The skyline surrounding USC’s campus could begin to shift next summer due to a potential state law that would allow for the construction of taller apartment buildings on land less than one mile from a train station or bus route.
SB 79, which passed the California State Legislature last month, would allow for more housing development in residential and commercial areas that are a quarter-mile or half-mile from light rail stations, bus routes with dedicated bus lanes and rapid bus lines.
LA City Planning representatives note that SB 79 would allow developers to deviate from local open space and height restrictions -- meaning eligible buildings that are currently two to three stories tall could double in height in areas surrounding USC’s main campus.
The City Planning Department released a preliminary interactive map last week, allowing residents to see how the bill might impact their neighborhoods.
“Cities change. They’re organic entities,” said John Southern, a professor at the USC School of Architecture. “They have to change, or they sort of stay fossilized and never allow a new generation to really move in and create new culture.”
Students expressed some concerns about increased density closer to campus, but agreed that the proximity to public transportation is appealing.
“I’m concerned that the village would be too crowded when I want to buy some food or lunch,” said USC sophomore Yunig Ren, who frequently commutes on Metro buses. “But I live in downtown LA and don’t own a car, so housing near a transit hub would allow me to get around easier.”
Ren also noted that it would be more affordable for students like her who would use rideshare services like Uber to commute to campus.
“I think this state law is pretty good if it will be cheaper for students to live by campus,” said Brasad Patre, a USC graduate student. “If they can find space closer to campus, it can save time and money.”
Others, like USC graduate student Matt Wang, are concerned that LA’s current transit system isn’t prepared for more riders.
“Personally my only concern with the zoning is making sure that Metro infrastructure is equipped to handle an increase in passengers,” Wang said, who commutes to campus using the Metro D and E lines.
Wang said he is supportive of creating more housing near transit hubs and he has no issues commuting to campus on the train, but handling more ridership in LA remains a costly challenge.
“If the bill is successful in increasing ridership, it would take coordination with the Metro to make sure train and bus lines are equipped, which could cost a lot of money,” Wang said. “But, considering that the Metro is working to build out the system ahead of the World Cup and Olympics, I think it could be feasible.”
Southern noted that the city’s programs have been successful at increasing density around the Exposition Line stop at Vermont St., but that the bill could accelerate this process.
“We’re going from a model that is less dense, the existing century-old housing stock, and moving to a model that’s more appropriate for the kind of density we need around the campus with the student body, and I would hope university staff as well would want to live close to campus,” Southern said.
In a close vote, the LA City Council moved to formally oppose SB 79, with some council members arguing that it would give corporate developers and state lawmakers too much local control.
In a letter sent to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Mayor Karen Bass later called for legislators to veto the bill because it could have “significant unintended consequences for many of Los Angeles’ diverse communities.”
LA Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell also expressed concerns about the state’s approach in her district, which includes USC and the surrounding neighborhoods of Exposition Park and South Central.
“I have concerns about Senate Bill 79’s blanket statewide approach that can undue the work we are doing in my district with residents and the County’s Department of Regional Planning to create housing area plans informed by community input, environmental impacts, and inclusive of economic development efforts,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell also said the bill doesn’t address the specific needs of LA’s different communities.
“We need diverse housing options to end the homelessness crisis and affordability crisis that far too many residents are facing and cannot do this without paying attention to the unique needs of each community,” Mitchell said.
Some housing advocates disagree, stating that the bill could reduce the city’s existing budget deficit by placing more taxpayers per square foot.
“Housing costs and transportation costs are the two largest household expenses for most people. If you can cut both of those, you’re actually doing more for low-income people than anything else you can do,” said Matthew Lewis, director of communications for California YIMBY.
“SP 79 essentially is what would be considered best practices in urban planning, because LA has some surprisingly strong advantages,” Lewis said. “In this case, you have a really robust transit network for buses and a rapidly improving network for LA Metro heavy and light rail.”
Gov. Newsom has until Oct. 12 to sign or veto the bill, which would take effect next July if passed.