The Los Angeles Municipal Council voted on Tuesday to stimulate the development of housing in existing high density residential neighborhoods and along commercial corridors, while leaving Unifamilial zones largely intact.
During a 15-0 vote, the Council asked the city's prosecutor to write an order to carry out this plan, which encourages both the market rate and the affordable units. Once the order was written, it will return to the Council for final approval.
The rezoning effort is a response to public housing mandates that seek to mitigate the housing crisis by forcing the city to find land where 255,000 additional houses can be built and have a plan to do so by mid-February.
Last month, a municipal council committee approved A plan that allowed more buildings in existing high density residential areas and along the main streets in areas with jobs and good schools.
Under the plan, the developers could exceed the current limits of construction in these areas if they include a certain percentage of affordable units.
The incentives to be built in single -family areas would only apply if a property belongs to a public agency or a denominational organization, which represents only a ribbon of the city's unifamilial land.
The Council approved the plan on Tuesday after having briefly debated the opportunity to authorize more dense housing in the unified areas, which certain housing defenders have argued to significantly reduce the economic and racial segregation that the unifamilial zoning has contributed to maintaining.
The groups of owners have opposed this, saying that allowing apartments in their communities would increase traffic and reduce the opportunities to buy a house.
The member of the Council Nithya Raman, which represents a district which extends from Silver Lake to Reseda, presented a motion which would have allowed buildings of mixed income and 100% affordable apartments in certain unifamilial areas near the transit while restricting developers to smaller projects, which Raman called “sweet density”.
This plan was less than some defenders requested, but the members of the Council rejected it by a vote of 10-5, choosing to leave the unified areas for the most part.
Cindy Chvatal-Keane, President of Hancock Park Homeowners Assn., Hummed the decision to “huge victory for all of us”, noting that many members of the community worked with the city to find a way to respond to state housing mandates while protecting the unifamilial districts.
In a speech to the colleagues member members of the Council, Raman said that by allowing no more housing in single -family areas, the city directed too much development in existing multifamilial areas, which would result in frequent demolition of existing apartments and shift tenants.
“What this plan is currently is to put a target on the back,” said Raman about tenants.
The council took some measures to protect these people. He voted on Tuesday for the city prosecutor to project rules that would give low -income tenants expelled for the development of the right to receive a unit in the new building and to receive aid for enlarged resettlement to help them afford the housing during the construction of the project.
Laura Raymond, director of the ACT-La Coalition, praised these additional protections, but argued that more should be made to preserve the old housing subject to the City rent stabilization order.
In a press release, she added that by voting Raman's proposal to add more housing in the unified areas, the Council missed “a golden opportunity to significantly tackle the housing crisis and segregation.
Some members of the council who voted against Raman's proposal expressed their interest in allowing more accommodation in the unified areas at a future moment, but wanted a more personalized approach.
“I would like us to continue the conversation,” said the member of the Bob Blumenfield council, who represents the central valley of San Fernando. “But it's a complicated question.”
