A Bitter Battle : Housing: Tenants of Venice affordable-housing complex assail redevelopment plan. Owners say it’s the best solution for aging facility.
Sheila Bernard, a single mother of three and longtime Los Angeles schoolteacher, has moved nine times in the last 20 years.
Job transfers and the search for affordable housing have taken her to Long Beach, Pasadena and Central Los Angeles, among other places.
And now she faces another uprooting.
Bernard’s current home is in the 40-acre Lincoln Place apartment complex in Venice, the subject of five years of pitched battles among tenants, property owners and neighbors over redevelopment of one of the largest affordable-housing facilities on the Westside.
Now, after more than 200 community meetings, Los Angeles city officials are about to decide whether Berkeley-based TransAction Cos. Ltd., which owns the apartments, can replace most of them with condominiums.
The company wants to gradually demolish the 795 apartments in the sprawling complex near Penmar Park and construct 654 market-rate condos, 52 moderately priced condos and 144 low-rent apartments.
Opponents of the redevelopment say it will exacerbate an alarming trend in which lower- and middle-income renters are spending an increasing proportion of their incomes on rent. A 1993 Los Angeles city survey found that 41% of renters paid more than 35% of their gross household incomes on housing, up from 35% in 1980.
“There is a housing crisis for people of moderate means--construction costs today are creating [rents] out of their price range,” said Venice’s City Council representative, Ruth Galanter. “The developer’s attitude is to take care of everyone living there today and to hell with everyone else later.”
Company officials say their proposal is the only long-term solution for the facility’s fraying buildings, which have faulty wiring and antiquated plumbing, and don’t meet fire and safety codes. The $150-million redevelopment would preserve a measure of affordable housing, increase security against crime and revitalize the neighborhood, they say.
*
But tenants of the well-worn but sturdy complex of bungalows and low-rise buildings have sworn to fight the redevelopment project, saying it would permanently eradicate a diverse community of 1,500 residents. Many tenants, who pay $388 to $971 a month for one- and two-bedroom units, say they are dependent on low- and moderate-income rental housing.
“When you destroy low-end housing and put in high-end units, you are basically taking out something that’s irreplaceable,” said Bernard, president of the Lincoln Place Tenants Assn.
The Los Angeles City Council’s planning and land-use management committee is scheduled to vote on the project Aug. 8 and forward its recommendations to the full council for a final ruling.
Built in 1949 in response to the severe post-World War II housing shortage, Lincoln Place provides about 5% of Venice’s total rental units, according to housing experts.
Over the years, the tree-studded complex--seen last year in Tim Burton’s period move “Ed Wood”--with its grassy courtyards and ocean breezes has attracted a loyal community. A majority of residents are white, with about 12% Latino, 6% Asian and 3% African American, and a significa1853104238according to city and federal definitions.
In 1987, about one year after TransAction purchased the complex, it issued eviction notices to tenants and began renovation work, planning to rent the units to new tenants at higher prices. Residents formed the tenants association and successfully fought the evictions. By 1990, TransAction had proposed a more drastic plan than rehabilitation, opting for demolition of the current structures and offering redevelopment of the site.
In 1992, tenants proposed buying Lincoln Place for $47.7 million with private and city financial assistance and later lowered the offer to $40 million due to declining real estate values. The owners rejected both offers, citing unrealistic financial plans, and have continued to push their project through the city planning process.
A covenant in the proposal promises that no tenant will have to leave Lincoln Place during the decade-long construction. The company says it will provide an existing, similar or new unit at the complex for the same rent.
Tenants who want to move will be granted a relocation fee of $2,000 to $5,000 and assistance in finding other housing in the area, according to the proposal. Elderly and low-income residents will have top priority in moving into the 144 low-income apartments and in purchasing the 52 moderately priced townhomes.
*
The plan’s advocates say the redevelopment will create more than 100 construction jobs, provide the city of Los Angeles with $4.5 million in one-time development fees and eventually contribute an additional $600,000 in annual tax benefits.
Many tenants see the project as a potential disaster because of the financial history of the property and market forces.
TransAction is a majority holder in all 10 partnerships that own Lincoln Place. Those partnerships just emerged in 1993 from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, which holds off creditors while a business establishes a plan to pay its debts.
Housing advocates worry that the company will be unable to sustain the project in a market that is already flush with expensive townhouses and condominiums. If the company’s plans go awry, they warn, it will be too late: A crucial segment of the area’s affordable-housing market will already have been demolished.
Canvassers, some paid by the company, say they have collected 2,477 signatures in favor of the redevelopment, including 24% of current tenants. Tenants association members say their detailed survey and petition drive at the complex shows opposition to the plan at 29 to 1. Tenants are pushing the idea of a modest renovation and urging the owners to continue to operate the complex at what they say would still be a profit.
Urban planning experts, many who have studied the decade-long saga of Lincoln Place, have a historical perspective.
“A little investment would go a long way,” said Neal Richman, a professor of urban planning at UCLA. “Europe has buildings that have gone on for hundreds of years. Why do we have to tear down structures here in this city every 40 years?”
