To build apartments that are higher density than normally allowed, developers in the city of South Gate can agree to provide affordable housing.
Gonzales-Goodale Architects and Newport Ventures did just that in September for a 78-unit apartment complex they’d like to build on the site of a former metal fabrication company. But city officials asked that the developers increase the number of affordable housing units to about 10 or 15 and to consider adding some private open space like balconies.
So the developers recently proposed 12 low-income units instead of four “very low-income” units but some city residents and leaders took issue with waivers the developers are requesting.
For instance, the city requires developers to give half of the units in a building access to private open space. The developers say that won’t work for this project and instead proposed doing that for four units while providing other communal spaces on the roof and in courtyards, according to the agenda report.
The developers also want an indoor trash area instead of outdoor and don’t want to have a yard, terrace or porch in front of the building. The city requires one of those options in that industrial area “to create a pedestrian-friendly environment and connect where possible to the future amenities offered by the Los Angeles River Bikeway,” as described in the agenda report.
At a South Gate city council meeting last month, the city rejected the waivers after hearing from more than a dozen stakeholders, most who were opposed to the development or the waivers. Among other issues, there were questions about reports of lead contamination on the proposed site and concerns about how affordable the units would actually be.
Rent estimations
In a city where rent averages $1,400 for a 646-square-foot apartment, Legacy Apartments estimated the rental price of a one-bedroom unit would be $1,958 and two-bedroom units would be $2,300. It would be closer to $1,469 and $1,777 for low-income one-bedroom and two-bedroom units, respectively.
“I don’t know if anyone else felt this way but when the estimated rent was read out, my stomach dropped because as a college-educated person who earns okay money, that seems almost unaffordable for me,” said Veronica Hernandez, a resident who called in.
Robert Montalvo, who called in to comment during the council meeting, said the development doesn’t help much with the area’s housing crisis: “Unfortunately, $1,900 is way over budget for our typical family here in South Gate. So we’re not really solving any other housing issues with your development.”
Lead contamination questions
Considering the site used to be an industrial facility where they processed metal, area residents had questions about possible hazardous substances at the site such as lead.
“Legacy high school, north of [the site] is peppered with groundwater monitoring wells that tells me that there’s a very big problem with groundwater contamination,” said Liz Ruiz, and environmental consultant. “Groundwater contamination is very shallow there and [the site is] right next to the LA River so, I mean, brown water creates fumes, fumes go through pretty much everything.”
Ruiz, who is also concerned that the city council had not done its due diligence, added: “Is somebody from the city going to be there daily to make sure that the dust isn’t been picked up? I mean, all those residents are going to be exposed to all that lead if the dust picks up.”
“Thank you for the caller who made us all aware of the environmental impacts of the soil on this property. I’m in dismay that this wasn’t part of the presentation,” added Hernandez during her comment.
Dave Mossman, a representative of the developers, addressed the project, saying “In summary, these waiver requests would result from a responsible design and development approach to creating what we believe will be a superior apartment housing opportunity and an attractive residential living option for the citizens of South Gate.”
Dianne Guevara, South Gate’s interim director of community development, said that the first two phases of checking lead contamination levels in the dirt have been completed and officials are now working on a plan to decontaminate the site.
“In addition to reviewing those two environmental studies, we also consulted with state and federal databases to evaluate the past history of the site,” said Mark Blodgett, the environmental consultant for this project.
Affordable housing units
Some community members were more concerned that there weren’t more affordable housing units included.
“I want to bring special attention to something stated by [the developer’s representative]. To hear him state that they’re invested in our community, but in the same breath, say the move to affordable housing units from four to 12 and it not being optimal for their firm shows…otherwise,” said Amanda Tapia, who called into the meeting. “Twelve units do not suffice given the needs of our community.”
Diana Morales, from the office of Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood, said that the legislator thinks the proposed number of units of affordable housing should increase.
Another caller agreed, saying that the city’s housing ordinance should require that “at least 20% to 25% of units are for low-income families, especially because they’re the ones who are suffering the most right now.”
The motion to allow the developers’ requested waivers failed to pass. The developers can still build the apartment complex following the city’s housing codes or make changes to the proposal that they think the city would approve.
Community News reporters are enrolled in JOUR 3910 – University Times. They produce stories about under-covered neighborhoods and small cities on the Eastside and South Los Angeles. Please email feedback, corrections and story tips to [email protected].
benjamin romero • Dec 3, 2020 at 1:09 pm
This is not affordable housing…its ridiculous my opinion on affordable apartment housing should be at the most highest $ 900.00 for a one bed room apt. $1,100 .00 for a 2 bed room that should be affordable housing…so the family will have more money to save and or spend in local city economy or in our state and USA country.
Adriana Rodriguez • Dec 1, 2020 at 9:00 pm
This project won’t benefit the residents of South Gate. The rents are ridiculous! Most families in this city can’t afford that, and with no parking, no patio.. The people of this project are just looking to make their bank accounts bigger. I hope the SG board members don’t let this happen.
Norma Rodriguez • Nov 30, 2020 at 4:59 pm
As a resident of this beautiful city I give my opinion and I do not agree. They would only turn it into mousetraps to live in, where only construction companies and consequently certain politicians want to become millionaires, would receive their “share” for accepting these projects, of supposed “affordable housing”. They are not thinking about the community, they are thinking about your pockets. We should come together and give our resounding NO to all this waste.
Sylvia • Nov 30, 2020 at 4:14 pm
This project is ridiculous as it is that area has now become a hot bed for homeless people, drug users, people littering (once i found a dead dog in a box already decomposed) people drag racing with motorcycles and making doughnuts. Maybe you should fix these issues first before screwing the people in that area with apartments to make the situation worse. The rent cost is also way high even for low income come on. How is this help from the city. I agree with that parking is already bad now with an apartment complex they will take cover the parking for residents in the surrounding neighborhood.
Albert Robles • Nov 30, 2020 at 12:57 pm
Time to let them feel your presence and concern.
Jesus Garcia • Nov 30, 2020 at 11:58 am
We have a big problem with parking in the area, is not fair that authorities aren’t doing anything to solve the problem, that has existed for decades, I have proposed a plan of limiting car per household and charging a anual fees for a parking tag, and I have been ignored. On the other hand, we have to force this developer to show that they are not going to add to the problems , parking, overcrowded schools, and traffic, and they have to honor the promise of affordable rent, and safe environment.
Jiovanni Hernandez • Nov 30, 2020 at 8:38 am
This project doesn’t make sense! Where are all the families going to park their vehicles in an already overcrowded area.
The price of these are ridiculous for not owning your own property. This project should be immediately overturned since it not going to help the community. An example of this can be seen with the apartment building next to the community college. Complete utter chaos.