other kinds of projects that suggested an earlier, multi-family history. So in the time that I have left, I want to talk about a few of the projects that I'm working on given that sort of reading of Los Angeles, which I think has really informed the way that I've approached the new job. And while I've talked about maybe a half dozen places where I'm focusing some of my efforts, some of these are projects that I'm initiating, like this one from my office. Others are projects where I'm collaborating with a range of folks in the mayor's office and in departments across the city. So the kind of direct influence I have on a project really varies from case to case. This is one that is coming as an initiative from my office and in collaboration with the chief sustainability officer and a group in LA called the LA Cleantech Incubator, which is the first design competition that I'll be working on, which is to imagine the gas station of the future. Or perhaps it's better to say imagining Los Angeles after the gas station as efforts at electrification continue and accelerate. And the gas station importantly was often a very significant locus for experimentation and a way to suggest the forward looking optimism of Los Angeles going back all the way to the '20s. This is a project from 1965 by Gin Wong, a Chinese-American architect who worked in William's Pereira's office. A gas station for Union 76 that was planned for LAX and actually was built ultimately in Beverly Hills. And so with the CSO's office and with LA Cleantech Incubator, I'm working on a design competition which will imagine first, what the charging station of the future looks like, the extent to which it has a public space, retail, sort of communal component, the extent to which it will be a place where many different kinds of vehicles are charged. And thinking about that also is what will ultimately be an ephemeral building type, because ultimately when full autonomy arrives, we won't need a charging station that is communal in that sense. Your car will drive itself, without any input from you in the middle of the night to charge itself somewhere remotely. But in the interim, in the limbo, as we sort of negotiate this transition between cars with drivers and autonomous vehicles, we have to think about what that charging station looks like and the ways that it will serve the public and the kind of urban design implications. And the second part is imagining what the sites of gas stations like this one ultimately will become. Many sites of gas stations in Los Angeles occupy really important corner locations. Many of them are in economically, environmentally challenged neighborhoods. There are intersections in Los Angeles where three of the four corners are occupied by gas stations and the fourth by a fast food restaurant with a drive-through. We're thinking about asking designers to help us imagine, in collaboration and conversation with the owners of those sites, what happens from an urban planning point of view and urban design point of view at those really important, crucial corner sites as gas goes away-- of course environmental remediation will be necessary-- but given the importance, given how much this realm is shifting and the technology is changing and given the importance of the gas station as a sort of building type in Los Angeles. That will be one initiative that I'm working on fairly soon. We're calling it from Pumps to Plug. And it's part of a larger set of initiatives that I'm interested in, which is to think about the larger urban design implications of various forms of new mobility including of course, the scooters, which I understand were briefly in Cambridge, right? Before being banished. It's a similar story playing out in cities across the country with regulations hastily being put in place. But as we think about scooters, e-bikes, the approach of autonomy. It's, I think, really crucial for us to try to get ahead of that conversation a little more than cities did, let's say, with the arrival of Uber and Lyft and carshare and try to think about what the design of streets will look like in this new world of mobility. In the LA context, it has been politically challenging in some parts of the city to build bike lanes. And there's an interesting set of questions now, I think to be considered, about the extent to which scooter riders are complementary or allies of bike advocates or whether they're at odds about the shape of the design of the street. And I think all of those questions are playing out. So another interest of mine is shade. As I mentioned, I showed this image at the top. Shade as an equity issue more than anything in an era of climate change, which is to say that our transit users tend, many of them, not to be able to afford cars. And so as we get more intense heat across the region, they will not be able to duck into an Uber or go into their private car as we have more intense days of heat. And as we reinvest in and re-animate the public sphere and rethink our transit network, we're also, I think, leaving our most vulnerable citizens vulnerable to this sort of climate change in a way that we're only beginning to grapple with. Here's another image of the same sort of landscape that greets transit users. You often see this kind of condition, people waiting for the bus in the very narrow shade that is cast by a bus stop pole. And this is just to give you an indication of the way that that intensity will change. So if you look at Pasadena, for example, the shift from 24 days of this-- this is days of 95 degrees or more, by the end of this century, so you'll see those days quadrupling in a city like Pasadena. If you have 100 days of that sort of intense heat, that means many of those days are happening not in the summertime. And that means that the kind of traditional mechanisms or strategies we've used to provide shade, which is to say anticipating the hottest time of day is when the sun is at its apex in the summer, don't really apply. So there are a lot of people, as you saw in these images, waiting for buses late in the day in October when it's still 95 degrees at 5:30. And so we need a whole range of new strategies, I think, to consider these issues, which include the tree canopy, of course, but also include a kind of more architectural strategies or raising the question of what we ask of developers in terms of how they treat the right of way. So I will say that this is a question in terms of particular strategy that raises some interesting questions for somebody in my position. Which is to say, I'm really looking at if we agree that that shade is this kind of equity issue in an era of climate change, what is the best way to achieve that goal? How do you precisely fold that sort of a goal into a policy framework? So the other element of this moment in Los Angeles that is compelling for me is that we're also not only getting ready to make decisions about how to spend all of this investment for transit and elsewhere, but we're also redoing, rethinking many of our basic policy and planning frameworks across the city. So we're remaking our zoning code for the first comprehensive, in the first comprehensive way since the 1940s. We're writing new community plans across the city for 35 different sections of the city. And so the question of where to fold an emphasis on shade, for example, into those new policy frameworks is something that I've been spending a good amount of time thinking about. And in fact, the sidewalk is a really interesting territory, because there are all kinds of rules. Here's another gas station at a corner, right? There are all kinds of rules that lead up to the sidewalk in the terms of