Somebody’s already spending big money on this, aren’t they?


Wow, IKEA’s not even dead and gone yet and we already have this slick work. Somebody’s obviously intent on prevailing. Ayn Rand, congratulate yourself!

See how those tentacles have already been reaching out all over town looking for support…



I heart nothing. These developer clowns aren’t even from Burbank. Love the down home guitar work though.

What condescending assholes. Cloying as hell, too.

Think staff will be charmed by the effort? Or our council members? Do the Burbank subjects victims in this video realize that they were being used to sell an incredibly huge apartment complex downtown?

Are THEY happy about being used? Like that Burbank High teacher?

Does the BUSD think they have room for 200-600 new students at Emerson? How about another 400 at Miller on top, when the Cusumanos get their Taj Mahal built?

Which they will.

Here’s another question: does staff go out and actually solicit these projects and neighborhoods to outside developers? Like encourage them to come in as part of their vision of “Burbank2035”?

If so, they are clearly working against the interests of most if not all Burbankers, and the council needs to do something about them pronto. Who’s working for whom here?


(h/t to a great commenter for referencing this today. It’s always fun to see this stuff crap.)






Filed under Uncategorized

21 responses to “Somebody’s already spending big money on this, aren’t they?

  1. Anonymous

    semi you think maybe this is a ploy to get 500 apartments in? Propose 1,000 and settle for half?

    • semichorus

      Could be. And then watch everyone at City Hall (except Gordon) cheer them for being so willing to “compromise.” Possible Rogers won’t fall for it either.

      I can hear Gabel Luddy right now going out of her way to praise them for being such “good neighbors,” and so, so willing to compromise “their vision.” For the good of Burbank, naturally.

      Of course, she’d have complete APOPLEXY if some outside company wanted to build 1000 apartments on NBC.

      • oscarhgake

        Gordon is an idiotic no-man and a disgrace of a public servant. He gives into the selfishness and ignorance of Burbank NIMBYs who by opposing development, further contribute to climate change and the rising cost of housing in the Los Angeles area. Gabel-Luddy is our best council member. She stands for the progress and prosperity of tomorrow, rather than the failure and backwardness of the past. If we had another council member like her instead of a NIMBY like Gordon, our city would be much better off. That great mixed use complex on 3rd wouldn’t have been killed.

        • semichorus

          You haven’t ready anything here, have you?

          We’re talking about the dangers of big growth. And the sudden infusion of thousands of new and expensive apartments will cause the existing stock to increase in price as well. These investor-funded “mixed use” projects are for higher end units — the ones that make lots of money for the landlords.

        • Craig

          Gee little oscar, what about the lack of on-site parking?
          The plan was to use parking across 3rd Street–not owned by them.
          Luggage Lady failed to garner a second for Vice Mayor recently
          NIMBY is more appropriate for Rancho types, like Luggage Lady.

          • I <3 Mixed-Use Development

            The across the street is more than enough. The mall is never fully utilizing all of it. Therefore, it would be stupid to have to spend money building more parking.

            • DixieFlyer

              There is a simple rule going wwaaayyy back in time.

              If you don’t OWN it, you can’t USE it.

              I3MUD is so stupid that it doesn’t know that rule.

              The proposal was available for any and all to read.

              Even Jess read it and opposed the proposal.

              “If it’s not yours, don’t touch it.”

        • Oscar, if you mean that the Council should exist to make developers lots of money then yes, Emily is the right choice.

    • Burbank Bill

      Just like Talaria, where the developer will “settle” for fewer units. Although I understand they wanna make it like the Grove, Americana, etc. Chevys, Corner Bakery, etc .. all of it is going. More crap condos on top of retail ..Ever try driving AROUND the mall, all those one lane streets, Oh, don’t forget the big fat 5 feeding all that traffic over there too., And when the Burbank Blvd overpass is torn down…oh boy ….

      • semichorus

        Crap retail as an excuse to build lots of profitable apts/condos on top, all in the name of taking advantage of these city’s “mixed use” incentives.

        Like that Third Street project that was rejected by the council last year. Over 100+ condos, but with only ONE small retail/business space on the bottom. That was considered mixed use!

        This Cypress outfit obviously buys up distressed and low performing retail properties in order to convert them into mostly residential mixed use. That explains why they’re real big on “Designer Shoe Warehouse.” It’s on that level for them.

        I’m also concerned about how over-leveraged they might be. Admittedly no money in 2012-2013, as noted in the appellate case?

        It’d be interesting to talk to that fired/retaliated against attorney. Apparently she’s in California now.

  2. Burbank IMHO

    That video is a total propaganda piece of shit. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

    Burbank is over and there is nothing we can do to stop it and our elected officials are very much active participants in its demise.

    • semichorus

      It’s just the start, too, with this developer.

      I wonder how much money this proud Ayn-Randian outfit is planning on spending on opposition research in order to help get this nonsense through? Private investigators, whispering campaigns, quiet asides to the world about those creepy “gadflies,” the works.

      We should all be ready for it.

      The council again is on the spot here. I have a bit more trust in them– or at least with two or three. It’s possible that this new IKEA mega-plan has just pushed everything down there to such a point of complete absurdity that the council will now also reign in the Cusumanos and all other Big Development in general. No one in their right mind wants 2,000 or more new high-density apartments in a one-square-mile area.

      I can’t believe the Cusos are at all happy about this sudden intrusion from the outside either; or the fact that it highlights the problem of excessive growth and development here in Burbank. IKEA really does take the shine off their own twin towers effort on the other side of Olive.

      I think this IKEA plan has helped blow it for the Cusumanos. Unless there’s some weird conspiracy going on here between them all, they could NOT be happy about it. Who would be in that same position?

      One thing about the Cusos, though — they’re not 1/100th as bad as this hyper-aggressive outfit. Obviously, after that sleazy, blatantly insincere PR video.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s