Renewal Brings Class, Confusion to Neighborhood

In the office where redevelopment plans for a slumlike Northridge neighborhood are coordinated, an artist’s rendering hangs, depicting how the renovated area will look. The drawing shows a gate-guarded, tree-lined community with Mercedes-Benzes driving in and out.

The rendering shows some of the physical and social changes that are supposed to transform the blighted Bryant Street-Vanalden Avenue neighborhood at the end of three years. As the first year of the $25-million renovation project ends, the predominantly low-income Latino area already is showing dramatic signs of change.

Bryant-Vanalden, once dubbed “Tijuanita,” or little Tijuana, by locals, is looking more like “Park Parthenia,” the name given by the developer to fit its new, spiffy image.

Streets and alleys are cleaner, grass grows in parkways, fresh paint and decorative redwood siding adorn the outside walls of the once-graffiti-strewn apartment buildings. Last week, the first stretch of handsome wrought-iron fencing depicted in the drawing went up.

So far, 38 of the area’s 453 once-dilapidated apartments have been renovated into comfortable and more modern units, complete with new carpeting, drapes and a fresh coat of cream-colored paint. City inspectors will begin checking the units this week, and the first low-income tenants are expected to move in by Christmas.

The area is also beginning to shake its crime-tarnished image. Police say arrests for such offenses as drug dealing and prostitution have markedly decreased as the result of security measures in the project.

Councilman Hal Bernson, who represents the area and proposed the plan, said he is pleased with the results so far. “In my opinion, it’s been very successful,” he said.

But the improvements have come at a cost.

Residents say strict new rules are difficult to live with, and many feel that they are unduly harassed by management. They say they have been overwhelmed by a deluge of confusing contracts and paper work. Some say their privacy has been violated because workers routinely walk into their apartments unannounced.

The unprecedented renovation plan was approved by the City Council and Mayor Tom Bradley in November, 1986. It was the second plan aimed at transforming the deteriorating three-block stretch of 60 apartment buildings into a comfortable, well-groomed development that would be more in keeping with the fashionable Northridge community that surrounds it.

Earlier, Bernson had proposed a similar plan to fix up the area by making it easier for landlords to evict the 3,000 predominantly low-income Latino tenants so that a “new class of tenants” could be brought in. He abandoned the proposal because of a threatened veto by Bradley and intense protests from civil rights and tenants groups.

The second plan provided developer Devinder (Dave) Vadehra with $20.8 million in funds from tax-exempt bonds and a $4.2-million loan to buy and fix up 453 apartments in the neighborhood. The key point in the plan was assurance by Vadehra and Bernson that low-income tenants who wanted to stay in their apartments could do so. They were told that they could obtain government subsidies to pay for the more expensive remodeled units.

But in the midst of the renovation, there is confusion over the number of low-income tenants who will be allowed to stay in the Park Parthenia. City officials and the developer have given conflicting information.

At first, spokesmen for Vadehra said the number of government-subsidized units would be limited to 91. Then they said they were mistaken, and anyone who wanted to could stay.

Ralph Esparza, director of the city Community Development Department’s housing division, agrees that there was no limit. But Friday, Barbara Zeidman, director of the department’s rent stabilization division, said there indeed is one. She said the department favors the cap on subsidized units to prevent the development from turning into a public housing project, which can be plagued by crime and other problems.

In light of the conflicting information, Councilman Ernani Bernardi, the lone council opponent of the plan, said Friday that he will call for a city investigation into the project.

Angry and confused tenants met Friday night to vent their frustrations over the project and protest the new policies.

They said they were told that they would have to pay higher rents if they remained in the neighborhood after the renovation was completed. Dozens of those who have received housing subsidies said they were told by project managers that they would have to move elsewhere to get the aid.

Indeed, scores of families have left Bryant-Vanalden in the past year. At least 355 families have moved, and about a quarter of the apartments are vacant. The result is the most noticeable change in the neighborhood: There just aren’t as many people around.

The sidewalks and apartment courtyards used to teem with children. Men congregated on corners waiting for day labor jobs, and youths loitered around cars. Every afternoon, a produce truck attracted a crowd of shoppers.

