How sad.
The building will be intact at least.
It’s much more than that. The vibe. The comfort of having a place open 24-7. I don’t understand why would you want to open a chicken finger chain fast food spot. We don’t need another Cane’s taking over a historic iconic spot.
This is, in my opinion, one of the stupidest “controversies” out there. It’s only become a “controversy” because the LA Times is again failing us as an unbiased arbiter of the news. Cane’s is not proposing that they even touch the façade of the building, minus for changing the lettering on the sign from NORMS to CANES. The article mentions that but not after 90% of people skimmed the headline and came away with an entirely different interpretation. I’ve lost even more of the little respect I have left for the LA Times for how they framed this article and situation. Their main source opposed to the change is Kim Cooper of Esotouric, one of the most insidious NIMBYs in LA. If she had her way, nothing “old” would ever make way for anything new, acute housing shortage be damned. Kim is advocating for people to protest the change at the Cultural Heritage Commission meeting in December. Cane’s has explicitly pledged to maintain the architecture of the building (not that they even need to pledge such a thing, since it’s a historic landmark), so aside from theoretically being able to deny modifying the lettering on the sign, the Cultural Heritage Commission has no jurisdiction over the matter - they do not have authority over what businesses a building can or can not be leased to. I love a good old-school diner as much as the next person, but in no rational world does that translate to a moral or legal obligation to force a landlord to maintain a lease to said diner.
What’s actually happening:
A new tenant in a historic building that has pledged to maintain the building as is. That is a win for historic preservation!
What would happen in a world run by Kim Cooper:
Even if Kim ran the city, you still can’t force a landlord to lease to a business, so we would probably end up with the building sitting empty and rotting like the Barry Building in Brentwood.
People like Kim make our city so much worse, and it’s sad to see the LA Times practically let her write the headline and frame the narrative of articles these days.
Our first date ended at that Norms at 3 am or so. No, i dont care if Norms is gone. That was my only time there
I recently was taken to the Cane’s in Northridge. Unless you are a fan of sweet tea, I can’t think of any reason to go there.
Agreed was pretty hyped when they first came on the scene out here, but now just realized its bland and expensive. The only plus is they are open late.
“‘The idea of transforming Norms from a sit-down restaurant, family friendly, affordable to a place to go to get fried chicken is astonishing to me,’ said Kim Cooper, one of the two people behind Esotouric’s Secret Los Angeles."
Can’t believe this is real.
I’ve been to that Norm’s and go to my local Norm’s in South Bay. The food is totally fine, Denny’s level. Raising Cane’s is way less interesting and that’s a low bar, but at least the building will live on. Norm’s has so many locations, they could’ve kept the building, but opted to cash out. I think anyone who’s upset about restaurants having to close after decades in business should try running themselves…it’s not easy.