the building envelope, or in this case, the gas station. There are all kinds of rules that govern what happens in the street, right? But the sidewalk continues to be a bit of a free for all from a policy point of view. A lot of it falls through the cracks. But this is an area of really intense focus in terms of new technology, mobility, the importance of the curb in an era of carshare, for example. And so what happens in the sidewalk becomes more and more important. And it also reversing a kind of architectural strategy that had been really dominant in Los Angeles for a long time. During the heyday of autopia as Banham called it, we pioneered a kind of architectural strategy where the facade, the rear facade of a building facing the parking lot, was often as grand or grander than the one facing the street. But for a whole bunch of reasons connected to transit, carshare, new forms of mobility, a lot of the entry to buildings now happens back again through the front door. And so the whole choreography of arrival from the curb or the bus stop across the sidewalk, through the front steps of the building, is regaining a significant importance. So that sort of choreography as it connects to issues like shade is of significant interest to me, as is the fate of a lot of buildings produced by this group. I'm wondering if there's anybody who can name everybody. I wonder if Mark Lee can name everybody in this photograph. Fred Fisher, Robert Mangurian, don't know the dog's name, Eric Owen Moss with a fabulous Uncle Sam tie. Coy Howard, Craig Hodgetts, I think in some ways probably maybe the most interesting and under appreciated of this group. Thom Mayne of course, and mustachioed era Frank Gehry. This is taken on the beach in Venice in 1980. So in Los Angeles, we have a remarkably comprehensive guide to cultural and historic architectural resources called Survey LA which was compiled by a colleague of mine in the planning department named Ken Bernstein who runs the Office of Historic Resources, as well as helping to lead the urban design studio and the planning department, which I'm collaborating with quite a bit. And that is a database of architectural and cultural resources that is now available to the public, funded in part by the Getty. But it stops in the year 1980. And because of the really rich collection of buildings that we have between 1980 and 2000, I'm really interested in figuring out a way to extend that catalog and with it some conversation about protections for the really important LA school work that was produced in Southern California in the '80s and '90s and extend that survey to 2000. And it's important in part because that work, much of it was really difficult to begin with. It was work that challenged conventional notions of beauty or bourgeois taste. At the left is the Kentucky Fried Chicken on Western Avenue by Elyse Grinstein and Jeffrey Daniels. On the right, residential addition by Morphesis, Thom Mayne and Michael Rotondi from 1982, which the New York Times in that year called "charming, but disquieting". This project. And I think it's perhaps only in LA that that adjective, disquieting, would be used to describe architecture. It seems straight out of noir fiction, straight out of Joan Didion's description of the Santa Ana's. Charles Gwathmey was also quoted in that piece complaining, sniffing a little bit. He said, "What bothers me is that some of these houses are all about graphics," which is perhaps true. So I'm interested in figuring out how we can build in some protections and begin to have a conversation that promotes a broader understanding of what this work was about, what it meant at the moment before it begins to come up, it begins to face inevitable battles about its fate, and before some of the buildings faced demolition. And there are a range of ways that I'm hoping to do that. And that too is part of a larger effort to think about how we can be more strategic in our new projects in grappling with memory and history in a city that as Norman Klien's book, History of Forgetting suggested, has often, I think quite credibly, been accused of being an amnesiac city, not tending particularly well to its cultural heritage. The same sentiment might be seen in another Ruscha canvas. He did a series of these paintings in the early '80s suggesting that same tendency in Los Angeles. So one of the great privileges of my job is I have the ability to convene really fascinating groups of people. And I'm interested in doing essentially a kind of committee on memory and history, bringing together historians and architects and artists, to think about how, when we are confronted in new projects with sites that are deeply fraught for whatever reason, that we can avoid the tendency that we have tended, I think too often to fall into in Los Angeles, which is to pursue a kind of tabula rasa, clean slate solution and start from scratch and not grapple with the complexities of the history of those sites and the layers of those sites. And so, I want that conversation to begin in a really abstract way. But I also want to pick, at the beginning, two or three sites that we can really direct that conversation towards in terms of policy. So think about a couple of sites where we're building a memorial or a monument or remaking a park that has a complicated history, and think about using these conversations to inform what we do. It's already become clear to me in six months that we need a better, sort of more nuanced framework for thinking about that notion of memory in a city that has a deeper history than some of its critics have given it credit for. Another interest is the fate of the tall building in Los Angeles. This is me standing on a helipad in one of those KCET programs that Diane mentioned, perhaps yawning at a really boring quality of our skyline. Because of a fire department requirement, every tall building in Los Angeles beginning in the 19-- mid-1970s, was required to have a helipad because the LAPD, alone among urban fire departments, insisted on being able to reserve the right to fight fires not only from below but also from above and rescue office users of these buildings from the roof. And as far as I know, it never actually, they never actually executed any rescues like that. But because of that requirement, we have this remarkably flat skyline. And it's only to go back to this image, I was standing there talking about the building behind me, which is the new Wilshire Grand Hotel, which was able to get a waiver. We've since done away with that helipad requirement. And it does have a more interesting top. And here's the image from above. And I mentioned that kind of forms of new mobility. This is probably the moment to mention that there are a lot of start-ups, including Uber Elevate which is an arm of Uber and other so-called urban air mobility start-ups which are quite interested in Los Angeles as a testing ground for what essentially will be flying taxis, that is to say drones that are large enough to carry passengers. And the technology is probably ready, will be ready within a decade, if you believe the leaders of some of these start-ups. Of course, there's a whole host of regulatory issues involved in actually having these services begin to roll out. But one of the reasons that a lot of those start-ups are looking at downtown Los Angeles is precisely because of this collection of helipads. So if you're coming from LAX and you want to get in one of these new vehicles and come to downtown Los Angeles, these companies are already beginning to imagine that you might land at the top of the Bonaventure Hotel, for example. And that there's a collection of places for those