Yaroslavsky warns L.A. Council candidates of voters' 'anti-development' mood

Here’s a warning for candidates looking to replace Los Angeles City Councilwoman Wendy Greuel in the Sept. 22 special election in the San Fernando Valley: pay attention to real estate development – and the fury it inspires among neighborhood groups.

That was the advice offered this morning by Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who picked the winning candidate in last month’s election for his own onetime Westside council seat.

Yaroslavsky backed former Assemblyman Paul Koretz, who won by a 51-49 margin. Appearing at the Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum, Yaroslavsky pointed out that the race, which started out with six candidates, went down to the wire as a nail biter between the two who were most skeptical of real estate projects.

“This was an anti-development electorate,” Yaroslavsky told the breakfast crowd. “Nobody in that electorate said, ‘I want to double the density [of buildings] on Fairfax Avenue or on Westwood Boulevard.’”

Greuel, who becomes the city controller on July 1, spent the last seven years representing a district that stretches from Sherman Oaks to Sunland-Tujunga. Potential candidates for her seat include Assemblyman Paul Krekorian, airport commissioner Chris Essel and school board member Tamar Galatzan, among others. (If no candidate garners a majority, a runoff is slated for Dec. 8.)

Yaroslavsky, in his typically blunt fashion, called Greuel’s district the “second angriest district in the city.” He argued that voters are fed up with the city’s handling of growth and development, including Senate Bill 1818, aimed at creating more affordable housing. The council pursued “an orgy of upzoning” in its attempt to implement that law, he argued.

Yaroslavsky, who served on the council from 1975 to 1994, said he made plenty of mistakes on development himself during his tenure at City Hall. But he argued that, when reviewing a real estate project, the city’s elected officials should pay special attention to the senior citizen who lives alone and can’t afford a high-priced lobbyist or City Hall consultant. “I’m her consultant,” he said.

-- David Zahniser at L.A. City Hall

Comments

[Scott Hamilton]

It is very sad that "developer" has become a pejorative. Everyone complains about new development, and then turns around and visits the Grove, the Century City Mall, Staples Center and Nokia Live in droves. Development is not only a refreshing of our culture and society, but it can make unproductive parts of our city productive again. And let us not forget all the jobs and revenue development creates! Finally -- SMART development can help dig us out of this traffic nightmare in Los Angeles. Imagine a well DEVELOPED subway system with high density housing running all along such transit arteries and to major commercial office and retail centers. You would no longer NEED a car -- really. But decades of lazy city officials and freeway happy transportation boards have made this goal difficult to attain -- but it is doable. We just need to be SMART.

[Raffi]

Thanks, Scott, that's exactly it. We need smart development that makes sense. We need a roadmap for it that people can get used to and rely on.

Where is the metro going to be built?
What areas around it will be (must be) rezoned into much higher density mixed use? How many blocks?
Where will bike paths be built?
Will the LA River Project ever really happen?

Perhaps in some areas, tall buildings might even be a requirement for a building permit. Those who want the car and the traffic can stick to the areas far from the railways. Those who don't can see the sense of the plan and lobby for a real urban option in LA.

[alex]

The MTA, having built several rail lines to date, has so far been unable to provide data that any of its rail lines has ever reduced traffic on any freeway, boulevard, or major street.

The MTA has also gone on record that the Expo Line won't help traffic either.

But Scott would have us believe that attratcing hundreds or thousands of new workers or shoppers to an area will somehow magically help traffic in that area. He must not live near any of the developments he names above.

I do agree with him that development is a good thing when an area, like Hollywood, needs revitalization. Unfortunately since developers are the main source of many candidates campaign funding, these politicains have failed to provide an adequate check to their execesses and have left that duty to the neighborhood councils and the general citizenry. Once politicians stop handing out zoning variances like Christmas presents, then residents can stop doing their job for them.

[Mike]

Yes, let's all take our political advice from grumpy senior citizens, the same ones behind LA's car culture and endless suburban sprawl in the 40's and 50's. I certainly agree with Scott - what is needed is smart development. Development will come no matter what; what City Hall is there to do is to make sure it is well located and serves the most people. It is not there to listen to people who oppose development at all costs and want to push the problem somewhere else. People are moving to Los Angeles, traffic is getting worse, and we can't continue these battles to protect neighborhoods. What needs to happen is a group effort to unite the neighborhoods behind a city mentality - one where everyone works together to improve a whole urban region instead of focusing on their own piece and trying to push developers out.