Mixed-use zoning in downtown L.A.

Re “A working downtown,” editorial, Feb. 22

A city recommendation to restrict development of downtown industrial land could prove costly to our economy. Much of L.A.’s industrial land has been abandoned since the 1970s because streets are too narrow for modern trucks, sites are too small for large-scale industries and taxes and zoning restrictions make downtown’s industrial land more expensive than in neighboring cities.

Since then, the market has realized more productive uses for much of this land, especially in providing mixed-use developments that foster entrepreneurs and creative professionals, who can operate alongside viable industrial uses. These small businesses, coupled with housing, create more jobs, pay higher wages and contribute 300% more in tax revenues to the city than old-economy heavy industry. This new mixed-use environment is serving Los Angeles well. The city’s restrictive zoning proposal needs to be rethought so that we can continue to create jobs, build much-needed housing and attract investment.

CAROL E. SCHATZ

President and CEO

Central City Assn.

of Los Angeles

*

In City Council District 9, which has a large portion of the city’s industrial land, industrial jobs have been declining for decades for reasons that have nothing to do with zoning.

As the center of the region’s public transportation system, downtown is the logical place for sustainable growth that allows people to live and work without adding to congestion or air pollution. The availability of public transit downtown provides no benefit to industrial uses. Furthermore, the wages for industrial jobs in Southeast Los Angeles are nowhere near those assumed by city planners; many of these jobs are in the garment industry in facilities just a few notches above the label “sweatshop.”

We have an opportunity to create mixed-use development that would provide better-paying jobs and more housing at all income levels. The city could develop downtown zoning and design guidelines that allow for mixed-use projects that combine low- or no-impact industrial uses (such as garment factories) with residential uses.

By requiring a certain percentage of industrial square footage on lower floors and residential above, the city may actually achieve a net gain in industrial square footage because the residential uses could help such projects pencil out. This is actually the more sensible use of restrictive zoning than that which The Times believes should be implemented.

COUNCILWOMAN

JAN PERRY

9th District

Los Angeles