‘No-Growth’ Movement Gaining Force, Planning Official Warns

Dan Garcia, president of the city Planning Commission and a confidant of Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, warned a group of downtown business people Thursday that a politically potent “no-growth” movement is gathering force around the state and is taking shape locally under the leadership of two city councilmen, Zev Yaroslavsky and Marvin Braude.

Yaroslavsky is widely regared as a potential candidate for mayor in 1989.

“More and more, planning will be used as a vehicle for advancing political careers,” said Garcia, who himself has been mentioned from time to time as a candidate for elective office.

Garcia predicted a “battle royal” over an impending package of anti-development legislation that he said the two councilmen are working on as part of a strategy to build a political base among home owners angry about unruly commercial development.

He said one part of the package would be an attempt to set new controls over large developments which, up to now, have been immune from criticism because they met local zoning requirements.

Braude confirmed Thursday that he and Yaroslavsky are working on what he described as “a package of significant reforms.” But he would not elaborate except to say that they would be introduced in a couple of weeks.

Garcia, whose alternating sympathies for both home owners and builders at times have left people unsure about where he stands, made his comments at a downtown conference sponsored by the Central City Assn. He urged developers to accept more controls or face the wrath of a Populist movement aimed at stopping them in their tracks. As evidence of that movement, Garcia pointed to the voters’ overwhelming approval of Proposition U, a citywide slow-growth initiative on the November ballot. Garcia first supported and then distanced himself from the initiative, whose principal backers were Yaroslavsky and Braude.

As an example of the kind of compromise he was advocating, Garcia spoke of his own decision to endorse a plan that he only half-heartedly supports--the creation of 35 community planning councils around the city that would give residents more influence over what is built in their neighborhoods.

A few hours after his speech, Garcia presided over a meeting of the Planning Commission at which the plan for the neighborhood councils was formally presented by a citizens’ advisory panel appointed by the commission. Although the commission seemed favorably disposed toward the plan, it withheld approval and avoided much discussion of crucial questions surrounding the plan, such as how the council members would be selected and how much veto power they would have over proposed development.

Garcia said the commission probably would approve the establishment of the councils in some form by the first of the year, and he predicted that the City Council would not stand in the way.

He said that a tentative agreement between Yaroslavsky and council President Pat Russell, who are frequently adversaries, over creation of the neighborhood councils indicated the likelihood of City Council approval. Efforts to reach Russell and Yaroslavsky on a day when the council does not meet were not successful.

But Garcia also said he is opposed to one feature of the plan, as presented, that calls for the election of at least some members of the councils.

He said that in many areas of the city where there are ethnic imbalances, elections would deprive the councils of minority representation.

The introduction of the plan for neighborhood councils is one aspect of a four-part policy announced Nov. 3 by Garcia and Russell which was widely regarded at City Hall as a counter strategy to the anti-development efforts of Proposition U champions Yaroslavsky and Braude.

With strong support for Proposition U coming from Russell’s congested coastal district, supporters of the councilwoman feel it is necessary for her to shore up her image with homeowners and other critics of the massive development occurring in her district.

The Russell-Garcia set of proposals call for more active citizen participation in the planning process; a re-evaluation of the city’s General Plan with its emphasis on more than 40 high-rise commercial centers; a modification of height and density provisions of the city’s Municipal Code and a detailed plan for promoting economic development in depressed areas of the city.