Comment
Rate
Rumble in the Industrial District
 |
| A large crowd voiced opposition to initial recommendations over what to do with land in the Industrial District. City Planner Jane Blumenfeld, shown here, cautioned that industrial-zoned property is diminishing. Photo by Gary Leonard. |
Anger Flares at Raucous Meeting About the Future of Zoning Changes
by Evan George
Raised voices and a lack of elbowroom gave a meeting last week a fevered pitch, as a packed crowd of Downtown stakeholders clashed with city officials over the future of industrial land in Downtown Los Angeles. Business interests are being ignored, many claimed.
On Tuesday, Nov. 14, representatives of the Los Angeles Planning Department and the Community Redevelopment Agency presented what they called preliminary recommendations for how the city should approach industrial-zoned land. But some in the crowd of about 100 people, many of them developers, argued that proceedings are already too far along, and they have not been asked for input.
"Raise your hand if you think this plan is pathetic and shows no vision for this district," one man interjected during the question and answer period at the Japanese American Cultural & Community Center.
Staff from the two agencies presented their findings on current land use and where they believe the city should preserve industrial property, and where it should allow new uses, such as the creation of housing, in five districts: Chinatown, Boyle Heights, Alameda, Downtown and Southeast Los Angeles.
"We have a new Planning Director and a new CRA Director and they both feel extremely strongly that we do a process where the staff does some work and all the public gets to comment," said Jane Blumenfeld, a principal planner for the city.
The debate over industrial land has grown heated around Downtown in recent years because of how little of it remains. Developers have become accustomed to receiving city approval for building market-rate housing on these parcels and want to see recent restrictions eased, especially as available land becomes limited. However, some city officials are rethinking the implications of shrinking industrial-zoned land, arguing that losing it could mean the loss of jobs.
The report presented by the city staffers recommends retaining much of the city's industrial land, though it also suggests creating residential development in some areas and mixed-use in others. Planners said their recommendations would strengthen policies that have been ignored, not change city policy.
But many in attendance disagreed with both the recommendations and the process.
"This is not the beginning of a conversation," Estela Lopez, executive director of the Central City East Association, said to the gathered business owners. "This is the beginning of your opportunity to react to something, not to contribute to something, and that is highly disrespectful to this community."
The report comes one year after Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa asked the Planning Department to evaluate land in areas zoned for industrial use and to reevaluate the city's policy of preserving the land for industrial development.
That policy, although it does allow for consideration of land conversion on a case-by-case basis, amounts to an unofficial moratorium, some have said.
As a result, the approvals for residential developments on Downtown's industrial parcels have slowed to a trickle in the last year.
No Consensus
Steve Andrews of the CRA thinks the slowdown is a good thing. "Normal transactions are not occurring," Andrews told the JACCC crowd.
The continued boom in residential development Downtown, he said, would continue to drive out industrial businesses, which he said employ approximately 64,000 people in the area in and around Downtown.
The Planning Department set out to map the area by walking the long blocks, knocking on doors and surveying business owners in order to understand the operations on the ground.
Their report indicates that 8% of land in the city of Los Angeles is zoned for industrial use, which includes everything from heavy uses such as manufacturing to mixed wholesale and commercial use. This land, according to the Planning Department, has about a 1% vacancy rate.
However, these parcels have become a sought-after commodity in Downtown, especially to residential and commercial developers who hope to turn a profit by building beyond already developed areas in the Historic Core, Little Tokyo and the Arts District.
According to the CRA, businesses on industrial land account for $219 million in taxes annually, nearly 13% of the city's tax revenue, and that those businesses employ 28.5% of the city's population.
Jack Kyser, senior vice president and chief economist of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., said those figures reveal the importance of not converting sought-after industrial land to other uses.
"What I saw was a big push by the residential developers," said Kyser, who attended the Nov. 14 meeting. "A lot of these people want to put up expensive housing, but how deep is that market?"
That's none of the city's business, according to Carol Schatz, president and CEO of the Central City Association.
"The market should determine where housing is built," she said, not governmental interference or what she termed "a social agenda."
"It was poorly planned, poorly executed and very disturbing in terms of the policy it outlined," Schatz said of the meeting.
