ReportWire

Tag: financial incentive

  • Thousands of apartments set to take over empty office buildings with new L.A. ordinance

    Los Angeles officials just made it easier to convert empty commercial buildings to housing, opening the door to the creation of thousands of apartments across a city clamoring for housing.

    Developer Garrett Lee is already rolling.

    After years of struggling to find white-collar tenants for a gleaming office high-rise on the edge of downtown, he has just begun converting its office space into close to 700 apartments.

    With the new Citywide Adaptive Reuse Ordinance going into effect this month, many more housing conversions are coming to Los Angeles, Lee said.

    “This is monumental for the city.”

    The ordinance opens the possibility of conversion for many more buildings than the 1999 guidelines, which paved the way for converting older downtown buildings and jump-started a residential renaissance that turned downtown into a viable neighborhood after decades as a commercial district where few wanted to live.

    The first ordinance applied to buildings erected before 1975 and was focused primarily on downtown. Under the new guidelines, commercial buildings that are merely 15 years old throughout Los Angeles can be converted to housing with city staff approval, rather than going through lengthy review processes that may reach the City Council.

    Streamlining conversion approvals for projects that meet city guidelines will remove one of the biggest hurdles for developers who have historically had to guess how long it would take to start construction, Lee said.

    “When you take that risk off the table, it materially improves the feasibility of conversions,” he said.

    “It addresses both the housing shortage and the long-term office vacancy issue,” said Lee, president of Jamison Properties.

    Jamison Properties is converting this office high-rise on the edge of downtown Los Angeles into housing.

    (William Liang/For The Times)

    There are more than 50 million square feet of empty office space in Los Angeles, according to industry experts, spread among the city’s many commercial districts and corridors such as Wilshire Boulevard.

    The new ordinance inspired developer David Tedesco to move ahead with plans to convert a high-profile office building in Sherman Oaks, a neighborhood that wasn’t previously included in the city’s adaptive reuse guidelines.

    His company, IMT Residential, plans to turn the former headquarters of Sunkist Growers into 95 apartments.

    The eye-catching inverted pyramid designed in brutalist style is visible from the 101 Freeway and served as Sunkist’s headquarters from 1970 to 2013. The Los Angeles Conservancy called the building “a symphony in concrete,” worthy of city landmark status.

    Earlier, there were plans to renovate the building for new offices, but as demand for office space plunged after the pandemic, developer Tedesco says his company decided to use the new adaptive reuse ordinance to make it into residences.

    The new rules mean “we could move forward a lot faster” and avoid a potentially lengthy environmental impact review, he said.

    The 1999 ordinance proved that people wanted to live downtown and that converting old office buildings to housing or hotels could transform a neighborhood, said Ken Bernstein, a principal city planner in L.A.’s Planning Department.

    People walk through the Union Bank Plaza in downtown Los Angeles.

    People walk through the Union Bank Plaza in downtown Los Angeles in August.

    (Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

    Construction of new apartments followed the wave of conversions downtown in the early 2000s, and the ordinance was expanded to a few other neighborhoods with older buildings, including Hollywood and Koreatown.

    But until this month, residential conversions in most of the city still required more approvals, permits and hearings as well as an environmental review, Bernstein said.

    “That could be a very time-consuming, cumbersome and expensive process,” he said.

    The new rules “unlock the potential,” he said, of thousands of underutilized structures all over the city, including such commercial centers as Westwood, Olympic Boulevard, South Los Angeles, Ventura Boulevard and the Harbor District.

    The ordinance is not limited to office buildings. Industrial buildings, stores and even parking garages are eligible for conversion to housing.

    Bernstein envisions shopping center owners converting part of their retail and garage space to housing under the new guidelines. Even smaller strip malls would qualify for conversion to housing.

    While the new ordinance lowers hurdles for landlords interested in converting their underused buildings, they still face market and regulatory forces that bedevil all housing developers.

    Mockup of an apartment inside a 1980s office tower.

    Mockup of an apartment inside a 1980s office tower at 1055 W. 7th St. in Los Angeles that is going to be converted to housing.

