WHAT DO ALL THESE THINGS HAVE IN COMMON?

glue3425397326_acd7e07c4b

THE SUBSIDIZED PARKER BLD.
THE SUBSIDIZED PARKER BLD.
The Parker Bld. and Gumby
The Parker Bld. and Gumby
1 million dollar subsidized Allen Hotel project
1 million dollar subsidized Allen Hotel project
1.5 million dollar subsidy
The Pansy Laws 1.5 million dollar subsidy
tiger3424586881_c43a925d2a
Lions and Tigers and Stucco oh my!

fake3392135869_b2ae8a3275

plastic3425394836_12336aaca2

fake-2nd-floor-roof3424584931_f4a27dc5de
styrofoam light fixture in redevelopment park
styrofoam light fixture in redevelopment park
Formerly a public sidewalk
Formerly a public sidewalk
Formerly Hierlooms of tomorrowland
Formerly Hierlooms of tomorrowland

32 Replies to “WHAT DO ALL THESE THINGS HAVE IN COMMON?”

  1. How long before the redevelopment agency has to RE-REDEVELOP it’s own crumbling creations?

  2. 1. They will have a very short pre-blight lifespan

    2. They were all overseen by Heritage group boardmember Terry Galpin

    3. They were all approved by the Redevelopment Design Review Committee

    4. They are all cheap, architectual crap

    5. etc., etc.

    But you missed one of the worst offenders. The so-called “Parker Building” that was remuddled beyond redemption by a Redevelopment rehabilitation loan.

  3. admin, how about Florentines beautiful patio, wasn’t that a government subsidy, and Heirlooms of tomorrow?

  4. Jack, you’re right! And what about the garbage stuck on the old Allen Hotel – that was subsidized. Come to think of it so was that God-awful apartment building on Chapman as well as the remuddle of just about every facade on Harbor between Commonwealth and Chapman.

    And let’s not forget that ridiculous Knowlwood’s barn – what a sad, subsidized joke that was, courtesy of Bankhead, McClanahan and Catlin (all mercifully recalled later).

    I would like to see an FFFF contest for the worst Redevelopment building in Fullerton.

    And these bozos want MORE Redevelopment.

    People: Redevelopment = blight!

  5. Damn, this is fun. Only problem is there is so much material it’s hard to know where to start. Maybe it’s better to ask: has the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency ever been responsible for a single thing that wasn’t pure crap?

    Even one? That might be the better FFFF contest.

    Seriously, how come nobody ever put this together before? And how did the people responsible for this avoid being fired for sheer incompetence? Instead our electeds have actually gotten away with TAKING CREDIT for this garbage. That’s got to change.

  6. Dear Friends, if any of you have images of subsidized Fullerton Redevelopment bozo buildings that you would like to share, please email them to: [email protected]

    WTF, I like your idea of a FFFF contest of the worst Redevelopment building in Fullerton.

  7. Thanks FFFF for bringing us these images. Until now I never really understood the magnitude of the damage done to Fullerton by the Redevelopment “professionals.”

    But where is the accountability?

  8. Molly was so happy when she found out that the developer promised (if the Redevelopment Agency gave them a $511,000 subsidy) to make the building look like it was a two story building.

  9. WTF’s idea for a contest to see which is the ugliest and cheapest looking piece of cardboard crap to come from Redevelopment is a great idea.

    There are more contestants on the books. The infamous Amerige Court, the still developing Fullerton Transportation Center plan, and who knows what else?

    On the positive side, some of us have tried, in our small way, to have some citizen influence on the Transportation Center plan. I encourage everyone reading this blog to suggest better alternatives. This is an area already in a Redev. zone, and could be a good thing for the city. You can see the documents here:

    http://www.cityoffullerton.com/depts/eco_dev/project_areas/transportation_center/default.asp

    Don’t be too discouraged by what you see. It isn’t built yet.

  10. P.S. Check out savefullerton.org for more info on development projects in Fullerton. There are documents archived there that I believe are no longer available on the city’s website. There are also links to project development plans and docs still on the city’s site.

