For the Community, Master Plan Means One Thing: Suspicion
Pastor Brian Eklund has seen how the growing demand for housing near USC's campus has taken a devastating toll on parts of the surrounding community.
During the last decade, Eklund's St. Marks Lutheran Evangelical Church, on Vermont Avenue across from USC, has lost a quarter of its membership and has seen many churchgoers move away because they're unable to afford the rising cost of rent.
Now, as Eklund hears talk of a broad road map for USC expansion - the University Park Campus Master Plan - he doesn't think the university will be any better at helping the community during the next 10 years than it was during the last 10.
"The drumbeat hasn't stopped; it's only going to get worse," Eklund said. "There's a lot of defeatism in the neighborhood."
For the residents, neighborhood councils and advocacy groups in the area surrounding USC, the master plan has led to an explosion of discussion and suspicion, and concerns that the project will lead to gentrification.
"It's the issue that everyone is talking about all the time," said Max Slavkin, a junior majoring in political science who sits on the North Area Neighborhood District Council, which represents the neighborhoods near the university.
"Students today aren't going to be here when any of the master plan is implemented, but these people in the community - they live here, and they're raising their kids here, and they want to retire here."
Audio Slideshow: The University Village as the center of controversy
USC officials have held town hall meetings and presentations during the past few months, and last year set up an advisory committee of community members.
Among the committee's recommendations that USC decided to adopt was a pledge not to use eminent domain to seize land to expand the campus, as it has done with past Master Plans.
The university also hopes that building more university-owned housing will ease the strain on the private housing market and lower the high rents that have forced residents out of the area.
But community leaders say USC's efforts have fallen short of giving the community a real voice in the process.
"You can come up with a plan on your own, work out the main elements of it, and then get 'input' from the community once the plan is already created. That seems to have been the model followed so far," said David Robinson, a research director at Strategic Action for a Just Economy, a Figueroa Corridor community advocacy group.
Robinson, who has led discussion of the master plan within the community, said that to give residents real input would "require a meaningful involvement of the local community much earlier, and in a much more significant way."
Among the committee's recommendations that USC decided to adopt was a pledge not to use eminent domain to seize land to expand the campus, as it has done with past Master Plans.
The university also hopes that building more university-owned housing will ease the strain on the private housing market and lower the high rents that have forced residents out of the area.
But community leaders say USC's efforts have fallen short of giving the community a real voice in the process.
"You can come up with a plan on your own, work out the main elements of it, and then get 'input' from the community once the plan is already created. That seems to have been the model followed so far," said David Robinson, a research director at Strategic Action for a Just Economy, a Figueroa Corridor community advocacy group.
Robinson, who has led discussion of the master plan within the community, said that to give residents real input would "require a meaningful involvement of the local community much earlier, and in a much more significant way."
Robinson and others want to see a commitment to building affordable housing and funding real community improvement alongside plans for expansion and a promise that new retailers will serve both the school and the community.
Without those promises, the master plan "would make USC an expansion zone; it changes the mom and pop quality of this neighborhood that it's had for 100 years," Eklund said.
The master plan's biggest impact would be on the USC-owned University Village, and it's that aspect of the plan that could prove most controversial. Under the plan, the shopping center would be integrated into USC's campus and redeveloped into housing and retail.
But that land was originally supposed to serve both the community and the university, said Mike Ureña, president of the North Area Neighborhood District Council.
"The people who live in that area do not want the UV to solely be for the university," Ureña said. "People are unhappy with that part of the plan."
The Community Redevelopment Agency, a Los Angeles city agency that encourages development in economically depressed areas, first conceived the University Village in the 1960s.
The agency used eminent domain to seize the land - displacing about 115 residents, according to one master plan official - and by the mid-'70s was funding businesses that would provide below-market priced services to the community.
But the redevelopment agency wasn't able to give the University Village enough money, and it soon went nearly bankrupt.
In 1994, the agency sold the land to USC at a steep discount. Now that USC plans to redevelop the area, concern hinges on whether the new retailers in that area will serve both the community and the university, or whether it will be dominated by high-end stores.
"One of the huge challenges is developing retail that serves the needs of the community and the university," said Curt Williams, USC vice president for campus development and head of the master plan project. "The question is, how do you have some variety of price, so it's not all high-end retail?"
