 |
| Duplexes in Carthay Circle Los Angeles, Ca duplexes.com |
A sort of May gray Monday and a fresh week on the blog. Today we are going to take the question whether or not high density housing can co-exist with historic neighborhoods? This is a question facing Los Angeles as Senate Bill 50 (leginfo.legislature.ca.gov; Dec. 3, 2018; date accessed May 13, 2019) makes its way through the California State Legislature.
The goal of SB 50 is to ease alleged land use barriers to increasing density and streamline the construction of multi-family housing units. If passed, SB 50 "would override local land use restrictions, allowing multi-family buildings to up near 'high quality' train and bus stops" (laconservancy.org; date accessed May 13, 2019). This will make it easier for four- and five-story residential developments to go up in areas currently zoned for single family residences (Ibid).Senate Bill 50 is the successor to last year's failed Senate Bill 827 (Ibid), which failed to clear committee.
If passed by the state legislature and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, the bill, among other things, would require cities to permit multi-story buildings to be up in neighborhoods, like Carthay Circle, near mass transit (latimes.com; May, 8, 2019; date accessed May 13, 2019). The goal is to alleviate the state's housing shortage and reduce the number of cars on the road as the effects of climate change intensify. Admirable goal but not everyone is thrilled about it.
 |
| Carthay Circle Theater (demolished) laconservancy.org |
Ann Rubin told Times columnist Steve Lopez,
We've got Wilshire right there, and they can go as high as they want (Ibid),
pointing toward the direction where she believes new housing should be built, along the commercial corridors instead along the the historic, quiet, upscale, leafy streets of Carthay Circle. Ms. Rubin and others believe that multi-story residential buildings would alter the look and character of the neighborhood.
Fellow resident Walter Dominguez remembers a time when the neighborhood was in decline during the eighties and the neighbors feared that developers would swoop in and upset the neighborhood's historic fabric. Mr. Dominguez and a coalition of residents undertook the three-year process to earn historical preservation overlay zone status from City Hall. They believed that HPOZ status would ensure the neighborhood's historic character for future generations. If SB 50 (Ibid; Apr. 23, 2019), some of the protections from designation could be lost. Steve Lopez notes, "Even with preservation status, structures that don't contribute to historic integrity of the neighborhood could meet up with a wrecking ball" (Ibid; May 8, 2019)
 |
| Map of Carthay Circle en.wikipedia.org |
Brad Kane, a neighbor of Walter Dominguez, told the Times,
To put an eight-story building in the middle of this district virtually nullifies the integrity,.... And there's nothing the city can do to protect us because state law trumps municipal law. (Ibid)
Carthay Circle is not the only neighborhood taking sides over SB 50. Around California, residents and civic officials have been taking sides over the bill, introduced by state Senator Scott Weiner (D-San Francisco) maneuvers its way through the state legislature, where passage is not a sure thing. Senator Weiner said,
We have a 3.5 million-home deficit in California,.... It's undermining our economy. It's undermining our climate goals. We have to be bold in solving this problem (Ibid).
Senator Weiner does have a point but Los Angeles City Council member Paul Koretz (CD-5), whose district includes the tony neighborhood, considers this bold initiative a misguided overstep (Ibid; Apr. 16, 2019). Council member Koretz spoke to Mr. Lopez, ""...the purpose of SB 50, as he see it, is to destroy single-family home neighborhoods ins Southern California" (Ibid; May 8, 2019). He spoke at a recent Carthay Circle meeting attended by those opposed to SB 50, making reasonable arguments. Steve Lopez reported, "He thinks putting multi-story apartment buildings on lots where a single-family homes now stand would be out of scale and little or nothing to address the state's greatest need--more affordable housing. He called Weiner's bill a handout for developers, some of whom happen to be big supporters of SB 50" (Ibid).
 |
| Carthay Circle home Los Angeles, California preservation.lacity.org |
Council member Paul Koretz also is unsure whether the bill would really mitigate traffic or the housing shortage, "noting that developers would inclined to build luxury housing" (Ibid). That would result in little or no relief for those who need affordable housing, near transit lines the most and it would undermine the state's efforts to reduce carbon emissions, "because those who can afford the rent might be more likely to drive than ride a bus or train" (Ibid).
UCLA professor Mike Manville has a different perspective. Senator Weiner's bill has already been been modified in response to its critics and there is no telling what the final draft of the bill will look like once all the revisions are completed. Be that as it may, Prof. Manville appreciates the intent behind it. He told the Times that "he understand the concerns of Carthay Circle residents but thinks everyone has to contribute to solving the housing crisis, including those living smack dab in in the middle of the nation's second-largest city" (Ibid).
 |
| SB 50 Town Hall meeting at Temple Beth Am Los Angeles, California beverlypress.com |
Prof. Manville said,
We have people in our city living in tents. They live in their cars. They live under our highway overpasses and they die on our sidewalks,... At a certain point, the pedigree of your house has to matter a little bit less if you live within walking distance of major transit stops and jobs. You ought to have to share some of these opportunities your location offers. (Ibid)
In previous conversations with Prof. Manville, Steve Lopez writes that "he argued that homeowners have benefited for decades from mortgage deductions, Proposition 13 tax relief and zoning restrictions that have limited new construction and driven up the value of homes, turning thousands of Californians into paper millionaires" (Ibid). Prof. Manville breaks down the arguments pro- and con-SB 50 to a give-and-take: "If we want more affordable housing,..., maybe those homeowners can contribute a small fraction of their wealth to construction fund when they sell their homes" (Ibid).
Council member Paul Koretz said "Los Angeles voters have already taxed themselves to build more affordable housing, and thousands of units are in the construction pipeline" (Ibid). Council member Koretz believes that Los Angeles should "build more density along commercial rather than residential corridors, offer more assistance to those in danger of becoming homeless and require developers to include more affordable housing in their developments" (Ibid).
The Los Angeles Conservancy issued the following position statement:
While the intent of providing more housing may be good, the bill and its approach is highly problematic. It poses a one-size-fits-all solution and a blunt, statewide fix that would outstrip local authority and planning. It also does not recognize the diversity of development statewide, let alone throughout Greater Los Angeles.
As part of a statewide coalition of preservation organizations, the Conservancy has requested amendments to the SB 50 to ensure safeguards to protect structures and districts placed on, or that have been identified by a public agency as eligible for, inclusion on a national, state, or local historic register.
The Conservancy wants to ensure that the revised bill language will not impose a one-size-fits-all approach and unnecessarily harm California's historic resources and potentially entire neighborhoods. (laconservancy.org; date accessed May 13, 2019)
Both sides make credible arguments but Los Angeles, as well as many cities around California, are made up of unique neighborhoods. These neighborhoods, like Carthay Circle, are historic in their own way. Together, they make Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and so forth the great places that they are. If signed into law SB 50 could strip away that unique historic character that help define cities.
No comments:
Post a Comment