Landlord: If buildings stay, tenants will still go LINCOLN PLACE, from page 1
Residents at a 54-year-old post-World War II apartment complex are hanging on a wing and a prayer that they’ll become history, literally.
Residents at Lincoln Place are hopeful a recent decision by California’s Historical Resources Commission will help preserve the apartments, although the property owner contends that even if the buildings stay, the tenants will go.
The historical commission voted on Friday to support the preservation of Lincoln Place, a 38-acre affordable housing site located east of Lincoln Boulevard and south of Rose Avenue. Tenants say the decision is a “significant boost” to keeping their homes intact, while the Denver-based property owner, Apartment Investment Management Co. (AIMCO), says the commission’s determination will likely only add “regulatory hoops” for plans to redevelop the site, and not prevent it.
Lincoln Place, a garden-style campus of 52 buildings built in 1951, was originally backed by the Federal Housing Authority to support World War II veterans and their families. However, it always has been privately owned.
Once offering 795 affordable apartments, the site has been largely abandoned in the face of an ongoing legal debacle that began shortly after 1993, when the property owner proposed a redevelopment plan that called for 850 units to be built on the site, most of which would be market-rate condominiums.
Currently at 20 percent occupancy, Lincoln Place continues to be rented by as many as 170 tenants. Those residents, along with representatives from other organizations, are fighting AIMCO’s redevelopment plans.
Amanda Seward, a local architect who prepared the application reviewed by the state’s Historical Resources Commission, said the Art Deco-style campus, designed by architects Ralph A. Vaughn and Heth Wharton, are defined by the bold geometric shapes framing the apartment entrances, windows and openings to the balconies.
Seward indicated in the application that Lincoln Place stands out because of the way it creates visual variation and individual character in each building, while at the same time it’s clearly a harmonious design.
The commission agreed, supporting historical preservation for Lincoln Place — for its architectural as well as social significance, Seward said.
RAMIFICATIONS DIFFER,
DEPENDING ON WHO YOU TALK TO
Laura Burns, a Lincoln Place tenant and advocate, said the commission’s ruling will put a major stumbling block on AIMCO’s redevelopment plans. Referring to a list of experts and political backers — including the American Institute of Architects and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa — Burns said AIMCO’s position continues to alienate it from the mainstream perspective.
“They may still be dreaming about demolishing this place, but the consensus is Lincoln Place should be preserved,” Burns said.
As a result of the historical commission’s decision, Burns said AIMCO will have to create a new environmental impact report regarding any redevelopment plans. The site’s historic significance will now play a part in that new report, as well as open up an opportunity for further public comment on the issue at Los Angeles City Hall.
In addition, the buildings may have to be sold before they can be destroyed.
Patti Schwayder, AIMCO’s spokeswoman, said the site’s eligibility for historical status “doesn’t mean a thing” in terms of the effect it might ultimately have on redevelopment. She said the commission previously voted to send the nomination to the national registrar of historical places, where it was rejected.
“(AIMCO) can still demolish the buildings, even if there may be more regulatory hoops to go through,” Schwayder said. “Residents are grossly misreading any action by the commission that they will get to stay, when it’s not connected at all.
“The buildings may stay longer, but not the tenants.”
AIMCO said it offered tenants a “generous” relocation package, which has played a large part in the site’s declining occupancy. Some tenants moved to Hawaii, others took the money to buy houses, Schwayder said. Last spring, AIMCO offered to provide remaining tenants rent-controlled apartments within its new development plans. Tenants refused the proposal, and the offer was taken off the table in March.
After a court ruling, AIMCO began serving eviction notices on July 18 to residents who continued to stay. This move, however, is being challenged in court by the tenants.
Lincoln Place residents Frieda Marlin, 81, and her son, Spike, 53, filed for declaratory relief in Los Angeles Superior Court last month. They are asking for clarification as to how AIMCO can use the Ellis Act to evict them.
The Ellis Act, passed by the California legislature in 1986, was designed as a way for landlords to sell their property in order to get out of the rental business. Legal advocates for the tenants contend AIMCO — a corporate landlord that owns 50 apartment complexes in California — is not going out of the rental business. Therefore, they argue, AIMCO is forfeit from exercising the Ellis Act.
Tenants say there is an injunction in place to prevent their eviction until the court makes a decision. AIMCO says there is no injunction in place and a counter-suit by tenants to clarify their rights will not be upheld in court, citing that the law’s parameters already have been largely defined.
According to AIMCO, seniors and the disabled have until March to relocate, while other tenants have 120 days from the time they were served with eviction notices. AIMCO is not accepting rent from any of them.
“They’re squatters,” Schwayder said. “It’s a serious situation.
“We are now suing them one by one to regain custody of the property.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on August 10, 2005. Read the original PDF.