Property owners plead with planners

Deirdre Newman

A vocal contingent of industrial property owners made emotional

pleas to the Planning Commission not to include their properties in

an area that may be added to the downtown redevelopment zone.

As of press time Monday, planners had not voted whether to

recommend redesignating the zone’s boundaries to include the

odd-shaped area roughly bordered by 15th Street, Whittier Avenue and

East 19th Street.

To qualify as a redevelopment area, the territory must contain

substantial blight and be an economic burden to the community.

Many owners said their properties are not blighted or an economic

burden and that any blight in the proposed area could easily be

resolved by working with existing city regulations.

“Capturing this area under the guise of blight is unforgivable,”

said Carol Ann Burr, who owns property on Whittier. “Forty-four of

the blight indicators can be resolved by code enforcement.”

Designating the territory as a redevelopment area would allow the

city to receive more revenue in property taxes. It would also allow

the city to seize property within the area through eminent domain, a

prospect that strikes fear in the hearts of the property owners.

“The city would have the power to take our property and turn it

over to a developer through eminent domain,” said Roger MacGregor,

who has owned a yacht-building business on Placentia for 35 years.

“That is what is scaring us to death.”

Only one out of 20 speakers at Monday night’s meeting spoke in

favor of adding the area to the redevelopment zone.

Martin Millard said that redevelopment is essential for improving

the Westside.

“The Westside stinks, literary and figuratively,” Millard said.

“It needs to be redeveloped. This is not a popularity contest.”

The Downtown Redevelopment Project was established in 1973, and

new territory has been added to it three times -- the last time in

1980. It currently includes about 200 acres.

In October 2001, the city began a study on adding more land to the

area to spur economic development. The study provided sufficient

evidence that additional parts of the city qualify for redevelopment,

according to staff reports.

Independent consultants have done a preliminary study of blight

and economic burden to arrive at the proposed boundaries. If the

boundaries are approved, the consultants will embark on a more

in-depth assessment of which parcels meet the criteria.

Properties will be gauged on 66 blight indicators, which include

things like electrical hazards, industrial odors and potential

hazardous substances. A section can also be designated blighted based

on deficiencies in the infrastructure such as problems with the

street and the sewer system.

Properties that are not found to be blighted could also be tagged

for redevelopment to ensure a mostly contiguous area.

“Some need to be included for the integration of economic

development because you cannot have a series of doughnut holes,” said

John Huffman, executive vice president of Urban Futures.

The consultants are still in the early stages of assessing the

area, so the boundaries may be modified, Huffman said. So far, the

swath of potential redevelopment includes about 627 property owners.

About 80% of the funds reaped in property taxes from the new area

would have to be reinvested into that territory, said Perry

Valantine, assistant development services director.

But some industrial property owners in the area charge that the

funds won’t be used to enhance their neighborhood. Instead, they

assert the revenue will be used to bail the redevelopment agency out

of its approximate $14-million debt, since the city loaned itself --

through its redevelopment agency -- about $13 million.

“So the money that’s supposed to go to redevelopment kicks right

back to the city’s general fund,” said John Hawley, owner of

Railmakers Inc. “It’s an interesting little dance.”

If the issue is ultimately approved by the City Council, the

property owners say they will have lawyers at the ready.

“Instead of placing our businesses in a 30-year project area, I

want a 30-year moratorium of the harassment of the people and

businesses over here,” Hawley said. “When push comes to shove, it’s

all going to be about attorneys and legal battles. They’re just going

to see lawyers up the eyeballs.”

* DEIRDRE NEWMAN covers Costa Mesa and may be reached at (949)

574-4221 or by e-mail at deirdre.newman@latimes.com.