vehicles to land already in place in Los Angeles. So we'll see how that plays out. The FAA, of course, has traditionally been in charge of what happens in the air, but as these drones are flying lower and as passenger drones become a real policy reality over the next decade or so, it will be fascinating to see how those issues play out both in terms of regulation, but also in terms of urban design. It turns out though that there is a really long and fascinating history in Los Angeles for the relationship between the helicopter and let's say, architectural experimentation. This is another one of the Case Study projects. This is Case Study #4, one of the early projects from 1945 by Ralph Rapson. And Esther McCoy who really invented architecture criticism in Los Angeles wrote of this house, "Rapson's rendering showed a helicopter hovering over the flat roof, as if the owner was coming home to the suburbs from his day at the office. His wife is waving to him. Where is she? Hanging out diapers in the drying yard." And then she wrote, as if to suggest, what this image anticipated, Rapson's money was on the wrong machine. Which is to say, he imagined that the helicopter might be something that became commonplace for personal transportation, but didn't at the same time anticipate the washer and dryer. So there is this fascinating sort of connection between the helicopter. And in fact, a long history of debates about tall buildings in Los Angeles and what place they hold. And so I show this image to talk about maybe what the future of that conversation will look like. There has long been a part of the conversation in LA politically about-- there's been a really lively debate going back more than 100 years about the role that skyscrapers ought to play and whether Los Angeles ought to be a city that had, that was known for tall buildings. A lot of people who moved to Los Angeles from places like New York and Chicago tended to argue that they had left those cities for a reason. And they found the horizontal nature of Los Angeles appealing. And therefore, it wasn't a city that should invest in skyscrapers. And there were several ballot measures, votes, about the height limit. And the voters decided the height limit on many occasions going back as early as 1905. And now we have a de facto limit written, I've learned since taking this new position, in the City Charter itself. So we had a 150 foot height limit in Los Angeles until 1956. When that height limit was repealed, as a way to assuage concerns about kind of rampant Manhattanization, a de facto height limit in the form of a 13 to one FAR cap was put into the City Charter. So when I went to a meeting early on for this project, which was done by the New York firm Handel Architects, for a site at 5th and Hill and the sort of edge of Bunker Hill, I did a very quick calculation. And sure enough, the FAR on this project is 12.99 something. So if we were to change that, if we wanted to have pockets of the city, for example, where we could have a kind of super tall buildings that are being built in cities around the world, in certain pockets, we would actually have to go back to the voters and pursue that kind of a change officially as charter reform, which I actually think would be a fascinating conversation to have. And I think it would be part of this longer history, as I said, of Los Angeles debating in really public ways, whether we were a city that should be vertical or not. It would be a continuation of interesting history. So the last couple of projects I'll mention have to do with the LA river. This is the image of what we might think of as the first LA river which was central to LA's identity. It was the source of LA's drinking water until 1913, until we built the aqueduct coming down from the Owens Valley. A story that in slightly modified form is familiar to most of you from Chinatown. And the city is where it is downtown is where it is because the city, the original pueblo was founded on the banks of the LA river. But it was also prone to really deadly flooding. And by the 1930s, it had produced a number of deadly floods, which led to the channelization of the river led by the Army Corps of Engineers. And essentially all 51 miles of the river as it runs from San Fernando Valley to Long Beach were wrapped in concrete as a flood control measure. And a byproduct of that effort, this incredibly muscular infrastructural effort was essentially to make the river invisible as a public amenity. So what had been despite this tendency to flood, a sort of crucial part of a lot of communities near the river had, by the postwar period, been fenced off and turned into private space, which became famous for car chases and other films. This is John Boorman's film Point Blank with Lee Marvin. And that became the setting for, as you saw in the previous image, graffiti or car chases or finales of movies. Or this is a so-called party crew from Boyle Heights. This on the east side of the river from the early 1990s. And it been cut off as a public space. And that's beginning to change. There are a number of efforts to rethink the role that the river might play in Los Angeles. That's the project that I've been working on. So the city bought last year, a 42 acre parcel, part of the old Taylor yards. This is a so-called G2 parcel. And we are in the process-- it will require significant remediation itself because it was an old rail yard. But we are in the early stages of imagining how this site might be opened up to public access. As I mentioned, the river is 51 miles long in total. And this is almost exactly at the halfway point. This is across the river from Frogtown, essentially. This is San Fernando road. Those of you who know LA, sort of in the base of Mount Washington, more or less. But let me go back and point out another part of this image, which is the 5 freeway here. And the way that the river, in the so-called second Los Angeles, both the river and the freeway operated in very similar ways. Which is to say they were mono-cultures. They were designed to do one thing and one thing only. In the case of the freeway to carry car and truck traffic. In the case of the river, to carry storm water out to sea. That's the only program essentially that the river had in its channelized form. It was cut off, as I said, as a public amenity. And it was designed entirely as a flood control channel from the point of view of the Army Corps. And so what we are engaged in at the moment is an effort to rethink both of these mono-cultures for this emerging third Los Angeles, which is part of a real focus of my work at the LA Times. I engaged Michael Maltzan's firm. He worked on this project with Arup to re-imagine a section of the 134 freeways as it crosses the Arroyo Seco, which is to really break through that monoculture notion and think about a freeway that could actually enable many things or do many things at once. In this case, to produce electricity, to collect stormwater. And actually in this case, this is in the city of Pasadena, to feed that electricity, the revenue produced by it, back into the local school districts. Because Pasadena is a city that controls its own school district and its own Department of Water and Power. So Michael, in a very thoughtful way with Arup considered, the extent to which the freeway could be a machine for producing revenue that instead of cutting off neighborhoods from one another, could be redirected into those neighborhoods. And also executes some sound mitigation, because sound carries all through the Arroyo from this stretch of the freeway. And similarly, Chris Reed is here, did a project with us for re-imagining the 2, the end