Saturday, August 18, 2007

A Comment and a Few More Things

Today I received a comment that I will post on this post. It was written at 1:58 PM on Saturday August 18, 2007 and here it is:

"Anonymous said...
I am very excited about the project. I am interested in buying one of the houses.I think is great.
1:58 PM"

I don't know if the author has been asleep for six months because it was written for "Odds and Ends #2 which was published on March 2, 2007. Perhaps the author may be stuck in a time warp because they write that they want to buy "one of the houses". I think it would be fair to not to this author that there will be zero houses at Ponte Vista if Bob gets his way.

I do hope the author really wants to buy a "house" at Ponte Vista, one of 429 beautiful homes that can be built there.

Sales tax revenue generation really comes into play when there are expensive things to buy, or there are speciality stores that provide goods that other stores don't sell.

Let's look at some of the goods and stores that are NOT within the limits of the City of Los Angeles, but are within the five-mile radius of Ponte Vista. These stores will be shopped in by Ponte Vista residents, but the sales tax revenues that will be generated will NOT go to the City of L.A.:

Costco, Sam's Club, two out of three Target stores, all the fine furniture businesses in Torrance, every single movie theater except the Warner Grand, Smart and Final, most fine clothiers, and many used car dealerships.

What Ponte Vista and other San Pedro residents need is a mall within the City of Los Angeles and within the five-mile radius of Ponte Vista to generate real revenues that will be needed. Residents of R.P.V. and other communities would buy goods in a new mall and create even more revenue for L.A.

I think we all should consider that downtown San Pedro and the Pacific Avenue Redevelopment Corridor really need to find many, many businesses to come to San Pedro and let it become a wonderful shopping area.

I shop in San Pedro and I think we all should support the businesses there, even though the C. of C. have their heads placed placed in the sand when it comes to Ponte Vista.

A large Ponte Vista will drain other local areas of funds they need for their infrastructure. We have seen that San Pedro seems to be in last place when it comes to L.A. City spending. A giant development down here would mean even more economic troubles for this area, I feel.


Anonymous said...

Good point about the shopping mark, however, you cant use this as a reason against ponte vista because everyone in san pedro has to leave to go to certain stores, ponte vista residents will still go to the albertson's on western, will still go to the regal cinemas, etc. San Pedro may be a drain on the city of los angeles, but ponte vista isn't a drain on san pedro.

M Richards said...

Thanks anonymous 4:44 PM,

Ponte Vista might not be a drain on San Pedro, but adding many residents to the population of San Pedro from any and all developments puts a drain on the rest of the City of L.A. because there are not enough revenue generation sites in L.A. and within the five-mile radius of any new development in San Pedro.

Seaport Luxury Homes, Highland Park, Vue, Centre Street Lofts, Bank Lofts, LaSalle Condominiums, and whatever finally goes in across Palo Verde Street from Vue will all contribute residents that require goods and services from the City of Los Angeles.

If there are fewer new residents of San Pedro, then there would be fewer additional requirements for goods and services, it would stand to reason.

As it stands today, there will be residential units built at Ponte Vista. How many units are going to be built is not known by anyone, at this time.

What should be done about adding all these new residents, but not having the revenue generation streams the City of L.A. needs for these new residents?

It would seem to be that better urban planning would seek to put the larger developments closer to the best mass transit and best sources of revenue generation.

Unfortunately, San Pedro currently has neither.