The CCA, along with the Los Angeles Business Council, compiled its own set of policy recommendations for industrial land back in June. The report suggested creating a series of overlay zones and a rezone process more accommodating to mixed-use projects.
Their proposal also suggested a grandfather clause for developers who had already invested significantly in industrial land. Despite what city policy reads on paper, the report said, developers have enjoyed years of discretionary approvals for conversions.
The city has been overriding its own preservation rules on a case-by-case basis for years, both sides agree.
But where some business interests envision market forces steering strong growth, Blumenfeld sees shortsighted development that could hurt the city in the long run.
"We know that once industrial land becomes residential, it doesn't come back," even if market-rate housing fails, Blumenfeld said.
"When those businesses see $800,000 condos across the street they will no longer make the decision to grow in Los Angeles. They'll be gone."
The Next Step
By the end of the meeting only one thing was certain: Almost everyone in attendance agreed the public comment period that was set to last one month and end on Dec. 15 should be extended.
"It's not a lot of time to get our head around this and consult our stakeholders," commented Kent Smith, executive director of the L.A. Fashion District, the business improvement district for the Downtown apparel sector.
A number of those present said the city should reach out to business owners for their input before recommendations are formally made by the Planning Department. The expertise of some community members could be put to better use earlier in the process, many said.
Denise Fairchild, the president and CEO of the nonprofit Community Development Technology Center, said she worried that some in the community were being excluded from the discussion, including those who rely on affordable housing as well as industrial jobs in Downtown.
"This issue of the public good needs to be addressed," she said after the meeting. "It became a greed fest where people were trying to figure out how much money they were going to lose."
A spokesperson for 14th District City Councilman José Huizar said his office plans to ask for the comment period to be extended one month, ending on Jan. 15.
There will likely be more meetings for the public to comment on the recommendations, according to Blumenfeld. After that the Planning Department will issue a final report to the City Council and Villaraigosa's office for a decision on the matter.
What's uncertain is how much the public comments will affect that report.
"Everyone can have their own opinion," Blumenfeld said to the testy crowd.
Contact Evan George at evan@downtownnews.com.
page 1, 11/20/2006
© Los Angeles Downtown News. Reprinting items retrieved from the archives are for personal use only. They may not be reproduced or retransmitted without permission of the Los Angeles Downtown News. If you would like to re-distribute anything from the Los Angeles Downtown News Archives, please call our permissions department at (213) 481-1448.
On Tuesday, Nov. 14, representatives of the Los Angeles Planning Department and the Community Redevelopment Agency presented what they called preliminary recommendations for how the city should approach industrial-zoned land. But some in the crowd of about 100 people, many of them developers, argued that proceedings are already too far along, and they have not been asked for input.
"Raise your hand if you think this plan is pathetic and shows no vision for this district," one man interjected during the question and answer period at the Japanese American Cultural & Community Center.
Staff from the two agencies presented their findings on current land use and where they believe the city should preserve industrial property, and where it should allow new uses, such as the creation of housing, in five districts: Chinatown, Boyle Heights, Alameda, Downtown and Southeast Los Angeles.
"We have a new Planning Director and a new CRA Director and they both feel extremely strongly that we do a process where the staff does some work and all the public gets to comment," said Jane Blumenfeld, a principal planner for the city.
The debate over industrial land has grown heated around Downtown in recent years because of how little of it remains. Developers have become accustomed to receiving city approval for building market-rate housing on these parcels and want to see recent restrictions eased, especially as available land becomes limited. However, some city officials are rethinking the implications of shrinking industrial-zoned land, arguing that losing it could mean the loss of jobs.
The report presented by the city staffers recommends retaining much of the city's industrial land, though it also suggests creating residential development in some areas and mixed-use in others. Planners said their recommendations would strengthen policies that have been ignored, not change city policy.
But many in attendance disagreed with both the recommendations and the process.
"This is not the beginning of a conversation," Estela Lopez, executive director of the Central City East Association, said to the gathered business owners. "This is the beginning of your opportunity to react to something, not to contribute to something, and that is highly disrespectful to this community."
The report comes one year after Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa asked the Planning Department to evaluate land in areas zoned for industrial use and to reevaluate the city's policy of preserving the land for industrial development.
That policy, although it does allow for consideration of land conversion on a case-by-case basis, amounts to an unofficial moratorium, some have said.