of the 2 freeway, which I argued ought to be closed to traffic as it runs from the 5 into Echo Park and Silver Lake. Again, thinking about a version of our freeway that could be reimagined to enable all kinds of productive outcomes, rather than just pollution and sort of cutting one part of the city off from another. Which again recalls-- this is a famous mural by the LA Fine Arts Squad from 1972, which suggests the connection between, even by the 1970s and the beginning of the environmental movement, between the freeway and this idea of environmental ruin. This is what the G2 looks like now. So we're really thinking about how, while we pursue environmental remediation in a certain part of it, just been interviewing a list of architects who might help us with so-called early activation which is to say, to get the public on a certain part of the parcel and to the river's edge on a quicker timetable even as we do the longer, more complicated work of remediation over many years. So last couple of things. One of the main challenge in Los Angeles is housing, housing affordability, the homelessness crisis that we face. And the City Council, in collaboration with the Mayor's office, has agreed to build 15, at least 15 emergency shelters. One in each of the city council districts. But as you can imagine these are very politically fraught projects. This is one of the projects that I've been paying the closest attention to for a site in Venice. And the architects on the project are Gonzalez Goodale. And it's a former-- it's a Metro bus yard that will be turned into housing for about 150, about 150 beds. And this is a project in Mike Bonin, Council Member Bonin's office. Which I have learned, these are projects that have to thread a really remarkable number of needles. They have to be done on a very quick budget, on a very tight frame, and they have to be both efficient enough to please those voters who want them to look like nothing more like barracks, but also be humane enough to convince people to come off the street and be workable for them in terms of their needs. So those projects are continuing to roll out. And as Diane mentioned, my role often is to sort of act as a go between and vet some of the ideas from architects in town and think about which ones are feasible for this project, given the really remarkable set of constraints that they face. So you heard about the Olympics. We did have an Olympics in this first LA. We had a 1932 Olympics. We had an Olympics in 1984 that was really remarkable in its design strategy, mostly led by Jon Jerde's office and Deborah Sussman, which really was an expression. Even in the color palette alone was an expression of LA's role as I would say, emerging sense of itself as a Pacific Rim city. So a color palette that really borrowed from Latin America and Asia. And here's Deborah Sussman at an exhibition of her work that Barbara Bestor and others organized in Los Angeles. She was really a pioneer of super graphics and a lot of environmental graphics work that was truly remarkable. And her Olympics design strategy was most impressive for really representing the sensibility and the optimism of Los Angeles at that moment in 1984. So now we have an opportunity to think about what a design strategy for 2028 might look like. And in closing, this is the-- I started with a street level view to emphasize my interest in the street and the sidewalk. This is a slightly more elevated view. This is the view from my office, actually. And I work on the 13th floor of City Hall. Looking out over Bunker Hill, which is the part of downtown that's very much in flux. And this view really does suggest where Los Angeles finds itself, I think, in terms of its effort to re-animate its public sphere and also what it's had to recover from in that effort. So like many cities, LA embraced urban rule quite dramatically and nowhere more dramatically than on Bunker Hill where a collection of Victorian houses and rooming houses and apartment buildings were replaced in a really aggressive sort of gouging of the Earth with these super blocks which even now-- there is City Hall Tower. So my office is right up here somewhere. Replaced with the city, with these mega blocks that the city is even now still filling in. I showed you that tower by Handel Architects is one of the last pieces of that hill to fill in. So even this little square of the city, if you know how to read it right, suggests the layers of history, reinvention, expulsion, et cetera, that have remade this small patch of Los Angeles over the last three quarters of a century and of the work that remains to be done. I showed you an image from CicLAvia was right along this stretch of Grand Avenue. So the new federal courthouse, the Board by Diller Scorfidio and Renfro, Walt Disney Concert Hall. One of the great public buildings the Los Angeles, the Department of Water and Power by AC Martin. A new park, Grand Park, that was opened about five years ago. And then this little corner will be a city park by OMA and Mia Lehrer, an LA-based landscape architect. Sort of finally filling in these last pieces. And this is an urban renewal process that started as early as the 1940s. And even now, we're just beginning to fill in the last little pieces. So with that, I will thank you for your attention and really encourage all of you to be in touch. Thank you. [applause] And I'm happy to take some questions. Yes, we do have time. I think we have at least 15 minutes for questions. OK. Anyone want to get started? John? Thank you, Christopher. My question is about the rapidly shifting economics around design firms in Los Angeles. I mean, it's really in North America in general, maybe globally really, which is to say that one of the features of neoliberalism is clearly one in which something like a vertically disintegrated company like Amazon or Walmart can actually, amazingly, through technology extend its global reach, in ways that the late 19th century vertically integrated company could never have dreamed. Right? And I think in the same way that we don't really have community banks anymore, we are increasingly-- I mean, as someone who runs a young practice in Los Angeles, we find ourselves increasingly up against global giants for certain kinds of design projects. And we are always astonished that a AE Kahn or Gensler even wants a piece of any of this. What, of course, we are also aware of is that they are rapidly buying up medium-sized firms. And so I guess I'm wondering, in all of the projects that you have and things you're seeing and come across your desk and whether that's a piece of the conversation, because it seems to me, ironically, having been in LA more than a decade now, the city is booming like never before. And yet we increasingly don't even look to Los Angeles as a place where we're going to find certain kinds of projects that might move us from a small firm to a medium firm. Right. It's a really important question. And it's actually something Mark Lee and I were talking about just last night. And it really gets back to the question of procurement. So when I talk to colleagues who have-- as Diane mentioned, there's no specific equivalent in another American city, but there are people doing similar work. Justin Moore in the New York of the Public Design Commission. There are others around the country who I went to for some advice before I started this job. And I would say to a person, they all said the place where you can have the most impact, but will face the toughest challenges is around the issue of procurement. So they all said, make friends with some procurement lawyers. Figure out how that works. Figure out how the different