USC officials also point out that the original University Village lease with the redevelopment agency would have ended in 2011, around the same time that USC expects to start construction.
If USC wasn't going to redevelop the land, these officials say, another developer would. As USC and city officials tout broad plans for expansion and improvement in the Figueroa Corridor area, however, many residents are worried that amid plans for high-end development, new retailers and an expanded campus, the community will be left behind.
"The city's fathers, they have got this grandiose idea that they can improve the Figueroa Corridor," said Ureña. "It's a paternalistic attitude, when people say, 'Well this area could be really nice, if only it wasn't full of these people.' And it's not for us."
Community distrust of the university stems back to the 1960s and the university's last master plan, when the CRA used eminent domain on behalf of the university to expand the campus.
"There are still some fairly deep scars because the university was the benefit of eminent domain [in the 1960s]," Williams said.
This time around, USC has pledged not to use eminent domain. But Robinson said that during the last few years, the effect has been the same: Residents have been forced to make way for students willing to pay far more for housing.
Williams said the university will continue to work with community leaders throughout the master plan process, he said, and once new housing is built around campus, rents in the surrounding areas should decrease as students move back toward campus.
But despite the talk and promises, Eklund said he can't shake the feeling that USC's plan for development will irrevocably alter these neighborhoods.
"Resignation is the only word I can think of; they've got us," Eklund said. "What the community often says, 'USC will do what they want to do, and nobody can stop them.'"
Without those promises, the master plan "would make USC an expansion zone; it changes the mom and pop quality of this neighborhood that it's had for 100 years," Eklund said.
The master plan's biggest impact would be on the USC-owned University Village, and it's that aspect of the plan that could prove most controversial. Under the plan, the shopping center would be integrated into USC's campus and redeveloped into housing and retail.
But that land was originally supposed to serve both the community and the university, said Mike Ureña, president of the North Area Neighborhood District Council.
"The people who live in that area do not want the UV to solely be for the university," Ureña said. "People are unhappy with that part of the plan."
The Community Redevelopment Agency, a Los Angeles city agency that encourages development in economically depressed areas, first conceived the University Village in the 1960s.
The agency used eminent domain to seize the land - displacing about 115 residents, according to one master plan official - and by the mid-'70s was funding businesses that would provide below-market priced services to the community.
But the redevelopment agency wasn't able to give the University Village enough money, and it soon went nearly bankrupt.
In 1994, the agency sold the land to USC at a steep discount. Now that USC plans to redevelop the area, concern hinges on whether the new retailers in that area will serve both the community and the university, or whether it will be dominated by high-end stores.
"One of the huge challenges is developing retail that serves the needs of the community and the university," said Curt Williams, USC vice president for campus development and head of the master plan project. "The question is, how do you have some variety of price, so it's not all high-end retail?"
USC officials also point out that the original University Village lease with the redevelopment agency would have ended in 2011, around the same time that USC expects to start construction.
If USC wasn't going to redevelop the land, these officials say, another developer would. As USC and city officials tout broad plans for expansion and improvement in the Figueroa Corridor area, however, many residents are worried that amid plans for high-end development, new retailers and an expanded campus, the community will be left behind.
"The city's fathers, they have got this grandiose idea that they can improve the Figueroa Corridor," said Ureña. "It's a paternalistic attitude, when people say, 'Well this area could be really nice, if only it wasn't full of these people.' And it's not for us."
Community distrust of the university stems back to the 1960s and the university's last master plan, when the CRA used eminent domain on behalf of the university to expand the campus.
"There are still some fairly deep scars because the university was the benefit of eminent domain [in the 1960s]," Williams said.
This time around, USC has pledged not to use eminent domain. But Robinson said that during the last few years, the effect has been the same: Residents have been forced to make way for students willing to pay far more for housing.
Williams said the university will continue to work with community leaders throughout the master plan process, he said, and once new housing is built around campus, rents in the surrounding areas should decrease as students move back toward campus.
But despite the talk and promises, Eklund said he can't shake the feeling that USC's plan for development will irrevocably alter these neighborhoods.
"Resignation is the only word I can think of; they've got us," Eklund said. "What the community often says, 'USC will do what they want to do, and nobody can stop them.'"
No comments:
Post a Comment