Highland Park Development Curbs Assailed

A proposed city ordinance that would severely limit development in parts of Highland Park met strong opposition for the first time at a meeting held by city planning officials last week.

Proprietors of small businesses and property owners complained bitterly about the proposed interim control ordinance, which they said could lower the value of some property in the area by limiting development.

If adopted by the Los Angeles City Council, the proposed ordinance would prohibit the demolition of buildings in most cases and limit construction to projects that city planners deem compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. It is a temporary measure designed to stave off development while city planners revise the general plan of the area, one of the city’s earliest suburbs, over the next few years.

The Dec. 14 meeting at Franklin High School drew more than 200 people, on both sides of the growing debate over the future of Highland Park. On one side, the Highland Park Neighborhood Assn. represents homeowners seeking density controls and the restoration of historic homes. On the other are owners of small businesses and property owners who bought land in Highland Park with the intention of developing for profit and now fear that their investments are threatened.

City planners at the meeting explained the proposed ordinance--in English and Spanish--to property owners, and heard their reactions to it. Owners’ testimony will affect the ordinance’s final draft, which the planning department will submit to the Los Angeles Planning Commission. The testimony will also be part of the planners’ report that will accompany the ordinance.

As proposed, the ordinance would cover sections of Highland Park that are part of the 1st and 14th City Council districts. The long irregular swath is bounded by the Pasadena Freeway and Griffin Avenue on the east, Avenue 35 on the south, Avenue 50 and Marmion Way on the west and York Boulevard on the north.

Though much of the area covered by the proposed ordinance is residential, Highland Park’s two major commercial sections--Figueroa Street and a bustling section of York Boulevard near the Pasadena Freeway--are also included.

Under the ordinance, city planners would review construction projects in the area to determine if they are consistent with the “density, scale and character” of 75% of the existing buildings within a 300-foot radius of the project. Under existing law, building projects in most areas of Los Angeles are individually reviewed only if a zone change is requested.

Builders whose plans pass the review process can submit them to the Building and Safety Department and complete the routine process of obtaining a building permit. The proposed ordinance exempts construction or remodeling plans for single-family homes.

The proposed ordinance combines two measures introduced separately this fall by Councilwoman Gloria Molina and Councilman Richard Alatorre. It is intended to limit development while city planners revise the Northeast Los Angeles District Plan.

If adopted, the ordinance would be in effect until the council adopts a new district plan, or for 3 years. It would include provisions for exemptions under certain conditions.

The Highland Park area has seen increased development this year, with an association of 12 Highland Park neighborhood groups urging a package of density restrictions, historic-preservation zones and design-review standards to slow growth.

Opponents’ 1st Hearing

But Wednesday’s meeting was the first time opponents of such growth controls testified at a city hearing. Two previous meetings of the council’s Planning and Environment Committee, at which the council members’ two measures were introduced, were attended only by proponents of the proposed law.

“I paid a lot more for my property here because I had a dream that I could someday build something on it and put away something for my future,” Highland Park resident John Arlata said at the meeting. “Now they are telling me I can’t do that. I say that is not right. These people, they don’t want us to share in the same cake they’re enjoying.”

Jack DeMartinez was one of several real estate brokers opposing the proposed ordinance.

“This effectively does cut off any significant-size buildings, even though they have represented it does less than that,” DeMartinez said. “I challenge you to find one property in Highland Park where you could build eight units profitably, according to that law. It can’t be done.”

But Diana Barnwell, president of Highland Park Neighborhood Assn., said the interim control ordinance would limit, not stop, development.

“The ICO’s purpose is to qualify the mathematics of greed, but surely not to erase the potential for reasonable profit by reasonable men,” Barnwell said.