    (Eddie Shih/E22 Studios)

    Among them are interest rates that make construction loans more expensive . Higher tariffs have driven up the prices of construction materials and equipment, while the crackdown on undocumented workers has thinned and spooked much of the international workforce on which the housing industry depends.

    Developers also say that Measure ULA, the city’s “mansion tax” on large property sales, hurts the outlook for the profitability of any housing.

    Measure ULA “is really impeding developers from doing any development in the city of Los Angeles,” said local architect Karin Liljegren, who specializes in adaptive reuse projects and helped the city craft the new ordinance.

    Developers also worry that new apartments won’t generate enough income to cover construction costs.

    Apartment renters accustomed to steady price hikes saw a downward shift last year as the median rent in the L.A. metro area dropped to $2,167 in December — the lowest price in four years, according to data from Apartment List.

    Experts disagree on the momentum behind the drop. Some say it’s a sign of things to come, while others suggest it’s merely a brief price plateau and rents will rise again this year.

    Conversion activist Nella McOsker, president of the Central City Assn. business advocacy group, said the new ordinance is “tremendous” and creates “incredible flexibility” for owners who want to make changes. But L.A. needs to follow the example of other cities and do more in the way of financial incentives for developers trying to make a project pencil out.

    The Central City Assn. wants the city to consider financial incentives for conversions, even though it is experiencing budget shortfalls, McOsker said.

    City leaders should consider offering financial incentives, such as those used in other cities, to bridge the gap to profitability, McOsker said, citing programs in other central business districts.

    New York, Washington and Boston have property tax abatement programs, for example. San Francisco offers transfer tax exemptions, and Chicago uses tax-increment financing to encourage some redevelopments. In Canada, Calgary offers direct grants.

    In Washington and New York, there has been widespread adoption of adaptive reuse, Lee said, resulting in makeovers of buildings that each add 1,000 to 2,000 residential units.

    Lee, who has converted nearly 2,000 apartments so far, said he plans to take advantage of terms in the new ordinance that will allow him to put more apartments on each floor.

    “We’re taking projects that are fully designed already and we’re redesigning them for more, smaller units,” he said, which helps reduce rents.

    The new rolling 15-year age requirement will also bring up a new crop of conversion candidates every year. More recently built structures need fewer upgrades and may not require seismic retrofits to meet safety codes.

    “Vintage matters,” Lee said. “Converting a building from 1990 versus one from 2010 is night and day due to the differences in code eras.”

    Roger Vincent

    Source link

  • Plenty of People Could Quit Therapy Right Now

    Plenty of People Could Quit Therapy Right Now


    About four years ago, a new patient came to see me for a psychiatric consultation because he felt stuck. He’d been in therapy for 15 years, despite the fact that the depression and anxiety that first drove him to seek help had long ago faded. Instead of working on problems related to his symptoms, he and his therapist chatted about his vacations, house renovations, and office gripes. His therapist had become, in effect, an expensive and especially supportive friend. And yet, when I asked if he was considering quitting treatment, he grew hesitant, even anxious. “It’s just baked into my life,” he told me.

    Among those who can afford it, regular psychotherapy is often viewed as a lifelong project, like working out or going to the dentist. Studies suggest that most therapy clients can measure their treatments in months instead of years, but a solid chunk of current and former patients expect therapy to last indefinitely. Therapists and clients alike, along with celebrities and media outlets, have endorsed the idea of going to therapy for extended stretches, or when you’re feeling fine. I’ve seen this myself with friends who are basically healthy and think of having a therapist as somewhat like having a physical trainer. The problem is, some of the most commonly sought versions of psychotherapy are simply not designed for long-term use.

    Therapy comes in many varieties, but they all share a common goal: to eventually end treatment because you feel and function well enough to thrive on your own. Stopping doesn’t even need to be permanent. If you’ve been going to therapy for a long time, and you’re no longer in acute distress, and you have few symptoms that bother you, consider taking a break. You might be pleasantly surprised by how much you learn about yourself.

