News

THE MARSHALLS PLAN

Theo DouglasWed. April 30
 

City officials weigh the look and future of a Bixby Knolls shopping center


THE PROPOSED BUILDING

Many people in Long Beach blame the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) for knocking down one stylish, historic building after another. But for a few minutes during an April 21 RDA board meeting, it seemed like the agency was in the historic preservation business—and, slightly later, like Eighth District Councilwoman Rae Gabelich was warming up the bulldozer.

That was a weird five minutes, literally, and by the time RDA board member John Thomas said, “There’s a new day in the RDA: to be more sensitive and look at reuses,” it was over, and he was talking about the Acres of Books sale—next on the agenda.

The RDA board first began to sound like the city’s Cultural Heritage Commission when it talked of replacing the former Roberts department store building in the 4400 block of Atlantic Avenue with a Marshalls franchise. Built when Glenn Ford was a movie star, and now owned by the Gaska family of Los Angeles, the empty Roberts has seen more cobwebs than a Halloween costume shop, which is what it’s been the last few Octobers. It anchors the retail center; its glass-walled ground floor and stuccoed upstairs recall a tanned girl with beautiful vacant eyes—and a large forehead.

The store is a monument to the giddy years after World War II, when our parents, or their parents, first had money again—and by some accounts, the Gaskas have been as resistant to redevelopment as the British were to certain German architects during the war.

The city and Gabelich have been eager to finish transforming a half-done shopping center—with a newish Starbucks and Orchard Supply Hardware, and an oldish ex-department store—from half-1950s/half-1990s to, well, all 1990s. But the RDA board didn’t like the look of the proposed shopping center.

“I think that we deserve better. I think the community deserves better,” said RDA board Vice Chairman William Baker. He wanted to ensure that the shopping center’s makeover with an Early Nothing kind of modern architecture (a little stucco here, some flagstone and decorative tiles there) includes all of it.

“All of the back property is what I would call a blighted property,” Baker said later of the massive shopping area behind Roberts, which extends eastward past California Avenue. “It needs to be revitalized and let people know these businesses are there.”

“I really, honestly, felt that the architect should have been here today,” RDA board Chairman Thomas Fields said at the meeting. Craig Beck, director of the city of Long Beach’s Department of Development Services, agreed.

“I think we share some of your concerns relative to architecture,” Beck said. “We’re very concerned about the look and feel of that shopping center, especially on Atlantic Avenue. That shopping center is on one of our major corrridors.”

Then the board voted unanimously to continue the design review process—and its architecture discussion—at a later date, its May 5 meeting. Gabelich said the delay could derail the whole project.

“My two predecessors were not successful in coming to an agreement on that property. I started working on this with the Gaskas three-and-a-half years ago when I first came on the council,” Gabelich said later in a telephone interview. “Everybody has come to the table and given a bit. When I heard what happened this morning, I was very upset. I will tell you, we are on a time crunch, and it is possible that we could lose the Marshalls. They said ‘Yes’ two-and-a-half years ago.”

We don’t want to lose Marshalls. Or do we not want to lose the Roberts?

“It’s an outstanding example of mid-century modern architecture,” said E. Thor Carlson, a Cultural Heritage Commissioner who visited the RDA meeting with warm words about the former department store building. “I think it’s unfortunate to tear down an architectural gem that we already have and replace it with this.”

Afterwards, Carlson made the ultimate leap in architectural styles, suggesting that Acres of Books, which sold its 1924 Streamline Moderne home to the city for $2.8 million that very morning, would perhaps be the ultimate tenant for the Roberts—if only the RDA would leave the store and its capacious basement standing.

(Said Fields: “The Roberts was pretty much a hazard,” using past-tense as if it was already gone.)

“I’ve never even considered Acres of Books for that site because we’ve had Marshalls signed for that site for two-and-a-half years,” Gabelich said. “But I am looking at another site that I think would be great [for them] and that’s the Expo furniture building. It’s not great architecture, but it is a great facility.”

Which is exactly what you could say about the Marshalls plan.