Vendors Banned

Now, the streets are nearly empty during working hours. Street vendors are not permitted. Strict house rules prevent children from playing on the grass and in other public areas.

When Vadehra took over a year ago, life at Bryant-Vanalden seemed to change overnight. Vadehra’s representatives said the immediate goal was to bring some semblance of order to the project.

Here was an area where slumlike conditions existed, where several families crowded into one apartment. Many residents sublet bedrooms to help pay the rent, often installing individual locks on the doors. In one case, project official Raman R. Nayer said he found 20 people living in a two-bedroom apartment. Almost every building had different rental contracts, and rents were due at different days of the month.

Vadehra’s first step was to take a tenant census. No one really knew how many people lived in the area. The conservative estimate was 3,000.

All tenants listed as residents were asked to fill out forms stating how many people or families lived in their units. The purpose was to determine how many families should be offered subsidies during the renovation. The census found there were 1,156 families in the area.

Subletting Illegally

Exactly how many individuals have left Bryant-Vanalden in the past year is not known.

Project manager Rex A. Renfrew said most of those who left probably were illegally subletting bedrooms or were into “other types of illegal activities,” namely drug dealing. Tenants said many undocumented aliens, who were afraid to be counted, also left.

Eligible tenants were photographed and given Park Parthenia identification cards. Uniformed, 24-hour security guards began patrolling the area, often asking people to show identification.

As a result of the security measures and the temporary deployment of a police task force in the area, crime has dropped 45% in two years, Capt. Mark Stevens of the Los Angeles Police Department’s Devonshire Division, reported. The area, which once had the highest crime rate in the division, now has a rate equal to other northwest Valley neighborhoods, he said.

New contracts were issued to make paying rents more uniform. Now, all tenants have to pay rent on the first of the month. If they are even one day late, they are fined $25. If they are four days late, they receive an order to vacate the apartment within 30 days.

According to the project manager, 164 families--more than one-third of the families who left in the past year--did so after failing to pay their rent on time.

In addition, tenants also were given a set of house rules and told they would be fined $10 for every infraction. The rules include no walking on the grass, no drinking in public, no playing of loud music and no storing of personal belongings on balconies.

Children are not allowed to play in areas where their games could interfere with pedestrians. Overnight visitors are not allowed for more than a day or two without the approval of management.

Tenant Nora Martinez said she, like other tenants, received a notice asking her to go to the office and sign the house rules agreement. The document she was asked to sign was printed in English. Martinez reads and writes in Spanish.

“They were in a hurry and told me to sign it. I felt like I didn’t have any choice,” she said. “They told me a Spanish copy was on the bulletin board,” which she read after she signed the English version.

‘Like Harassment’

Martinez and other tenants say many of the rules are ridiculous and “almost like harassment.”

“My children can’t play outside anymore,” Martinez said. “I am afraid to let them out in the courtyard because I don’t want to be fined.”

Nayer said the rules were put in place to make the area a pleasant place to live. “We don’t want loud parties and noise disturbances,” he said.

While vacated units are undergoing renovation, repairs are also being made on occupied apartments.

The most serious building, fire and health code violations, including cockroach infestations, holes in ceilings and walls, exposed wiring and accumulated trash, have been corrected, Nayer said.

“When we walked in here, we had a stack that thick of code violations,” said Nayer, holding his hands more than a foot apart. “That’s what we took care of right away.”

During the repairs, however, a number of tenants said workers with master keys entered their apartments unannounced, without the legally required 24-hour notice.

Residents say repairs have taken too long. Their most pressing problem is severe water damage caused by recent rains. Roofs leak, walls are crumbling and their personal possessions are waterlogged, some residents say.

Berta Rueda, whose family has lived in their apartment for eight years, said workers entered her home three times without warning. Twice, she said, she was in the shower when they walked in.

When she complained to project managers, Rueda said she was told that notices were distributed. “They told me I probably lost mine,” she said.

Her husband changed the lock after the third incident and now the Ruedas are in the process of fighting an eviction notice. They have been told that they violated a section of their contract that states locks cannot be changed without permission.

“I have right to my privacy. And it is not right that workers can come into my house when my wife is in the bathroom,” said Baudelio Rueda. “If they don’t respect us, I won’t respect them.”