    Therapy, in both the short and long term, can be life-altering. Short-term therapy tends to be focused on a particular problem, such as a depressed mood or social anxiety. In cognitive behavioral therapy, usually used for depressive and anxiety disorders, a clinician helps a client relieve negative feelings by correcting the distorted beliefs that he has about himself. In dialectical behavior therapy, commonly used to treat borderline personality disorder, patients learn skills to manage powerful emotions, which helps improve their mood and relationships. Both treatments typically last less than a year. If you start to get rusty or feel especially challenged by life events that come your way, you simply return for another brief stint. Termination is expected and normal.

    Some types of therapy, such as psychodynamic therapy and psychoanalysis, are designed to last for several years—but not forever. The main goal of these therapies is much more ambitious than symptom relief; they aim to uncover the unconscious causes of suffering and to change a client’s fundamental character. At least one well-regarded study found that long-term therapy is both highly effective and superior to briefer treatment for people diagnosed with a clinically significant psychiatric illness; other papers have shown less conclusive evidence for long-term therapy. And few studies compare short and extended treatment for clients with milder symptoms.

    In fact, there’s reason to believe that talk therapy in the absence of acute symptoms may sometimes cause harm. Excessive self-focus—easily facilitated in a setting in which you’re literally paying to talk about your feelings—can increase your anxiety, especially when it substitutes for tangible actions. If your neurotic or depressive symptoms are relatively mild (meaning they don’t really interfere with your daily functioning), you might be better served by spending less time in a therapist’s office and more time connecting with friends, pursuing a hobby, or volunteering. Therapists are trained to use the tools they’ve learned for certain types of problems, and many of the stress-inducing minutiae of daily life are not among them. For example, if you mention to your therapist that you’re having trouble being efficient at work, he might decide to teach you a stress-reduction technique, but your colleagues or boss might provide more specific strategies for improving your performance.

    One of my childhood friends, whose parents were both psychoanalysts, went to weekly therapy appointments while we were growing up. He was a happy, energetic kid, but his parents wanted him and his sister to be better acquainted with their inner lives, to help them deal with whatever adversity came their way. My friend and his sister both grew up to be successful adults, but also highly anxious and neurotic ones. I imagine their parents would say the kids would have been worse without the therapy—after all, mental illness ran in their family. But I can find no substantial clinical evidence supporting this kind of “preventive” psychotherapy.

    Beginning therapy in the first place is, to be clear, a privilege. Therapy is not covered by many insurance plans, and a very large number of people who could benefit from it can’t afford it for any duration. Only 47 percent of Americans with a psychiatric illness received any form of treatment in 2021; in fact, federal estimates suggest that the United States is several thousand mental-health professionals short, a gap that is likely to grow in the coming years. Stopping therapy when you’re ready opens up space for others who might need this scarce service more than you do.

    I do not mean to suggest that a therapy vacation should be considered lightly, or that it’s for everyone. If you have a serious mental-health disorder, such as major depression or bipolar disorder, you should discuss with your mental-health provider whether ending therapy is appropriate for your individual situation. (Keep in mind that your therapist might not be ready to quit when you are. Aside from a financial incentive to continue treatment, parting with a charming, low-maintenance patient is not so easy.) My rule of thumb is that you should have minimal to no symptoms of your illness for six months or so before even considering a pause. Should you and your therapist agree that stopping is reasonable, a temporary break with a clear expiration date is ideal. At any time, if you’re feeling worse, you can always go back.

    Psychiatrists do something similar with psychiatric meds: For example, when I prescribe a depressed patient an antidepressant, and then they remain stable and free of symptoms for several years, I usually consider tapering the medication to determine whether it’s still necessary for the patient’s well-being. I would do this only for patients who are at a low risk of relapse—for example, people who’ve had just one or two episodes, rather than many over a lifetime. Pausing therapy should be even less risky: The beautiful thing about therapy is that, unlike a drug, it equips you with new knowledge and skills, which you carry with you when you leave.

    About a year after my patient and I first talked about ending therapy, I ran into him in a café. He told me that stopping had taken him six months, but now he was thriving. Maybe you, like my patient, are daunted by the idea of quitting cold turkey. If so, consider taking a vacation from treatment instead. It might be the perfect way to see how far you’ve really come.



    Richard A. Friedman

    Source link