Tags: , , , ,

RELATED

Viewing 17 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    While we're at it, let's also mandate that Marshall's venerate Roberts nostalgia by carrying a full line of Boy Scout wear, Bass Weejuns, 8-Track Players and bell-bottoms, and using the streamline modern pneumatic tube system to process transactions instead of those tacky, nouveau scanners. Bixby Knolls has waited too long for some shopping and for something, anything, to enliven and replace that incredible hulk on Atlantic. Besides, we better act fast before the Commission reverts full time to its favorite pastime, ginning up new redevelopment schemes for downtown.
    • ^
    • v
    Mr. Combover, I am really torn on this one, especially as someone once forced to wear a pair of Bass Weejuns--without pennies! (Also, I'm a big fan of the pneumatic tube system, and whenever I visit Home Depot it reminds me of the old Press-Telegram building, which also had one.)
    Generally, I love almost all old buildings--but I do also see the point-of-view of those who'd like to see a real, live, functioning business there.
    It's a tough question: do we make our cities into museums or do we make them work for the people who live here, drive safe, and pay their taxes on time?
    (Also: thanks for using the word "ginning." That's a good one.)
    • ^
    • v
    Ultimately, what we are talking about is the loss of aesthetics and character for the city. If the council is set on building a new structure, why in God's name is it so hard to just mandate that it reflect the historical character (or just any small sliver of character) of Long Beach as opposed to the strip mall aesthetics of, say, Orange County. It would not seem too difficult to ask an architect to design a new building in the mid-century modern style, or in the streamline moderne style, or any other style that the city wants. But, please, take the opportunity and think outside the (big) box. As a community, shouldn't Long Beach stand out instead of trying (or is it buying) to look like everyone else. I would rather have a hundred simple deco or mid-century facades than a similar amount of pastel stucco slab-fronts or demented re-interpretive schlock like the Pike.
    • ^
    • v
    Keith,
    On a personal level, I agree with you: more midcentury modern--and more aesthetics and character--please!
    On the other hand, if my last name were Gaska, I probably wouldn't want an armchair architect telling me what to do on my land.
    • ^
    • v
    As a resident of the neighborhood south of the Gaska property I could care less about the mid-century architecture style of the Roberts, it is a blight and an empty blight and the Gaska folks have seem hell bent on preventing any updating of the center for seemingly decades. Roberts is an ugly box surrounded by other ugly boxes--that is aesthetic? Get rid of it, get a deal inked and start developing the center so that it can become useful for the residents and produce tax revenue for the city. Gaska is a horrible neighbor and we need to take advantage of them finally opening the door to redeveloping any part of the site. If they back down let's pull out the eminent domain ordinances.
    • ^
    • v
    I still think that a Laemmle Theater would be the perfect solution for the Roberts location, and it would certainly attract upscale patrons and new upscale businesses.
    • ^
    • v
    Where and what is the "Expo Furniture Building?"
    • ^
    • v
    Dave: It is one of the big ugly "mid-century" boxes on Atlantic south of San Antonio on the west side; if it were to be taken down and replaced I don't think anyone would mind. Unless of course it is replaced with anything that looks like anything you can find in Irvine or Mission Viejo then there might be opposition, evidently. I agree with the Doctor and the theater concept, I just do not know if the area would support "upscale" despite the affluence in the area with Los Cerritos and other neighborhoods south. Currently upscale and Uptown do not seem to mesh; but hey we got our Trader Joes!
    • ^
    • v
    I will say, it's nice to see we are raising hell, not allowing "just anything" in our fine neighborhood. Some architecture is absolutely worth keeping and we should fight to keep the dozers away. Neither the Gaska center nor Expo Furniture falls into this category. I would classify them as Potash Provincial (save the entry way tile to Roberts). However the Marshals proposal just feels like we are settling, both architecturally and business wise. The renderings are typical of Marshalls everywhere. And if it does open, it will become the Nordstrom’s of NLBch... ROCA Wear, FUBU, BabyPhat, Nike... and other special high end lines of apparel. It will not add to what many of us would like to see in da Knolls, nor will it bring other preferred retailers/restaurants. But hey, if that’s all we deserve, (according to our city leaders) well. “Uptown” was a destination place for all of LB. People who not only lived here enjoyed what it had to offer, but LB’rs from all over came (ie…destination). Until we give the rest of LB a reason to come “uptown” why should they. I think we all agree that a Marshalls is not the attraction that will cause Nancy and Bob and their shore friends to travel our way. I don’t even think they know how to get here. If they did decide to venture up, we would however have to inform them not to take the Atlantic exit off the 405N… it’s been closed for over 6 months now, due to some dirt that washed down on it last year. Maybe BK should stop spending our money in the shores and downtown, since they won't spend their or they city's money up here.
    • ^
    • v
    Amen RKJ, amen.
    • ^
    • v
    Just put something in there ASAP cuz I'm sick and tired of getting KFC while I shop for hip hop fashion while on by break from the comedy diving school just before I get an infection from getting my nails done eating orange chicken and getting held-up for 10th time at Wells Fargo. But we have our farmers market!!!
    • ^
    • v
    My name is Monique Johnson and I am the owner of Sweet Treasures and Sweet Treasures Home on Atlantic Ave. I am not in support of Marshalls or tearing down the roberts building. It is unfortunate that there is no clear vision of how the Bixby Knolls area should look and feel. We are being directed by politicians and not by the people who live here. I moved to this area 10 years ago and opened my business because of the character of the homes and Long Beach in general. Bixby was something special once where people from all over came and I think that it will be again but not if we don't demand it. We can be the shore, Pasadena, and Sant Monica and can be upscale but we have to look it and our leaders have to want it. I put a lot of time and effort into my businesses and I wish other shops would do the same. My landlord pushed me out of the building after I put a lot of effort designing and remodeling it to bring something to the area, yet there are so many other business that could care less. It is time to demand that the city council representative take our wants into consideration and do her job.
    • ^
    • v
    I have an Idea why don't we put in a bad theater, Wal-Mart then a Hooters, then a 7-11 and why not throw a sex shop in mix along with an over priced sports bar, put cameras on every corner. Get a bunch of blowhards who do nothing to meet once a month and call it the Up-town Business Association.