As a result, the approvals for residential developments on Downtown's industrial parcels have slowed to a trickle in the last year.
Steve Andrews of the CRA thinks the slowdown is a good thing. "Normal transactions are not occurring," Andrews told the JACCC crowd.
The continued boom in residential development Downtown, he said, would continue to drive out industrial businesses, which he said employ approximately 64,000 people in the area in and around Downtown.
The Planning Department set out to map the area by walking the long blocks, knocking on doors and surveying business owners in order to understand the operations on the ground.
Their report indicates that 8% of land in the city of Los Angeles is zoned for industrial use, which includes everything from heavy uses such as manufacturing to mixed wholesale and commercial use. This land, according to the Planning Department, has about a 1% vacancy rate.
However, these parcels have become a sought-after commodity in Downtown, especially to residential and commercial developers who hope to turn a profit by building beyond already developed areas in the Historic Core, Little Tokyo and the Arts District.
According to the CRA, businesses on industrial land account for $219 million in taxes annually, nearly 13% of the city's tax revenue, and that those businesses employ 28.5% of the city's population.
Jack Kyser, senior vice president and chief economist of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., said those figures reveal the importance of not converting sought-after industrial land to other uses.
"What I saw was a big push by the residential developers," said Kyser, who attended the Nov. 14 meeting. "A lot of these people want to put up expensive housing, but how deep is that market?"
That's none of the city's business, according to Carol Schatz, president and CEO of the Central City Association.
"The market should determine where housing is built," she said, not governmental interference or what she termed "a social agenda."
"It was poorly planned, poorly executed and very disturbing in terms of the policy it outlined," Schatz said of the meeting.
The CCA, along with the Los Angeles Business Council, compiled its own set of policy recommendations for industrial land back in June. The report suggested creating a series of overlay zones and a rezone process more accommodating to mixed-use projects.
Their proposal also suggested a grandfather clause for developers who had already invested significantly in industrial land. Despite what city policy reads on paper, the report said, developers have enjoyed years of discretionary approvals for conversions.
The city has been overriding its own preservation rules on a case-by-case basis for years, both sides agree.
But where some business interests envision market forces steering strong growth, Blumenfeld sees shortsighted development that could hurt the city in the long run.
"We know that once industrial land becomes residential, it doesn't come back," even if market-rate housing fails, Blumenfeld said.
"When those businesses see $800,000 condos across the street they will no longer make the decision to grow in Los Angeles. They'll be gone."
By the end of the meeting only one thing was certain: Almost everyone in attendance agreed the public comment period that was set to last one month and end on Dec. 15 should be extended.
"It's not a lot of time to get our head around this and consult our stakeholders," commented Kent Smith, executive director of the L.A. Fashion District, the business improvement district for the Downtown apparel sector.
A number of those present said the city should reach out to business owners for their input before recommendations are formally made by the Planning Department. The expertise of some community members could be put to better use earlier in the process, many said.
Denise Fairchild, the president and CEO of the nonprofit Community Development Technology Center, said she worried that some in the community were being excluded from the discussion, including those who rely on affordable housing as well as industrial jobs in Downtown.
"This issue of the public good needs to be addressed," she said after the meeting. "It became a greed fest where people were trying to figure out how much money they were going to lose."
A spokesperson for 14th District City Councilman José Huizar said his office plans to ask for the comment period to be extended one month, ending on Jan. 15.
There will likely be more meetings for the public to comment on the recommendations, according to Blumenfeld. After that the Planning Department will issue a final report to the City Council and Villaraigosa's office for a decision on the matter.
What's uncertain is how much the public comments will affect that report.
"Everyone can have their own opinion," Blumenfeld said to the testy crowd.
Contact Evan George at evan@downtownnews.com.
page 1, 11/20/2006
© Los Angeles Downtown News. Reprinting items retrieved from the archives are for personal use only. They may not be reproduced or retransmitted without permission of the Los Angeles Downtown News. If you would like to re-distribute anything from the Los Angeles Downtown News Archives, please call our permissions department at (213) 481-1448.
 |
 |
|
| A Cornfield Park Winner | Battle for the 14th: the Sequel to the Sequel |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of ladowntownnews.com.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
Popular Searches
