Chamber Presents Its Downzoning Plan : Development: Advocates of the alternative strategy say it will damage property values less than the city’s growth-control plan.

The Glendale Chamber of Commerce said Tuesday that a six-month land survey by more than 100 volunteers shows that the city can scale down development in a way that will do less damage to property values than a city proposal would do.

Chamber officials said the study supports an alternative plan they presented several months ago, which they said would give property owners an option to increase the value of their land by making it part of a larger project built on adjoining lots.

The chamber’s study shows its plan still would accomplish the Glendale City Council’s goal of limiting construction to about 10,000 more apartments or condominiums, chamber officials said.

To curb Glendale’s population boom, the City Council is considering proposals to change the zoning in areas earmarked for multiple-family buildings, so that fewer new units can be built.

After hearing a summary of the study Tuesday, council members praised the chamber’s work but said they would not abandon their own strategy of reducing growth by downzoning--changing zoning regulations to permit fewer multifamily residential units to be built.

Initially, the council considered a blanket downzoning plan to reduce housing density citywide. In March, the council decided to tailor growth limits to local conditions in 25 selected neighborhoods. That review will resume June 5.

“I think we still have to go neighborhood by neighborhood and see what the result is,” Mayor Larry Zarian said.

The council’s downzoning plans have triggered an outcry from many property owners, who say that allowing fewer units on their lots will dramatically reduce the value of their land.

The primary difference between the chamber plan and the city’s is that the former would allow an increase in the number of apartments or condominiums on a site if a builder added adjoining lots. That would increase the value of each lot, chamber officials say.

For example, the city’s plan might allow no more than two four-unit apartment buildings on adjacent lots. But under the chamber’s plan, a developer who purchased both could build a single 12-unit complex.

“The question is, ‘How is the council going to minimize the damage to the property owners and at the same time manage growth in the city?’ ” said Hamo Rostamian, a developer who heads the chamber’s housing and urban development committee. “We believe we have provided a viable solution to that.”

He said volunteers from the real estate industry and other businesses spent the past six months conducting a lot-by-lot visual inspection of Glendale’s neighborhoods zoned for multifamily housing. The volunteers counted 4,572 lots where single-family houses, duplexes and triplexes could be replaced by larger apartment or condominium complexes.

The volunteers also identified places where lots could be combined for the higher-density projects allowed under the chamber plan. The study concluded that the maximum number of new apartments or condominiums that could be built in Glendale under the chamber’s plan would be 10,208.

Those could house about 27,000 new residents under the chamber’s calculations, and up to 35,000 by the city’s estimate.

Councilman Jerold Milner said he was pleased that the chamber agrees with the council’s goal of capping growth at about 10,000 more units. But he said he objects to rewarding developers who can assemble a large project on adjoining lots.

“Their proposal up front discriminates against single-lot owners,” Milner said. “It gives a significant economic advantage to a professional developer. I think that’s wrong.”

He said the chamber’s plan provides no relief to a person who owns a single lot between two large apartment complexes, with no chance of using the land for a combined-lot project. Milner said the council’s neighborhood-by-neighborhood review will look for ways to help such property owners.

The chamber’s Rostamian said larger housing projects should be encouraged because they are usually better managed and have more flexibility in design. He said building one large project is less disruptive to a neighborhood than a series of smaller ones.

Councilman Carl Raggio said he was pleased to see that the chamber’s study corroborated some of the growth predictions prepared independently by the city’s staff.

Now that there is wide agreement that the city should allow only about 10,000 new apartments and condominiums, the council must agree on a downzoning formula to reach that goal, Raggio said.

He said some elements of the chamber’s proposal could be incorporated into the final plan adopted by the council.

The council has imposed a moratorium on new apartment and condominium construction while the downzoning plan is being prepared. City Manager David H. Ramsay predicted Tuesday that the council’s review will last at least three more months.