    We can call it Pine Ave II
    • ^
    • v
    FYI to khigginbotham after reading through this. On one hand you ask the city to build new developments that reflect the historical of Long Beach but then bag on what you call reinterpretive schlock. I would keep in mind that those two things are pretty much the same thing. Reflecting the historical style of the city usually means that you get get pasted on faux architecture, such as city place in downtown or the Aqua condos, perhaps our worst example of architecture for the city.

    good contemporary architecture should not mean that we'll look like Irvine. adaptive reuse projects celebrate our past so i love those where there is merit, but new designs take us forward and help to celebrate a future. just make sure the architect on the project isn't one of the usual suspects being hired from irvine that thinks rough stucco is really neato.
    • ^
    • v
    Why not pay Trader Joes to go away and open a new Vault350 in the Roberts store for starters. We shouldn't concern ourselves with the utter waste of raw materials as we tear down perfectly good buildings to create new "sets" on which to play out the absurdist melodramas that have become our civic lives.
    • ^
    • v
    I went to the Vons about 6:30 this morning to get milk, is there a trashier looking parking lot in Long Beach than this one? It's horrible, it pretty much looks like the gutters on Atlantic and LB Blvd north of Del Amo with the trash. Joseph, your "perfectly good buildings" like Roberts are archaic and would cost as much to retrofit to be of use as it would cost to build a new building. And why do we always have to "capture the history and charm?" Why not something new and dramatic, architecture that looks appealing, is unique and is functional? To me recreating any attempt at "historic" usually ends up cheesy and is a cop out for the architect. Show me something new, different and functional. Oh, and Vons and other tenants in that center, clean your damn parking lot every day.
    • ^
    • v
    The fact that whatever is built to replace the building will be "archaic" in thirty or forty years and have to be demolished is what puzzles me. How is it that some buildings service populations for centuries while matters of taste and style dictate the squandering of resources elsewhere in a couple of decades? Why build a downtown mall and tear it down just a few years later? Maybe developers should be forced to post bonds insuring they don't build crap or maybe the citizenry should be forced to make do with what their elected, corrupt leaders institute and allow. There are millions around the world who have no basic housing at all while here we destroy what doesn't draw traffic away from what is destined to become the next blighted area. Whatever.

blog comments powered by Disqus