departments make those decisions. And then, it's absolutely crucial to making sure that we can have a different, I would say, ecosystem of firms first of all, being competitive for public work and also in turn, given how much we're investing in this city, also then supporting that ecosystem of small and mid-sized firms. You know, I showed that image of all those architects on the beach in 1980. First of all, obviously all white male architects, but also at a moment where maybe the last kind of moment where there was the kind of free wheeling design culture and the ability to find young clients and sites to do experimental work. LA sort of still has that reputation sometimes and outside of LA, but it hasn't been that way since the mid '80s probably or certainly not since 1990. So this is a real challenge and a focus of mine in terms of how we can change that equation. So part of the way that I've thought about it is conceptualizing, thinking about the city as a client and how we can define that in very specific ways. It also means looking for ways when some of the projects I showed are underway and the RFP, and you know, RFQ, is already out the door, there are a number of projects where I'll still you know hopefully have a chance to be working on the RFP and think about specific language that can be both elevating design as a requirement, given the extent to which some of those are really quantified projects that have rankings. I went to meeting my second week where there was a big public project and they had all the categories ranked. And architecture was literally at the bottom of that list. So part of it is thinking about that process, but part of it is also thinking about ways to work within the existing world. So I showed you the G2 piece along the river. And I'll go back to that for a second. One way that we've engaged with some architects about our conversation here is that there's already contracts with landscape architects and a big engineering firm. And so we can bring some architects probably on this early activation as subs. And so the list of architects we could go to, of course, gets much broader right away. But I think we also have to rethink what the on-call list looks like. You know, there are various departments that have on-call lists. Bureau of Engineering has one that could be probably broader. And that's only for public projects. So that's to say nothing of the private projects and how we encourage that. So I think the way that I've been thinking about framing it is that-- I showed you some of the private houses of the post-war city. You know, to try to think about the innovation experimentation that marked that work and try to figure out, although it's very difficult, how to drag some of that spirit into the public work. Because we really are investing in projects that touch on the public realm to a really unprecedented degree. And that's easier said than done. Clearly convincing a big agency like Metro which is a county agency or our Bureau of Engineering to think about design is really central to the mission of what they're doing is a change. There are some allies. There's a woman, Deborah Weintraub who works in Bureau of Engineering who has really made promoting good design a priority. So it's partially about finding allies in those departments. But I think it's really around the specifics of the procurement process and what that looks like. So we're doing a replacement for the Parker Center just east of City Hall. And that will be a kind of an experiment in a public-private partnership in a city building, but the city will control the process. So as we write the RFQ for the consultant teams, I think, I hope there'll be an opportunity to focus on some of these things. Good question though. Thank you so much for your talk. So I have a question about to go back to housing. And so Proposition 10 is on the ballot in the state of California to repeal Costa-Hawkins, which will allow cities to implement rent control. But Los Angeles has rent control to buildings built before 1978. Right. So which is roughly the age that building since start to become historic. And so my question is about the relationship between affordability, historic preservation, and this push for experimentation in development, in new design, in housing construction. And so I just wanted to hear more about that and how you think-- how you make sense of that relationship between those competing interests? Right. So Prop 10, which will be on the ballot in the fall, will repeal Costa-Hawkins which did not allow cities to apply rent control to new projects essentially. And so it will allow all of the new volume of construction, residential construction, to be subject to rent control if cities decide to do that. And there's a kind of split within the housing advocacy groups about what the precise impacts of that will be. The mayor has come out in support of it. I think what's clear is that we need to be thinking about housing, the housing question and both sides, ends of the spectrum, which is to say we have to produce more, but we also have to be thinking much more strategically about tenant protections and rent control and other ways of keeping people in place. And you're right to raise the question of historic preservation, which sometimes has been a rather disingenuous way for neighborhoods to fight new housing production. And so to the extent that I'm interested in preservation for more recent buildings, that will have to done be done in a very limited strategic way, that doesn't take huge numbers of existing housing units off the market as it were or freeze those neighborhoods in amber. The politics of housing are extraordinarily complicated in Los Angeles. The protection for single family neighborhoods in terms of political clout is still remarkably strong. And there's a lot of concern about what additional housing production will mean in those neighborhoods and others. I have found though, that despite a lot of talk about a huge gulf between sort of the NIMBY and YIMBY ends of that spectrum, most people that I talked to in LA fall into the middle between those polls, which is to say, they realize that we have underproduced housing and that's one of many reasons for the affordability crisis that we face. And they have some reasonable concerns about what that new production looks like in their neighborhoods. But the underproduction is really important to emphasize all the time. The most recent study suggests that in LA county, over the last three decades or so since the down zoning and slow growth movements of the 1980s, we passed something called Prop U in LA in the middle 1980s that down zoned significant sections of the city. We've underproduced in LA county something like a million housing units in terms of what we should have produced to match our population growth. So that's not the only reason for the affordability crisis but it's certainly one of them. In a city that had been known for headlong growth and production, we really put the brakes on that effort starting in the '80s. So I think we have to be thinking about new sites and strategies for producing new housing, affordable and market rate. And we have to be thinking more strategically about new protections for tenants and rent control strategies. And it will be interesting to see. So Prop 10 will be on the ballot Meanwhile, a state senator named Scott Wiener from San Francisco proposed a very aggressive pro housing bill last year called SB, Senate bill 827, which died in committee, which would have allowed significant new densities of new housing production along transit lines, which he defined early in the bill as close to