  11. Can anyone post old pictures of these intersections and buildings prior to muddling and outright destruction?

  12. Circle of B, “How long before the redevelopment agency has to RE-REDEVELOP it’s own crumbling creations?” Look at the link that Matt Leslie posted and you’ll see it’s in the works, the Crane building (fake second floor) is already in the cross hairs for demolition.

  13. For years Fullerton BooHoo has fough to keep those hideous street trees in downtown Fullerton. Now we know why. To hide the fugly buildings.

    They were right.

  14. when I go south on Harbor and make a left on to commonwealth, the word tarantula comes to mind. Heirlooms of tomorrow are today’s junk and when I go north on harbor and turn left on to commonwealth i wonder why the upraised arms on the karate figures would hang past their knees if lowered. But the worst eyesore is the perplexing pagoda clock on the corner of rosecrans and gilbert. why is it crucial that I know what time it is when i am at this intersection? Instead of ticking off the seconds, shouldnt i be watching for cross traffic? fullerton’s redevelopment strives to blend the Great Gatsby into the Jetsons.

  15. neo-classical architecture mates with coffee shop googie and the spawn is downtown fullerton

  16. No way van. You are far too generous. Downtown Fullerton is using the sticks & stucco method to create a style that can only be termed Fake Old Cheap (see also previous posts on this site in re: FJC buildings).

    At least that pagoda clock didn’t cost the taxpayers anything.

  17. van, googie meets gatsby in fullerton and a new architectural movement is created and known as gaggie architecture

  18. Let’s be fair. Fullerton is no worse than Garden Grove, LaHabra, or Buena Park. The point of this is that the design review process in Redevelopment areas has failed – spectacularly.

    Where public money was spent (wasted) the dereliction is nearly criminal.

  19. Wow, that sidewalk leads right into the Tuscany Club. What an amazing blend of public and private spaces.

  20. So, in regards to your articles and following comments on the wariness to modern architecture, the picture I’m getting of what “historic” means to Fullerton is anything built between 1925 and 1940. This narrow definition of historic would explain a lot –from the stalling and loss of the potential of having Norton Simon’s proposed museum in Fullerton (thus losing the Modigliani and Henry Moore sculptures), to the lack of outcry when it came to the desecration of the William Perreira buildings for that new private high school. And this also explains the impending demolition of the structures you’ve posted –as well as the love of concrete strips to make it look like 1925.

    At the meeting I attended in which the Fullerton Heritage Group and the City Planning Dept were involved in, it was inferred that nothing like a Frank Gehry house would ever be built in a neighborhood should a historic blanket be tossed over it.

    While on one hand this makes people feel old-timey, it got me to thinking. If the option is fake old over a Frank Gehry, quite frankly I’d pick the latter. And isn’t it rather ridiculous to keep modern architecture out of a neighborhood (that has no overall consistent architectural theme) by saying “it wouldn’t fit in?” And doesn’t that presume that all Frank Gehry or contemporary architecture is going to be the same?

    While I see on their site they have studiously tried to describe different types of architecture, I don’t see any comfort level with anything contemporary.

    Hence, the city redevelopment monies are used for inferior architecture and questionable building materials.

  21. Kanani, your perspective of this issue is right on. The histerical group (tom & katie ” motor mouth” dalton) are down right ignorant. And the city staff are just as ignorant, that they believe the daltons’ know what they are talking about. The blind leading the blind. Serious, you should run for city council.

  22. Oh Joseph, You crack me up. City council isn’t my thing. It is or it isn’t. But I am understanding more about the general unhappiness here and the overall lack of a broader view. I think Tony Bushala’s article about the college was excellent.

    I split time between here and Savannah (exhausting yes) –where bigger fights are abound about everything from war memorials to Paula Deen’s fried chicken.

  23. “While I see on their site they have studiously tried to describe different types of architecture, I don’t see any comfort level with anything contemporary. ”

    Apart from the fact that “modern” architecture has been around now for a hundred years, and is thus worthy of being preserved just as much as the period revivials of the same era, it’s important to match scale and density in historic neighborhoods and quit worrying about fake-old. Lots of fake old monstrosities are completely out of scale with their historic surroundings.

    McOld doesn’t equate to historic preservation. And there is no inherent reason that contemporary architecture can’t complement older styles and neighborhoods.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.