4 ms·

Snapchat is a unique case because they've insisted on shoving their growing workforce into a bunch of small bungalows, retail spaces and storefronts--including

by danhak 10y ago

Snapchat is a unique case because they've insisted on shoving their growing workforce into a bunch of small bungalows, retail spaces and storefronts--including Nikki's, a beloved neighborhood bar--scattered throughout Venice. This has had a really outsized and unfortunate effect on the neighborhood that goes well beyond the standard gripes about gentrification and rising rents. They've taken one of the most walkable, lively communities in LA--where you could just wander around ambling into funky shops, cafes and bars--and turned it into their private, cordoned-off distributed campus. One of the most vibrant neighborhoods in the city has turned dead and boring. I lived in Venice when I first moved to LA and absolutely adored it, but there's literally nobody left except techies and tourists. If that's the sort of place Snapchat employees want to live then more power to them. Let them stay by the beach as LA's center of gravity continues to shift to DTLA and the eastside.

rhodysurf 10y ago
But I'm confused. Are they actively pushing other businesses out? Or are they just snatching up vacancies where businesses already failed?
- danhak 10y ago
  Both--this article is pretty informative: http://la.curbed.com/2015/3/31/9975230/snapchat-venice-leases http://la.curbed.com/2015/3/31/9975230/snapchat-venice-lease... But even if a retail vacancy appears--it kinda diminishes the quality of a pedestrian-friendly neighborhood for a private corporate office rather than another retail storefront, bar or restaurant to take its place. I'm a free marketer, blah blah blah, Snapchat is free to set up shop wherever they want within the bounds of the law. My point is to say what they are doing is lame, and they've made Venice lame. And it's uniquely lame compared to cases where tech giants set up shop in a single large commercial building that can accommodate all their employees within a locale.
bit_logic 10y ago
Why do you think DTLA and eastside are becoming more important? (For tech) It seems the opposite is true, "Silicon Beach" continues to be the center of LA tech and there's no signs of this changing. Especially with the new train, many can work westside and live somewhere near a train station.
- danhak 10y ago
  When I said "center of gravity" I was referring to culture--art, live music, nightlife and food--not tech, which is certainly centered in Venice and Santa Monica.
- sjg007 10y ago
  DTLA is cheaper for artists especially around the warehouses. Silverlake use to be cheap until it was gentrified. Venice is still pretty crappy. Love it but still crappy. Also a lot of the housing there are old apartments covered by rent control.
jvm 10y ago
> Snapchat is a unique case because they've insisted on shoving their growing workforce into a bunch of small bungalows, retail spaces and storefronts--including Nikki's, a beloved neighborhood bar--scattered throughout Venice I don't have knowledge of this particular situation, but I get the sneaking suspicion that there are building restrictions that render them unable to pursue the more traditional technique of building large buildings to house their workforce.
rconti 10y ago
Move them off to an industrial park so everyone can complain about traffic and how every lives so far from where they work, instead of having live/work neighborhoods!
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- danhak 10y ago
  You can have live / work communities without shoehorning a $35 billion company and its 2,000 employees into a bunch of retail storefronts originally built as single-family dwellings in the 1920's. There's plenty of large commercial space nearby in downtown Santa Monica, Culver City and Plays Vista. None of those are the distant industrial parks you allude to. Based on your comment I'm reasonably certain you have zero familiarity with this area.
  - vmarsy 10y ago
    > into a bunch of retail storefronts Do the buildings only have 1 floor? It's not hard to have 2 or 3 stories buildings that doesn't look ugly, then the first floor could be retail/restaurants and the floor above it could be companies like Snap. Using the first floor for anything non retail/restaurants seems like a waste of space
  - rconti 10y ago
    I was not attempting to speak to the area. I was speaking to the attitude that nobody's ever happy. Good economy? Things are getting too expensive! Labor/goods are cheap? Everyone's pissed they can't find work! Jobs? Traffic! Unemployment? Poverty!

by danhak 10y ago

rhodysurf 10y ago

But I'm confused. Are they actively pushing other businesses out? Or are they just snatching up vacancies where businesses already failed?

danhak 10y ago
Both--this article is pretty informative: http://la.curbed.com/2015/3/31/9975230/snapchat-venice-leases http://la.curbed.com/2015/3/31/9975230/snapchat-venice-lease... But even if a retail vacancy appears--it kinda diminishes the quality of a pedestrian-friendly neighborhood for a private corporate office rather than another retail storefront, bar or restaurant to take its place. I'm a free marketer, blah blah blah, Snapchat is free to set up shop wherever they want within the bounds of the law. My point is to say what they are doing is lame, and they've made Venice lame. And it's uniquely lame compared to cases where tech giants set up shop in a single large commercial building that can accommodate all their employees within a locale.

bit_logic 10y ago

Why do you think DTLA and eastside are becoming more important? (For tech) It seems the opposite is true, "Silicon Beach" continues to be the center of LA tech and there's no signs of this changing. Especially with the new train, many can work westside and live somewhere near a train station.

danhak 10y ago
When I said "center of gravity" I was referring to culture--art, live music, nightlife and food--not tech, which is certainly centered in Venice and Santa Monica.
sjg007 10y ago
DTLA is cheaper for artists especially around the warehouses. Silverlake use to be cheap until it was gentrified. Venice is still pretty crappy. Love it but still crappy. Also a lot of the housing there are old apartments covered by rent control.

jvm 10y ago

> Snapchat is a unique case because they've insisted on shoving their growing workforce into a bunch of small bungalows, retail spaces and storefronts--including Nikki's, a beloved neighborhood bar--scattered throughout Venice I don't have knowledge of this particular situation, but I get the sneaking suspicion that there are building restrictions that render them unable to pursue the more traditional technique of building large buildings to house their workforce.

rconti 10y ago

Move them off to an industrial park so everyone can complain about traffic and how every lives so far from where they work, instead of having live/work neighborhoods!

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
danhak 10y ago
You can have live / work communities without shoehorning a $35 billion company and its 2,000 employees into a bunch of retail storefronts originally built as single-family dwellings in the 1920's. There's plenty of large commercial space nearby in downtown Santa Monica, Culver City and Plays Vista. None of those are the distant industrial parks you allude to. Based on your comment I'm reasonably certain you have zero familiarity with this area.
- vmarsy 10y ago
  > into a bunch of retail storefronts Do the buildings only have 1 floor? It's not hard to have 2 or 3 stories buildings that doesn't look ugly, then the first floor could be retail/restaurants and the floor above it could be companies like Snap. Using the first floor for anything non retail/restaurants seems like a waste of space
- rconti 10y ago
  I was not attempting to speak to the area. I was speaking to the attitude that nobody's ever happy. Good economy? Things are getting too expensive! Labor/goods are cheap? Everyone's pissed they can't find work! Jobs? Traffic! Unemployment? Poverty!