About Books, Buildings and L.A.’s Future

Leon Whiteson (“More Is Less,” Oct. 3) never did like the library design. We’ve always known that. His critical review is remarkably whiny considering that he was a member of the Urban Design Advisory Committee (UDAC), which advised the Cultural Affairs Department on architectural matters.

The library is the most important public building to be completed in the city of Los Angeles in many decades. It has weathered a tedious design review that has included librarians, preservationists, community activists, bureaucrats and politicians. For this project the Three Rs were not reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmatic, but rather regulations, requirements and restrictions.

Even with these constraints, I, for one, recognize the building as miraculous. Faced with many devastating setbacks--neglect and community disinterest, two fires, earthquakes--and impossible budget restraints, the citizens of Los Angeles now have an impressive and functional facility that in only a few days has regained its place as the cultural centerpiece of our community.

What is “good architecture” is only slightly less subjective than what is “good art.” Architecture is defined as “the art or science of constructing edifices for human use.” Norman Pfeiffer has done just that and has quite remarkably melded the various elements required to create a complex that has already captured the hearts of the people of our city and is a symbol of the “New L.A.”

Let none of us forget that this is really about books, not buildings, and we are all so fortunate that this project has been completed.

RONALD S. LUSHING

President, Board of Library Commissioners, 1984-1989

*

I saw no justification for the “shopping mall” east wing with its huge volume of air, miles of glass to clean and stacks of escalators to maintain . . . and general notice schedule reading: “Service hours subject to change because of budget constraints. . . .”

Where was the cost evaluation review? Who needs this much space to get to 10 standard reference sections--half of which are closed stacks anyway? What’s wrong with two elevators and sending the saved dollars to renovate the branches, buy books, operate and maintain the system? Who was looking out for the store? Obviously, few people.

A little math: old library: 270,000 square feet; new addition 270,000 square feet; cost: $214 million, or $793 per square foot gross--not cheap by any means. Then give up 1,650,000 square feet “potential-air rights” on a public property to three adjacent commercial properties, without ever asking the public if in fact they wanted to relinquish them; or, at least explaining it to them. This is important because that air-rights deal is sure to be precedent-setting. Could Union Station or City Hall be next?

I suggest The Times create a visual picture of where the space and dollars went, and how it was added to those commercial properties through this “transfer of development density,” and how this in turn pays for part of the $214-million bill--this all done as a citizen’s educational tool. After all, public air rights are forever.

BILL SMITH

Chatsworth

*

Can the Central Library be an enduring symbol of this city’s civic pride? Whiteson doesn’t seem to think so. However, the expressions on the faces of the many people who were there today belie Whiteson’s commentary. I have never seen such a diverse group of people . . . both ethnically and economically . . . they love books; they they love their city; they love the promise this new Central Library holds for the City of Angels.

Some have said that we live in the City of the Fallen Angel. This building, the new Central Library, represents the hope of the future, a place where the old, the young, the rich, the not so rich, members of all ethnic groups and skin colors can gather in a common adventure of learning and hope for a brighter future. Whiteson is wrong. The people of the city that walked the corridors of the Central Library today know that. Let’s hope that more people go to the library and build, not destroy, our future.

EDWARD POLL

Venice

*

It is the fate of all architecture, no matter how fine, to wind up decorated by pigeon droppings.

Hardy Holtzman Pfeiffer’s marvelous restoration of the Los Angeles Library has just been pooped on by its first pigeons, and their names are Leon Whiteson and Christopher Knight.

Dr. CHARLES LEINENWEBER

Studio City

Less Driving Would Improve Lifestyles

I say “Bravo!” to neotraditionalism (“The Village Anew” by Eric Morgenthaler, Aug. 29). One year ago I moved back to California from Astoria, Queens, N.Y.

The thing I miss the most is walking around my old neighborhood, where I did virtually all my shopping and errands. All the boroughs of New York City are wonderful for walking. They are treasure troves for discovery of beautiful architecture, new shops, restaurants and parks.

The biggest contribution we can make to improving our environment is to drive less. If we drive 20% less per year, we each only spew four tons of carbon into the atmosphere, instead of five.

To enjoy walking around and using public transit, drivers must change some habits. There’s a slight loss of convenience and time, and an increased need to plan ahead. Other benefits are better physical health, less isolation from the community and more time for reading or whatever on public transit.

Most of the critics of neotraditionalism and Duany and Plater-Zyberk say that their designs are not what the public wants, but I doubt that the home-buying public is a monolith of opinion. I am sure there are many who still want the big house on the cul-de-sac. We need lots of choices, especially for people willing to change their driving habits.

KATY DeBRA

Santa Barbara

Beware the Dangers of Buying at Probate Sale

We’ve just gone through the “Twilight Zone.” Normal rules and laws (and common sense) didn’t apply when we recently attempted to purchase a home in a probate sale. And now, since our money has been lost, our only solace is that we might be able to warn others of the dangers of probate sales, an implausible and inscrutable court system and real estate agents. Our tale of misfortune could save the uninformed buyer, much time, effort and money.

Rule No. 1--Never trust your real estate agent.

Rule No. 2--Never assume that a probate transaction is similar to a normal home purchase.

Rule No. 3--Carefully read all documents before you sign them. You may want to have a lawyer review any contracts and escrow instructions.

Rule No. 4--Never confirm the sale of the real estate in court unless you have absolute , final written approval of financing because--this is the important point--despite what your purchase agreement states, your deposit and much, much more are in jeopardy if you cannot procure financing after the probate court has approved the sale.

In our ignorance, we assumed that the standard California Assn. of Realtors’ Purchase Contract & Deposit Receipt, which states that “obtaining financing is a contingency of this agreement,” would protect us. Much to our surprise, we were wrong; it wasn’t any protection at all.

No one ever told us that we might be jeopardizing our funds by asking court approval before financing confirmation. In fact, we had been assured the exact opposite by our real estate agent. And it was not written anywhere that this would be the case except in the obscure Probate Code Book under Section 10350, which states, “If after court confirmation of sale of real or personal property the purchaser fails to comply with the terms of sale , the court may, on petition of the personal representative, vacate the order of confirmation, order a resale of the property, and award damages to the estate against the purchaser.”

And guess what those damages may be? How about, “the difference between the contract price for the first sale and the amount paid by the purchaser at the resale.” And, “Expenses made necessary by the purchasers’s breach.”

And according to the probate judge, the inability to procure a loan after court confirmation will mean you failed to comply with the “terms of sale.”

After hiring an expensive lawyer to negotiate with the expensive lawyers retained by the estate, we were able to get back only half of our deposit held in escrow. And the judge assured us we were lucky to receive that. And the time, legal fees, incessant discussions regarding the situation only only add to the costs.

So prospective probate buyers, take note. And if you can, run any contracts by an attorney. Remember, you are pitted against all the heirs to an estate and their lawyers. And when the deal goes sour, everyone, especially the lawyers, want their share of the leftovers. So make sure your main meal doesn’t end up on someone else’s plate.

MICHEL MOORE

TERRELL ORUM

Villa Park