THE ZONING GAME : Playing With a City’s Building Blocks

Say a developer proposes a three-story office building on Ventura Boulevard in Encino. But nearby residents howl in protest when he gets the permit to build with only perfunctory review. How did it happen? Most likely, the land was zoned for just such a use and the developer had what is called a “by-right entitlement” to build.

Zoning land is one of the most fundamental powers a local government has. It essentially establishes areas within a city or county where certain types of uses--such as residential, commercial or industrial--are permitted and how intense those uses should be.

As simple as that sounds, the practice and history of zoning are often messy affairs. Most disputes between neighborhood groups and City Hall have zoning at their root--from allowing a day-care center into a residential neighborhood to permitting apartments on a commercial strip.

But deciphering the alphabet soup of zoning designations--such as RZ2.5, CR and MR2--can be mind-numbing. And the friction between zones can create flare-ups, like the one between the owner of a Sherman Oaks coffeehouse and the homeowners in an adjacent single-family neighborhood.

Zoning was supposed to make city life easier.

Early History

Modern zoning has its roots in English common law and nuisance abatement laws, which gave government the right to regulate obnoxious uses on private property. But during the Industrial Revolution, the need for government regulation became more pressing. Cities were crowded, unhealthy places and local governments tried to bring order to the urban jumble.

Zoning differs from planning. Planning imagines the future in broad terms. Zoning is intended to implement that vision block by block and consequently prescribes specific designations for specific properties.

Los Angeles passed its first zoning ordinance in 1907. New York passed one in 1916. But property rights advocates argued at the time that the practice of zoning was unconstitutional because it deprived them of full use of their land.

Euclid vs. Ambler

The showdown over zoning came in 1926, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a case against the Village of Euclid, Ohio, by the Ambler Realty Co. In the 1920s, Euclid officials enacted a zoning ordinance to stave off the approach of factories and apartment buildings from nearby Cleveland. In the process, some property owned by Ambler was zoned to allow only one- and two-family houses.

Ambler sued, but the court ruled that “the complex conditions of our day” justified Euclid’s regulations. The court added that zones of the same use must be treated the same. For example, the owner of property in a light industrial zone must have the same development rights as all other owners of property in such a zone. In addition, the court ruled that every parcel in a jurisdiction must have some sort of zoning designation.

This became known as Euclidean zoning.

The Emergence of Zoning

Grumbling property owners soon found that zoning could help them sell their product. People liked to live in well-ordered neighborhoods. A pyramid model--with single-family homes at the top and industries at the bottom--emerged, with uses at the top permitted in zones below, but not vice versa. That soon changed so that zones were restricted only to their specified use. The automobile encouraged this trend toward sprawl and it is largely how the San Fernando Valley developed.

Invisible Walls

The idea of zoning has always appealed to those with upper-crust sensibilities. In fact, zoning became a tool to keep certain people out of neighborhoods, requiring, for example, large houses that would be beyond the reach of many income groups. While not explicitly discriminatory, such zoning effectively walled off many neighborhoods across the country.

But in 1975, the New Jersey Supreme Court said local governments had a “presumptive obligation” to zone and plan housing for all income groups. Although the U.S. Supreme Court did not take the case, many states have embraced the principles of the New Jersey decision.

C1: Local retail shops and offices

C1.5: Department stores and theaters

C2: Service stations and garages

R1: Single-family homes

R3: Apartment buildings and day-care centers

M3: Heavy industrial

Zones in Action

Reading zoning designations can be confusing, especially in such a big city as Los Angeles. In general, designations are made up of one or two letters followed by a number. The first letter of a designation indicates the use.

A: Agriculture

P: Parking

C: Commercial

M: Industrial/Manufacturing

R: Residential

Occasionally, a second letter follows the first, which indicates an even more specific use. For example, an R followed by an E, means Residential Estate.

The number after letters indicates the intensity. For example, an R1 zone permits single-family homes while an R3 zone allows apartment houses.

Sources: “Guide to California Planning” by William Fulton; “City of Quartz” by Mike Davis; “The Zoning Game” by Richard Babcock; Los Angeles City Planning Department.

Researched by AARON CURTISS / Los Angeles Times