transit, close to rail, and major bus lines. And it would have, in the earliest versions, allowed most of the LA basin to be up zoned in a really dramatic way up to 85 feet, although that was in single family neighborhoods, even that was later modified. He didn't really build a coalition with the, I think even he would admit, with the other side of the spectrum, which is to say the tenant protection and displacement groups that are working active and those questions, which are really crucial. He will be presenting-- he just announced this week a new version of that bill sometime next year. And I think it will bear the products of a lot of conversations he's had with folks on the other end of that spectrum. And so we'll see what the new version looks like. So, you know, my parents-- I grew up in Berkeley. They still live in the house that they bought in 1972. And you know, they're part of that generation which has been extraordinarily fortunate, not only because housing production really slowed down, if not stopped in many parts of the state after they bought their houses. They also had the benefit of Proposition 13. And a lot of other changes, regulations that have served collectively to really slow the production of new housing. So there is beginning to be a conversation about Prop 13 reform, or [inaudible] reform, what those things look like. And those are still politically fraught issues, but I think they need to be at the very least on the table. [inaudible] Go ahead. Can I go ahead? Sure. Go ahead and then we'll get that one next. OK. My question about building-- Oh, where are you? Oh, you're up there. Wait a minute. We've got one question here. Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry. You wrote about Pereira's LACMA being a lid on a boiling pot, I remember, sort of ultimately unsatisfying move for what artists and architects wanted in LA. Hence Ruscha's painting of it burning down. And that was a public building that was controlled by, I think a few private trustees and stakeholders. And I guess my question is, do you envision any sort of trouble between public and private interests in the implementation of those shaped projects? Or perhaps the contemporary art and architecture ideas being tapped by a sort of I don't know unwillingness to sort of move forward? Right. So the question was about LACMA and also about the ways in which these new initiatives might be tamped down. I mean, the politics of this are complicated. And I knew, when I took the job where most of the minefields were, but of course, it looks different once you get you know to see these, you get the perspective of being inside City Hall. I think the particular, this is something Diane and I were talking about. There's an interesting set of questions about where it makes more sense to fold something into your policy change, as I mentioned, or where it makes more sense to actually try to build a prototype of something that can be a model of a new way of using the city you're living in, the city. And so I think I'm trying to strike a balance between those two. But you know, Pereira is also the subject of another preservation question around my old employer's building, the LA Times, which was in a '30s building by Gordon Kaufmann with a '40s edition and then a '70s wing by William Pereira. The paper has moved west to El Segundo and leaving that building in a little bit of preservation limbo. There's an interesting set of questions about the Pereira addition to that project. So I think there is support and interest in some more experimental projects. I think the shade issue will be a really interesting test. I think the Olympics-- you know, Olympics has a really interesting legacy in LA. Unlike most Olympic cities, it is connected to public space and corridors and tree canopy to a certain extent rather than architectural icons like the Bird's Nest, for example, in Beijing. So in 1932, a lot of the palm trees in Los Angeles were planted for the '32 Olympics. They don't give a lot of shade, obviously, but they did give a kind of character to those corridors. Olympic Boulevard in Los Angeles is called that because it was 10th Street and the '32 Olympics was the 10th Olympiad. And so 10th Street was renamed Olympic Boulevard. The '84 Olympics was very, as I showed in that image, very much an economical, super pragmatic set of design solutions. Actually a kind of scaffolding that Jerde's office and Deborah Sussman put together. So there is beginning to be a conversation about what preparations for the Olympics might mean for the corridors and the public spaces of the city as opposed to the venues that other cities have had to think about building. We are in the privileged position of not having to build any major new venues for the Olympics. And so we can concentrate our attention on how people get to those venues or how they move through the city 10 years from now. And I think those conversations will include discussions about tree canopy, but also we're, you know, getting ready to renegotiate the street furniture contract, which may be another place to fold in a conversation about shade. And as I mentioned, there are a lot of things that we ask developers to do in the right of way still, many of which are not super positive in terms of remaking streets. And so I think we can revisit that conversation about what exactly we're asking private developers to do in the right of way and the extent to which they might be responsible for thinking about shading that territory in front of new projects. So I think it will require a number of different strategies. [inaudible] Thank you for coming to talk. My question is in regards to the scales of the projects that were mentioned throughout the presentation and just the consistency that they're all very large, but they kind of take on different roles in the city. The lateral tower, the vertical tower, the large plot of land next to the LA river, the transportation projects. This is kind of the residual to the scale of LA and the kind of pressures that exist in LA. Do you see that as something inherently local to LA, that there are pressures there that request a project of that scale? And then to kind of parse out what would be the driver behind thinking of those scales and are the drivers the same for these different projects? Right, right. I think its true about the images that I showed. But I think I used that opening image to suggest that I'm also quite interested in the hyper-local and small scale of the sidewalk and a number of small scale projects in terms of housing. I will mention one thing on the smaller scale too, before I get to the larger question. There have been some cities that have looked at fourplexes as a really interesting locus for experimentation in single family or low density residential neighborhoods, Minneapolis in particular. State of California has pushed, in a very productive way, cities to allow ADUs, so-called granny flats in single family neighborhoods. I'm really interested in whether it might be possible to do a design competition or a collaboration with an affordable housing developer to produce a couple of fourplexes with a young office or two to suggest the ways in which we need to go even further past, you know, the kind of modest density that is added with an ADU. And I think we have to be moving more aggressively. But also in ways that match sometimes the scale of existing neighborhoods, given the political complexities of changing density. And they are neighborhoods of Los Angeles. So if you ask even those single family homeowners who are most opposed to growth and housing production, to get back to the housing question, what they