Curbs Proposed for Developers of Apartments

A citizens advisory committee has recommended temporary controls on apartment development in San Pedro, but slow-growth advocates charge that the compromise measure does not go far enough to curb a building boom that threatens to mar the single-family complexion of the seaside community.

Because the recommendations are directed at lots larger than 6,000 square feet, they would do little to stop what residents have complained about most: the razing of single-family homes on small lots to make way for apartments. Instead, the controls primarily would limit developers who string together lots to put up larger apartment complexes.

“This is a first, significant step toward reduced density,” declared committee chairman Noah Modisett Friday.

Adopted Wednesday

Countered Shanaz Ardehali-Kordich, an anti-development activist on the committee: “The areas that we’re most concerned with, that most need to be conserved and protected, are not getting any more protection. . . . I don’t think it was a compromise. I think it was a sellout.”

The proposed restrictions were adopted Wednesday by an overwhelming vote of the San Pedro Community Plan Advisory Committee, a 25-member panel appointed by Los Angeles Councilwoman Joan Milke Flores to address what has become the hottest issue in San Pedro: apartment development.

Although no roll call was taken at the meeting, members estimated that only four of the 21 present voted against the plan, which calls for the City Council to adopt an interim control ordinance--a temporary law--that would limit but not ban building while the committee discusses permanent zoning changes.

It is now up to Flores to review the proposed ordinance and decide whether to submit it to the council. “Obviously, she’s going to take a good look at it,” said her San Pedro deputy, Mario Juravich.

The proposed ordinance targets areas zoned for multiple-family developments, particularly those designated RD1.5, which permits an apartment unit for every 1,500 square feet in a lot.

Construction Limited

The recommendations, which apply to RD1.5 areas and those with higher-density zoning, provide that:

* On lots 6,000 square feet or larger, apartment developers may put up only one unit for every 2,000 square feet of space.

* No single building may contain more than four apartment units, although more than one building would be permitted on a lot if the lot is large enough.

* When two or more lots zoned differently are tied together into one lot, the more restrictive zoning shall apply.

* Alleys may not be included in the size of a lot.

In addition, the committee recommended that developers be required to landscape 100 square feet of lot space for each apartment. And, in an effort to preserve historic buildings, the ordinance says that any building on the local landmark list of the San Pedro Bay Historical Society may not be demolished or altered without city permission.

Smaller Lots

Although the proposed ordinance would curb developers of large apartment complexes, slow-growth advocates complain it does nothing to curb apartment development on lots smaller than 6,000 square feet. According to Juravich, Flores’ deputy, most individual lots in San Pedro fall into this category, with many of them 5,000 square feet or less.

The anti-development activists are most worried about areas that are zoned for multifamily development but are composed of mostly single-family homes. Developers are coming into these areas, razing old homes and putting up “shoe box” apartments, they say.

Ardehali-Kordich and other slow-growth advocates have pressed for temporary and permanent restrictions that would allow only single-family homes or duplexes on such lots.

But under the committee’s recommendations, a developer may build the same number of apartments--three--on a 4,500-square-foot lot as could be built on a 6,000-square-foot lot. “They’re still going to be able to build just what they’ve been building,” Ardehali-Kordich said.

But committee vice chairman Bill Lusby, who said he drafted most of the proposed interim control ordinance, countered that the building industry would be devastated if the zoning was changed, even temporarily, to allow only duplexes on small lots.

“That means no building, because nobody will build a duplex,” he said. “Nobody will tear down one house to build two houses.” He said to restrict development to duplexes would be tantamount to a moratorium on new apartments on most lots.

Both Lusby and Modisett said they believed that other controls--particularly the landscaping provision--will encourage developers to put up apartments that are more aesthetically pleasing than those of the shoe box variety.

Further, Modisett said, he does not believe that the committee would have accepted a plan that would limit apartment development to duplexes.

“I could tell the sentiment of the members of the committee,” he said. “They felt that would be taking away too much of the economic freedom of the people who own that property.”