Citizens Panel Backs Reduction of CRA Project

A proposal to significantly scale back a massive redevelopment project area in the northeast San Fernando Valley won widespread support Monday from members of a citizens advisory committee, although a few said the reduction doesn’t go far enough.

“It makes sense,” committee Vice Chairwoman Carol Silver said. “Sometimes a more modest project works better than a larger project.”

Committee member Gary Forsch said it is smart to exclude some areas that do not want to be in the redevelopment project area.

“It’s a swell idea,” said Forsch, an owner of Roscoe Hardware in Sun Valley. “If you focus on areas with lower property values, it is easier to get development to come in and to have the money to pay for it.”

In interviews and public comments, a majority of the 20-member Project Area Committee endorsed the idea of a 40% to 50% reduction of the 6,835-acre project area. The panel was set up by the city and elected at large to advise the Community Redevelopment Agency about the northeast Valley proposal.

Redevelopment agency planner Bob Fazio presented a proposal to the citizens panel on Monday night that eliminated areas deemed no longer developable.

Those included nearly 2,000 acres of the Hansen Dam Recreation Area, about 300 acres of county land used for water-spreading grounds, 189 acres of Whiteman Airport, and the 63-acre former General Motors plant in Panorama City, which has already undergone major redevelopment.

The agency is also proposing the exclusion of areas--including a portion of Lake View Terrace--where there is strong opposition to the redevelopment agency.

At Monday night’s meeting--held at the Pacoima office of San Fernando Valley Neighborhood Services and attended by about 50 people--Fazio said reducing the project area’s size will allow the agency to better focus on redeveloping areas that most require help.

“Our other thinking in proposing consideration of reducing project area boundaries is based on what we see as trends apparent where investment is already underway in areas,” he added.

City Councilman Alex Padilla, whose district includes most of the project area, tentatively supported many of the cutbacks, but said he wants to see the committee’s recommendation before taking a final position on some of the proposed exclusions.

All of the committee members interviewed, including Chairwoman Caron Caines, said they supported scaling back the project.

Some members added that reducing it in size--even 3,400 acres would be the largest redevelopment project area in the city--might make the proposal more politically palatable.

“Right now there is a lot of opposition to the size and scope of the thing,” said committee member Joseph Corcoran of L.A. Family Housing Corp.

Panel member John Ashcraft said the project area should be cut “at least by half” to target areas that can be developed as opposed to those that are not likely to get new construction.

Committee member Dick Symonds said he is glad the agency is finally reducing the size of the proposed project, but said the reduction does not go far enough. He said the project area should be limited to the acreage identified by city officials as likely to see actual new construction--currently between 71 and 217 acres.

“That would be the maximum they should include,” said Symonds, who is part of a committee minority that has questioned whether the agency should be given the power of eminent domain to take property from owners who refuse to sell.

While supportive of the proposal to reduce the project area, a majority of the panelists said some redevelopment is needed to reverse the trend of economic degradation and blight that has plagued the northeast Valley. Many have blamed City Hall for not giving the region its fair share of resources and attention.

“The northeast Valley has really been shortchanged,” said Silver, a past president of the Sun Valley Chamber of Commerce. “I have seen it be seriously neglected and this project will go some way to rectifying that.”