An 11-square-mile portion of the northeast San Fernando Valley could become the City of Los Angeles' largest redevelopment project area. Planners have been at work on the project for about three years, and the City Council is expected to decide whether to create the project area this summer. However, the area is so large — and suffers from such widespread decay — that some people wonder whether a redevelopment project can provide meaningful change. While other cities have giant redevelopment project areas where the amount of true blight is debatable, no one doubts that this corner of the San Fernando Valley meets the definition of "blight." Tim Dagodag, coordinator of the Urban Studies Department at California State University, Northridge, said, "That area is not ill-chosen." Population densities are high, people often live in ancillary buildings, jobs pay little, health and safety issues exist, and streets, lighting and drainage are substandard, he said. Those are problems redevelopment is designed to address, he pointed out. Furthermore, the area's per capita income of $9,266 is only 57% of the city average, according to the city's Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). Property values in the area dropped about 10% from 1994 to 1998, while values remained about even citywide, and home sale prices in the area declined by 16%. But whether implementation of the proposed Northeast San Fernando Valley Redevelopment Project is the solution remains an unanswered question. Staff members, with guidance from a public advisory committee, are still examining conditions, working on a project area plan, considering financing options, and developing a work program, said Robert Fazio, a senior city planner and the project coordinator. The CRA has laid out rough plans for a $490-million, 40-year project that would add about 1,600 residences, rehabilitate many more, provide about 2 million square feet of industrial and commercial space, and bring about 3,600 new jobs. The CRA continues to receive criticism as an under-performing agency, and city leaders have reduced the CRA staff by about a one-third. Several top-level administrators have been forced out or left of their own accord during the last year, and some city councilmembers make no secret they want more control over the agency. "There has been some mixed reaction," to the Northeast Valley redevelopment proposal, said Gerardo Guzman, of the Mexican-American Political Association's San Fernando Valley office. The area's poor residents have not received the benefits of prior government programs, and they are unsure the CRA can properly administer a redevelopment project. "The residents want something to happen. They want the change," Guzman said. "In concept they are in support, but they are skeptical of the details." Among the details is the practicality of a 6,835-acre — nearly 11 square miles — project area. "We are not proposing large-scale redevelopment, but, rather, spot infill development that will have catalytic effects," Fazio said. He conceded that planners have recommended shrinking the project size because examining the range of issues over such a broad area on a timely basis is exceedingly difficult. The sheer size of the territory and diversity of neighborhoods makes a well-rounded approach difficult to craft, he said. And only two CRA staff members area assigned to the project full-time. But the project's scope has become a political issue — one with which the CRA Board of Commissioners and the City Council are likely to wrestle later this year. Guzman said not everything in the entire 11 square miles is blighted. "I think at the end of the day, we'll see a drastic reduction in the scope of the project," he predicted. Dagodag said almost any community within the proposed project area could be a redevelopment project of its own. Such a large project area could keep some segments of the community from receiving proper representation on advisory committees, Dagodag warned. He also worried that funding would get watered down so that only cosmetic improvements would be possible. "I think it will be a viable project, but I have some questions about the size of it. It's gigantic," he said. The proposed project area takes in all or parts of Mission Hills, Pacoima, Arleta, Sun Valley and Lake View Terrace — formerly suburban districts of Los Angeles that now show signs of urban blight and poverty. "The area is exceedingly overcrowded," Fazio said. "It's common for a one-bedroom apartment to support up to seven unrelated adults, with a three-bedroom unit supporting three whole families. … The area has pockets of residential uses that could best be described as squalor. There are some trailer parks in Pacoima and Sun Valley that are notorious." And the horrid living conditions are not necessarily inexpensive. Fazio said the agency has found people paying $900 a month to rent a single-wide mobile home, or $400 a month for a single motel room on a dirt road next to a factory. Conflicting land uses, in fact, are a substantial problems, Fazio said. The area has numerous gravel quarries, batch plants, automobile wrecking yards and other heavy industrial facilities. Oftentimes, homes of some sort are right next door. Residents are exposed to extreme environmental conditions, and childhood asthma rates are very high in some areas, he said. The redevelopment project could mitigate some of these land-use conflicts by either forcing one of the users to relocate or by helping landowners retrofit homes. Years of infrastructure neglect are evident. A CRA study found 53% of the area's 6,800 parcels lie on deteriorated streets, and 42% of parcels — including some schools — abut deteriorated or missing sidewalks, curbs and gutters. Parks are few in number and equally neglected. Even police patrols are reported to be below the city's average. Still, the area's large industrial base and the number of small businesses are assets on which the CRA hopes to build. The redevelopment project could provide funds to businesses for modernization and expansion, which would keep businesses competitive and let them add jobs, Fazio said. Ideally, these businesses would employ local residences, he said. A 23-member public advisory committee began work on the project in January 1998. However, because interest in the committee waned, the city conducted a new election at a meeting last December. So the majority of the committee members is new. But MAPA's Guzman and other observers see the committee as a major supporter of redevelopment. Indeed, Councilman Alex Padilla, a proponent whose district includes the project area, helped elect the new committee members. Dagodag, of CSUN, credited Padilla, a first-term councilman, with at least taking an interest. "Over the decades, that area has been neglected. The effort is late in coming and it's remedial," Dagodag said. Questions still remain regarding project area financing, eminent domain, and other aspects, Fazio said. Those will need to be resolved before the City Council makes a final decision. And Guzman raised an interesting social concern. Redevelopment, he said, could jeopardize the community of Pacoima's ability to serve as a first stop for new immigrants. Now, Pacoima provides homes and jobs to many Latinos who have recently come to the United States, said Guzman, who grew up in Pacoima. Once they get established, these people move on. A CRA-backed gentrification could close Pacoima's door to future immigrants, he said. Contacts: Robert Fazio, Community Redevelopment Agency, (818) 623-2128. Gerardo Guzman, Mexican-American Political Association, (818) 837-2272. Tim Dagodag, CSU-Northridge Urban Studies Department, (818) 677-2904.