want to see in their neighborhoods, they will often mention things like walkability, support for local retail, the ability to age in place, the ability for younger buyers or renters to get a foothold in different neighborhoods across the city. And all of those things are actually promoted by a thoughtful fourplex for example, which could be four detached units or it could be four units in a single structure. And that is as an example of where I'm really interested in working at that smaller scale and seeing what's possible and actually seeing whether it's possible to execute something like that on a relatively quick time scale. In terms of a larger question and the pressures, yes, the pressures of the city and the way we have shaped the city have been done at the macro scale to a large extent because of the sheer scale of the basin and Los Angeles itself. And the challenge of transit, transit expansion, for example, is expanding across that giant territory. And there has been a tradition of, for all of LA's civic fragmentation, for all of its, let's say governance complexity, there have been, in moments of real crisis, the city has figured-- the region has figured out how to respond at a macro scale. So in terms of water, in terms of air quality in the post-war decades and now in terms of transit, there has been an ability for the region to come together on these larger issues. It really only tends to happen in moments of crisis. And so, we're facing another one obviously with climate change and what the response will be in terms of land use policy across the region, that's probably the next test of that thesis that we're actually able to throw off the fragmentation when a real crisis is facing us. We'll see because we have one right now. That's such a good answer. I don't want to extend this too long, but I just want to ask one final question, because I'm really struck-- I'm struck a lot by your origins in architectural historian. Because in a lot of the conversation and the project you share, the idea, that kind of vernacular architecture. The history, memory, meaning of the iconicity of, what does it mean to people is very much embedded in your appreciation for the history of architectural form and sites. Great photographs, historical archives. So I'm wondering if you could say just a few things about attention that, whether you have attention with the planners, because one thing, I'm very interested in history myself. But one thing I've always found in any planning department I've taught in, planner's are all about the future. They're not necessarily always thinking about the past. Here you are working side by side in a planning department that's focused towards the future, but you bring to bear a sensibility about the history and the past. So where I see a potential tension is exactly on the issue of densification. And how do move through a climate change future where mobility and transport and sprawl and the size of the city is beyond control. But if we are preserving the vernacular architecture, it's not high density. So how do you work-- I mean, that's only one example, but what strategies do you use and how do you start that conversation to think about the past, the history because that's part of the project of making it the city again. And the presentist problems that planners are constantly dealing with. It is absolutely fair to say that bringing together a bunch of historians and artists and scholars to think about memory is not a particularly tidy fit with the bureaucracy, the larger bureaucracy. But that's part of what makes a project like that compelling to me, is trying to make it fit or trying to put those two things next to each other and see what happens. Part of the interest is my own frustration with the histories that many of us didn't learn and we continue not to teach people in Los Angeles. So Union Station, for example, which is our most important pre-war monument sits on the side of Chinatown. So before even urban renewal, we did a version of that all across Los Angeles. We razed an entire Chinese immigrant neighborhood that was thriving to make way for this train station. And the way that we talked about the history of Chavez Ravine, for example. I think most people know that it was a thriving Mexican-American neighborhood that was cleared to make way for what's now Dodger Stadium. What people leave out is that it was actually cleared to make way for a housing, a very optimistic public housing project that was then killed by fears of housing as a kind of leading edge of socialism in the 1950s in Los Angeles, which in those days was a very political, very politically conservative city. So some of it is frustration with the stories that I didn't learn. And that I still don't think that we teach as effectively as we might. But in a larger sense, I think there's an opportunity. I think there is-- I'm very interested in carving out space for the speculative project. And I showed the highway projects that, when I was a critic I was interested in doing that sort of activist criticism, which is to say using that platform to make proposals for the future of the city, some of which are politically complicated, some much less so. But I think that has to be married with a conversation about the history of the city, given that the stereotypes and tropes of the second Los Angeles, as I've described it, this postwar city, can't be separated from efforts beginning as early as the teens and '20s, probably before that, by an emerging class of Anglo leads to whitewash what was a very complicated multi-ethnic, multi-racial history of a city that, of course, was Spanish and then Mexican before it was Native American, then it was Spanish, then it was Mexican, before it was Californian and then American. And so the whole-- when I begin with an image of a Case Study project, that for me it's informed by the notion that a lot of those myths or tropes of Los Angeles came out of an effort by the people around the LA Times, the mayors at that point, you know, people at these institutions where I've worked to really whitewash. And the term comes from a historian Bill Deverell who's a friend of mine has a great book called Whitewashed Adobe, from an effort to whitewash that very complicated past, to promote this city as a kind of Republican pro-business, you know, let's say anti-labor city in the post-war decades. And that was completely bound up with the kind of architectural production that was happening. And so, that story doesn't typically get told in all of its complexity. And it is difficult in the position I'm in to tell that kind of a story while I'm working within the framework that I'm working, but. I think the Mayor is interested in an attempt to do that and more. We'll see where it goes. Amazing. I think all planners should be knowing the history of where they're coming from, because there's lessons embedded in them, as you've clearly said so. Let's give Christopher and round of applause. Well, thank you. Thank you for having me. [applause]



# Name Years Notes Ref
1 Charles Byrne and Ferdinand  Abell 1883-1890 [1]
2 Charles Byrne, Ferdinand  Abell and George Chauncey 1891-1897 Merger of Brooklyn Bridegrooms and Brooklyn Ward's Wonders [1]
3 Charles Ebbets and Ferdinand Abell 1897-1898 Byrne dies, his shares & Chauncey's bought by Ebbets & Abell [1]
4 Charles Ebbets, Ferdinand Abell, Harry Von der Horst, Ned  Hanlon 1899-1904 Merger of Brooklyn Bridegrooms and Baltimore Orioles [1]
5 Charles Ebbets, Ferdinand Abell, Henry Medicus, Ned Hanlon 1905-1906 Ebbets & Medicus buy out Von der Horst [1]
6 Charles Ebbets and Henry Medicus 1907-1912 Ebbets & Medicus buy out Abell & Hanlon [1]
