Being dense on development

Re “Don’t be dense,” Opinion, April 13

I was by turns offended, disturbed, amused and saddened by Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky’s article. Why offended? Because he insults our intelligence by quoting one isolated statistic, that 76,000 new residential units were built in L.A. between 2001 and 2007.

This number by itself means absolutely nothing. I suspect that, in those six years, the population has increased by hundreds of thousands, in which case the 76,000 new units mean nada. Even more important, how many of those units were affordable?

I was disturbed because this career politician is dictating where to build and, as a consequence, where to live: Downtown, Hollywood, Warner Center, Van Nuys. In other words: Keep away from affluent Westside communities.

His message: Keep your working-class and lower-middle-class existence away from my voting and fundraising base.

He amused me with his urban planning advice (read: urban nonsense), which leaves his anti-development agenda bare.

Why was I saddened? Because he may be the next mayor.

Lazaros

Papademetropoulos

Venice

Ironically, the densest area in Los Angeles is the space between anti-density activist Yaroslavsky’s ears. This is the same man who helped stop the Metro Rail at Wilshire and Western. (Can you hear the collective “Thanks a lot, Zev” from Westsiders at rush hour?) While we give massive chunks of our lives to sit in the parking lots we call freeways, Yaroslavsky fights density to save some boutique neighborhoods. The point is understood, but no one is talking about bulldozing Hancock Park.

But the area between downtown and Century City framed by Sunset and Wilshire boulevards should be a high-density zone with a focus on car-free transportation.

There was a time when we all could have frontyards, but this is a different Southern California. Some frontyards have to be traded for the sky, so step aside, Zev, and let Los Angeles evolve.

Adam White

Burbank