Farrell Seeks CRA Aid for Supporters’ Shop Center Project

Los Angeles City Councilman Robert Farrell has asked the Community Redevelopment Agency to consider condemning several houses in one of the city’s most historically significant neighborhoods in order to make way for a shopping center whose developer has contributed to Farrell’s reelection fund.

The proposed shopping center has set off a storm of protest by residents of the neighborhood, North University Park, just north of USC in South-Central Los Angeles. The residents, speaking at a CRA public hearing Wednesday, said that besides removing at least 27 dwelling units and displacing the occupants, the shopping center would deal a severe blow to a neighborhood unique for its ethnic diversity as well as its architecture.

North University Park boasts one of the largest concentrations of craftsman-style frame bungalows and turn-of-the-century Victorian houses in the city.

James Wood, CRA chairman, made it clear Wednesday that the proposed center is a prickly issue, saying: “This is going to be a tough piece of business, and I don’t know how it’s going to come out. . . . One of the objectives of the CRA is neighborhood preservation.”

Wood presided over the emotionally charged public hearing in which about 20 people spoke out against the shopping center and only one spoke in favor of it. Wood repeatedly told the audience that the CRA had not made up its mind on the issue and was looking into the matter only because Farrell had asked the agency to do so.

“This is really being driven by the councilman,” Wood said.

Three years ago, however, it was the CRA that first identified the area as an appropriate place for a neighborhood shopping center.

Farrell was scheduled to speak at the public hearing but did not appear. He did not return calls made to his office by The Times Wednesday afternoon.

While controversies pitting developers and council members against local residents are part of the fabric of local politics on the city’s wealthier Westside, this dispute is a novel occurrence in South-Central Los Angeles. It has already attracted the interest of the Los Angeles Conservancy, which works for the protection of historic buildings, and it is likely to draw the interest of politically active homeowners’ groups as they reach out for allies in their efforts to make growth the central issue in this year’s City Council elections.

The final decision on the shopping center, which will require the City Council’s approval, will entail balancing conflicting interests: the economic revitalization of a depressed part of the city versus the preservation of housing stock when there is a severe need for shelter. There is also the issue of gentrification, with local residents, who have restored their houses, arguing that the encroachment of a six-acre shopping center will scuttle the neighborhood’s nomination for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

Bestowing more than honor, the National Register offers tax credits to the owners of income-producing property, thus providing an incentive to local real estate owners to restore and rent out their property.

The shopping center would front on Adams Boulevard and run south from there between Vermont and Menlo avenues.

According to CRA officials, the promoters of the center include the Boys Market grocery chain and Danny Bakewell, a prominent black entrepreneur and civic leader. Boys Market Inc. made a $3,000 contribution to Farrell in 1985 and a $1,000 contribution to him in 1986. Bakewell, who has contributed to several local political figures, including Mayor Tom Bradley, said Wednesday that he has given to Farrell “for years.” But Bakewell said he contributes to Farrell because the councilman shares his interest in bringing new business to South-Central Los Angeles.

“For me, as a black man, that is a very important goal,” he said.

Bakewell said he is a partner in a joint venture with Boys Market to develop the shopping center, which he described as “an ideal opportunity to give the community the services it needs.”

Asked about neighborhood opposition to the project, Bakewell replied, “Our objective certainly is not to disrupt the community.”

But he added that he questioned the motives of some of the neighborhood opponents, whom he said were more interested in “exploiting” the market in old houses than in living in the area.

Virginia Rader, real estate manager for Boys Market, said her company has given assurances to CRA officials and neighborhood residents that it intends to cooperate “to the extent that is financially reasonable” with the goals of historic preservationists.

Rader also said that the Boys contribution to Farrell was one of many made routinely to local elected officials.

Rader and Bakewell said the supermarket chain already owns property at the site of the proposed shopping center but needs to assemble a larger parcel in order for the center to be financially successful.

To acquire the extra property, which consists of several residential lots along Menlo, Bakewell said the developers need assistance in the form of the CRA’s powers of condemnation.

Bakewell said Farrell, for now, is “emphatically” behind the project but added, “If the city doesn’t want that development . . . then we will go away.”

In order for the CRA to come to the aid of the project, it must vote to incorporate the entire site of the proposed shopping center into an existing redevelopment project area that now focuses on the area surrounding the USC campus and Exposition Park.