|
Dysfunction
Junction
Los
Angeles City Beat - October 23, 2003
By Chip Jacobs
You don't
have to look hard to see what has turned city development into a dysfunctional
morass in which only lawyers come out ahead. Big developers must negotiate
a labyrinthine public-approval process, and affected residents - allowed
their say only at the last minute - can usually respond only with predictable
outrage and distrust.
A few years
ago, residents complained they were blindsided by multimillion-dollar
plans for South La Brea Avenue and a site near the L.A. Memorial Coliseum,
and expressed their rage by helping to scuttle those projects. But there
was a downside, as these under-funded, under-built communities saw their
chances killed for retail/job bonanzas that many wanted. So no restaurants,
no chain drugstore, no supermarket, no electronics mega-store.
An alliance
of labor and economic-justice groups now wants to break this mold with
the introduction of a "Community Impact Report" (CIR) in the
Los Angeles development cycle. The idea is expected to get its first hearing
at the Community Redevelopment Agency next month, and may be considered
for implementation by the City Council. Supporters hope it will spread
to other municipalities.
"There
is tremendous community interest in development, but right now the community
involvement comes so late there's an oppositional process inherently set
up," said James Elmendorf, a research analyst with the Los Angeles
Alliance for a New Economy. The anti-poverty organization is part of the
Growth With Justice Coalition pushing the CIR. "Oftentimes, the public
process that does exist is focused on technical issues, like environmental
hazards. What's missing is looking at more basic things - the size [of
a development], is it affordable, how many jobs would it create?
That's what most people are interested in."
Not surprisingly,
the CIR is eliciting a chilly reaction from a business lobby sensitive
to red tape and what it sees as interference by the council or L.A.'s
muscular unions. (Among the members of the Growth With Justice Coalition
are five unions, including the County Federation of Labor and two locals
representing service employees.) Many developers are already irritated
by a low-income housing set-aside law the council is weighing.
"There
is nothing more difficult and nothing more public than trying to get a
residential or commercial project approved in a city like Los Angeles,"
said Ray Pearl, executive officer of the Building Industry Association
of the greater Los Angeles-Ventura area. "To say there needs to be
more process doesn't make any more sense."
Under the
draft CIR policy, builders working in redevelopment districts would be
forced to specify how their project would affect a neighborhood's employment
picture, its affordable housing, its quality-of-life needs, and overall
growth. Most reports would probably be under 30 pages and take a few weeks
to compile.
Just who
would write the formatted document is still a bit hazy, but it's envisioned
that CRA staff would cull the statistics for smaller projects with the
builder's assistance. The agency would then release the information to
the public through its website, neighborhood councils, libraries, and
other channels. All of that would be in advance of a hearing giving locals
a forum to register their concerns face-to-face with the builder.
The document
would be triggered on large-scale jobs where a developer must decide whether
an environmental impact report (EIR) is needed: commercial projects exceeding
50,000 square feet, market-housing complexes of 100 units or more, rehabs
of bigger, existing developments, or in cases where affordable housing
is destroyed.
The Alliance,
Elmendorf said, has learned through street experience that community negotiations
with builders pay off for both sides. It and other groups, for instance,
bargained with developers on behalf of neighborhoods in North Hollywood
and Hollywood for housing, jobs, and other services that might have otherwise
been lost in recent plans. Producing the CIR, he added, is a relatively
light task next to the cumbersome, expensive job of putting together a
phonebook-sized EIR.
An example
of how this could work is readily at hand. The Anshultz Entertainment
Group, the powerful development outfit that built the Staples Center,
has been fine-tuning its ideas for a mammoth hotel-retail-theater-housing
complex next to the glass-walled arena in downtown L.A. South Park residents,
though, were skittish that construction would generate traffic and crime,
or uproot them altogether through eminent domain. So, they did what a
growing number of neighborhoods have: They organized a community group
and brought in unions to negotiate with the builder. Six months later,
a legally binding deal was hammered out guaranteeing locals jobs, housing,
and parks - an agreement believed to have helped Anshultz win preliminary
council approval for its Sports and Entertainment District.
Hollywood-area
Councilman Eric Garcetti, who helped craft a city motion for a CIR, said
dispersing information would suction off a lot of the poisonous feelings
created by mutual distrust among builders, residents, and activists.
"There's
just a lot of fear," Garcetti said. "What this is about is communication
at the front end instead of the back end, about people sitting down together.
There's hardly a week that goes by that a developer doesn't tell me how
dysfunctional the current status quo is and how land-use politics is a
full-contact sport in Los Angeles. We want to change the dynamic."
Requiring
census tract statistics in the CIR, backers say, would ensure that projects
would fit their area. Income, poverty levels, property tax receipts, and
home-ownership versus rentals would be included. So would crime data,
proximities to parks and liquor stores, and availability of daycare services.
In the "smart
growth" section of the CIR, a builder must answer questions about
such diverse matters as density, parking, and amenities for bicycles.
Several business leaders complained that the CIR would enshrine political
correctness by forcing developers to throw goodies to areas that would
already see property rates skyrocket and new jobs produced just by adding
significant new investment there. But activists point to the shockwave
that development can send in terms of rent prices, quality-of-life hassles,
and other negatives.
What has
particularly infuriated some development boosters is the final section
of the draft CIR: an "employment questionnaire," which queries
builders about how many contract or temporary jobs might be expected to
be created by the development, and which companies might be employing
security guards, janitors, and such. Will they be part-time or full time?
Will benefits be offered? And what will be the pay?
Forecasting
those things, critics say, is more art than science because leases, finances,
and corporate fortunes can change. They worry developers could be sued
if they promised a certain number of jobs would be available, only to
see that shrink because some franchise decided not to locate there.
"I
have never seen the development community as angry and upset as they are
over this proposal," griped Carol Schatz, president of the Central
City Association, a downtown business-advocacy group. "It's not a
CIR - it's a special-interest impact report!
The issues they care
about are whether they are creating union jobs with union wages. If you
are taking an empty, unoccupied building, and you convert it, is that
not a major community benefit?"
Allan Kotin,
a real estate consultant who favors the CIR, said the idea is a natural
in redevelopment areas. Developers initiating projects there sometimes
covet subsidies, so that would leave them susceptible to questions about
jobs, housing, and daycare. It gets trickier with unsubsidized projects
where a builder has intrinsic zoning rights. Another uncertainty to be
hashed out is whether activists might use the CIR to sidetrack projects,
as they have with EIRs.
"The
offsetting positive," Kotin said, "is that the CIR done properly
can create a reference point so an awful lot of polemic will disappear."
|