7 Charles Ebbets, Ed McKeever and Stephen McKeever 1912-1925 Ebbets & The McKeevers buy out Medicus [1]
8 Stephen McKeever, Grace Slade Ebbets, Joseph Gilleaudeau and Brooklyn Trust Company 1925-1938 Ebbets & Ed McKeever die [1]
9 James Mulvey & Dearie Mulvey, Grace Slade Ebbets, Joseph Gilleaudeau and Brooklyn Trust Company 1938-1944 Stephen McKeever dies, shares inherited by the Mulveys [1]
10 Branch Rickey, Walter O'Malley, James Lawrence Smith, and James Mulvey & Dearie Mulvey 1945-1950 Rickey, O'Malley & Smith buy out the Ebbets Estate [1]
11 Walter O'Malley, Mrs. Smith and James Mulvey & Dearie Mulvey 1950-1958 James Smith dies, leaving his shares to his wife; O'Malley buys out Rickey [1]
12 Walter O'Malley and James Mulvey & Dearie Mulvey 1958-1975 Dodgers move to Los Angeles, Mrs. Smith sells her shares to O'Malley & the Mulveys [1]
13 Walter O'Malley 1975-1979 O'Malley buys out the Mulveys [1]
14 Peter O'Malley and Terry Seidler 1979-1997 Walter O'Malley dies, shares inherited by Peter O'Malley & Terry Seidler [1]
15 Fox Entertainment Group 1998-1999 Fox purchases the team [1]
16 Fox Entertainment Group and Robert Daly 1999-2004 Daly buys minority share in team [1]
17 Frank McCourt 2004-2012 McCourt purchases Dodgers from Fox & Daly [1]
18 Guggenheim Baseball Management
(Mark Walter, Magic Johnson, Stan Kasten, Peter Guber, Bobby Patton and Todd Boehly)
2012-2018 Guggenheim Group purchases Dodgers after bankruptcy court proceedings [2]
19 Guggenheim Baseball Management
(Mark Walter, Magic Johnson, Stan Kasten, Peter Guber, Bobby Patton, Todd Boehly)
Billie Jean King & Ilana Kloss
2018–present King & Kloss buy a minority share of team [3]


# Name Seasons Notes Ref
1 Walter O'Malley 1970-1979 Walter O'Malley steps down as President and assumes newly created position of Chairman [1]
2 Peter O'Malley 1980-1998 Walter O'Malley dies, his son Peter succeeds him [1]
3 Robert Daly 1999-2004 Minority Owner Robert Daly becomes Chairman [1]
4 Frank McCourt 2004-2012 New Owner Frank McCourt becomes chairman [1]
5 Mark Walter 2012-present Controlling Partner of Guggenheim Baseball Management [1]


Dodgers president Stan Kasten
Dodgers president Stan Kasten
# Name Seasons Notes Ref
1 Charlie Byrne 1890-1897 [1]
2 Charles Ebbets 1898-1925 elected president upon Byrne's death [1]
3 Ed McKeever 1925 acting president upon Ebbets death [1]
4 Wilbert Robinson 1925-1930 elected president upon McKeever's death [1]
5 Frank York 1930-1932 [1]
6 Stephen McKeever 1932-1938 [1]
7 Larry MacPhail 1938-1942 [1]
8 Branch Rickey 1942-1950 succeeds MacPhail, who quit to join the army [1]
9 Walter O'Malley 1950-1970 [1]
10 Peter O'Malley 1970-1997 Walter O'Malley steps down to become Chairman, his son Peter succeeds him [1]
11 Bob Graziano 1998-2004 appointed President by Fox Entertainment Group [1]
12 Jamie McCourt 2004-2009 appointed President by her husband, Frank [1]
13 Dennis Mannion 2009-2010 [4]
14 Stan Kasten 2012-present The team had no official president from 2010-2012 [5]

General Managers

The Dodgers did not employ a General Manager until 1950. Before then, the team President had the duties commonly associated with the GM.[6]

Former GM Ned Colletti
Former GM Ned Colletti
# Name Seasons Notes Ref
1 Branch Rickey 1950 [7]
2 Buzzie Bavasi 1951-1968 Won 8 NL Pennants & 4 World Series [8]
3 Fresco Thompson 1968 Died shortly after taking job [9]
4 Al Campanis 1968-1987 Won 4 NL Pennants & 1 World Series [10]
5 Fred Claire 1987-1998 Won 1 NL Pennant & 1 World Series [11]
6 Tommy Lasorda 1998 Interim [12]
7 Kevin Malone 1999-2001 [13]
8 Dave Wallace 2001 Interim [14]
9 Dan Evans 2001-2004 [15]
10 Paul DePodesta 2004-2005 [16]
11 Ned Colletti 2005-2014 [17]
12 Farhan Zaidi 2014-2018 Won 2 NL Pennants [18]

Other front office personnel


Name Position Ref
Andrew Friedman President of Baseball Operations [20]
Bob Wolfe Executive Vice-President [20]
Sam Fernandez Executive VP & General Counsel [20]
Lon Rosen Executive VP & Chief Marketing Officer [20]
Tucker Kain CFO & Managing Director of Guggenheim Baseball Mgt [20]
Tommy Lasorda Special Advisor to the Chairman [20]
Josh Byrnes Senior Vice President, Baseball Operations [20]
Janet Marie Smith Senior VP, Planning and Development [20]
Antonio Morici Senior VP, Premium Sales & Service [20]
David Finley Vice President, Amateur and International Scouting [20]
Jeff Kingston Vice President, Assistant General Manager [21]
Ismael Cruz Vice President, International Scouting [20]
Galen Carr Director, Player Personnel [20]
Billy Gasparino Director, Amateur Scouting [20]
Doug Feating Director, Research & Development [20]
Eric Potterat Director, Specialized Performance Programs [20]
Ellen Harrigan Director, Baseball Administration [20]
Scott Akasaki Director, Team Travel [20]
Alex Slater Director, Baseball Development and Scouting [20]
Brandon Gomes Director, Player Development [20]
Gerry Hunsicker Special Advisor, Baseball Operations [20]
Pat Corrales Special Assistant to the GM [20]
Raúl Ibañez Special Assistant to the GM [20]
Joel Peralta Special Assistant, Baseball Operations [20]
Luis Marquez Scouting Supervisor, Latin America [20]
José Vizcaíno Special Assistant, Player Personnel [20]
Ralph Avila Senior Scouting Advisor, Dominican Republic [20]
Ron Porterfield Director, Player Health [20]


  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah "Dodgers Owners". Los Angeles Dodgers. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  2. ^ news services (May 2, 2012). "Sale of Dodgers finalized". Retrieved September 23, 2018.
  3. ^ Gurnick, Ken (September 21, 2018). "Addition of King, Kloss sends 'strong message'". Retrieved October 31, 2018.
  4. ^ Dennis Mannion bio on
  5. ^ Dennis Mannion bio on
  6. ^ Dodgers General Managers
  7. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Branch Rickey". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  8. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Buzzie Bavasi". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  9. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Fresco Thompson". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  10. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Al Campanis". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  11. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Fred Claire". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  12. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Tom Lasorda". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  13. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Kevin Malone". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  14. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Dave Wallace". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  15. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Dan Evans". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  16. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Paul DePodesta". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  17. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Ned Colletti". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  18. ^ "Baseball America Executive Database:Ned Colletti". Baseball America. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  19. ^ "Dodgers hire Farhan Zaidi as GM". Retrieved November 6, 2014.
  20. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa "Dodgers Front Office Directory". Los Angeles Dodgers. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
  21. ^ Gurnick, Ken (December 9, 2018). "Dodgers add Kingston as assistant GM". Retrieved December 10, 2018.
This page was last edited on 1 April 2019, at 01:48
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.