University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Empowering communities through historic rehabilitation: creating a maintenance plan for public housing developments in Los Angeles

(USC Thesis Other)

Empowering communities through historic rehabilitation: creating a maintenance plan for public housing developments in Los Angeles

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

EMPOWERING COMMUNITIES THROUGH HISTORIC REHABILITATION:
CREATING A MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PUBLIC HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS IN
LOS ANGELES

By

Leslie-Anne Flores Palaroan

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF HERITAGE CONSERVATION

May 2016

Copyright 2016 Leslie-Anne F. Palaroan

ii
Dedication
To my parents, Jovencio and Mercedes Palaroan, thank you for all of your sacrifices.

iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the following individuals and groups who have aided me in
writing this thesis. I would like to thank Katie Horak and Peyton Hall for their support.
They looked beyond public housing’s stigmatization and recognized the social and
physical vulnerability of these developments. I would also like to thank Trudi Sandmeier
– halfway into my graduate program in planning, I asked her if I could pursue a dual
degree in heritage conservation. Now I can further challenge the built environment to
serve those in need. To my heritage conservation instructors at University of Southern
California, thank you for fueling my interest to strive for equitable environments and
communities. I have realized that cultivating equitable cities requires acknowledging the
past, recognizing community values, and striving to create resilient communities in the
face of change. I would like to thank my mentors at East LA Community Corporation.
Throughout my graduate school experience, their guidance has allowed me to garner
an immense understanding of the complexity of affordable housing financing, subsidies,
resources, and asset management. By working alongside them, they have
demonstrated the impact of affordable housing and heritage conservation beyond just
an increased housing supply and the physical building envelope. Finally, my greatest
gratitude is for my family. They have been immensely supportive as I repeatedly
traveled away from home to undo inequitable development. Similar to low-income,
immigrant families, our immigration story started in one overcrowded house with four
nuclear. Similar to public housing developments, that house was supposed to be a
starting point for us to save money, so each family could move out and own their own
home. By having a home, it gave me a place to study, so I could advocate for those in
need. Although I will not understand the experience of living in public housing, writing
this thesis underlines the importance of a home - a place of solitude and hope.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES vii
ABSTRACT ix
INTRODUCTION 1
Chapter 1: Public Housing and Heritage Conservation throughout the
Nation
9
Ongoing Stigmatization: Pruitt-Igoe in Saint Louis, Missouri 10
Reminding Each Other of Home: Tenant Battles in New Orleans,
Louisiana
12
Successful Public Housing Preservation and Ongoing Battles: Santa Rita
and Rosewood Courts in Austin, Texas
14
Chapter 2: Public Housing in Los Angeles 18
Importance of Public Housing in Los Angeles and Current State of
Significance
18
HACLA’s Funding Sources, Budget, and Maintenance 39
Chapter 3: Fighting to Preserve and Invest in Public Housing 44
Understanding Public Housing Financing 45
Contradicting Stipulations between HUD and Heritage Conservation 46
Demolishing and Decreasing Housing Supply at Normont Village 51
Redeveloping and Disrupting the Community at Jordan Downs 54
Planning to Demolish Rose Hills Courts 58
Modernization Upgrades and Alterations at William Mead Homes and
Mar Vista Gardens
60
Chapter 4: De-stigmatizing Through Education 67
Public Housing Museum in Chicago, Illinois 67
Preserving for a Conservationist View: Garden Apartments of Los
Angeles
68

v
Preserving from an Equity Standpoint: Resident Advisory Councils and
the Participatory Budgeting Project
71
The Meaning of Heritage Conservation for Residents at William Mead
Homes
75
Chapter 5: Harnessing Conservation for Physical Investment 77
Review of HUD Funding with Respect to Section 106 78
A Rehabilitation Maintenance Plan Supported with Preservation Briefs 80
Revisiting and Forecasting Physical Needs Assessments with Reference
to the Secretary of the Interior Standards (36 CFR 68)
86
Chapter 6: Pulling Residents Out of Poverty and Stigmatization 95
Northeast Trees and the Resident Jobs Program 96
Economic Benefits of Heritage Conservation: HistoriCorps and Veterans
Corps
100
Economic Impact of Heritage Conservation 102
CONCLUSION 105
BIBLIOGRAPHY 109
APPENDICES 119
Appendix A: Bedroom and Income Limits for HACLA 119
Appendix B: Affordable Housing and Heritage Conservation Acronyms 120
Appendix C: Aerials and Photos of Public Housing Developments 122
Appendix D: Interview Questions for Residents at William Mead Homes 132
Appendix E: Section 3 Jobs Program at Nickerson Gardens 133

vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. HACLA’s Public Housing Developments 20
Table 2. Statements of Significance for Each Public Housing Development 34
Table 3. Impact of HACLA’s Programs 37
Table 4. Housing Needs of Families on the Waiting List Public Housing Tenant-
based Assistance
39
Table 5. 2015 HACLA Agency Plan Financial Resources – Planned Sources
and Uses
40
Table 6. HACLA’s Published Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes
in Net Assets from 2008 – 2011
41
Table 7. Demolished Public Housing Units 54
Table 8. HACLA’s Proposed Redevelopment Solutions for Rose Hills Courts 60
Table 9. HACLA’s Prioritization for Replacement 62
Table 10. Possible Federal Financial Assistance for Historic Preservation
Projects and Affordable Housing – Housing, Community, and Economic
Development
79
Table 11. Conditions of Physical Building Systems in HACLA PNAs 87
Table 12. Prioritizing Cost Maintenance According to PNAs 87
Table 13. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards – Preservation and Energy
Efficiency
90

vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure. 1.0: Disinvestment in Jordan Downs, n.d. 10
Figure. 2.0: Utah Street Renderings, 1934. 19
Figure. 2.1: Estrada Courts Aerial looking west, n.d. 23
Figure. 2.2: Gonzaque Village, 2009. 24
Figure. 2.3: The Dominguez family children play ball in front of their apartment
at Rose Hill Courts, 1951.
25
Figure. 2.4: Los Angeles Housing Authority Architects, on the far right is Richard
Neutra, circa 1940.
26
Figure. 2.5: The anniversary of Rose Hill Courts with children from Rose Hill
Courts, 1948.
29
Figure. 2.6: The anti-housing Small Property Owners League, picketed outside
City Hall with signs blasting the pro-housing faction, 1952.
31
Figure. 2.7: Nickerson Gardens Playground, circa 2010. 38
Figure. 2.8: Bad Conditions in Jordan Down’s Resident’s Unit, 1988. 43
Figure. 3.0: Harbor Village, 2015. 53
Figure. 3.1: Jordan Downs, 2015. 57
Figure. 3.2: Jordan Downs’ athletic coach, Deryl Carter excited after
announcements for a new baseball field and other improvements, 1988.
58
Figure. 3.4: Rose Hill Courts, 2015. 59
Figure. 3.5: Children Posing in Ramona Gardens’ Windows, 1945. 64
Figure. 3.6: William Mead Homes, 2015. 65
Figure. 3.7: Mar Vista Gardens, 2015. 66
Figure. 4.0: Historic Context Statement and We Heart Garden Apartments
Covers, 2012 – 2014.
71
Figure. 4.1: Community Clean Up with Aliso Village Children, circa 1950. 73
Figure. 4.2: San Fernando Gardens, 2015. 75
Figure. 5.0: William Mead and Surrounding Industrial, 2009. 82
Figure. 5.1: Lead and Asbestos Abatement at Rose Hill Courts, circa 2012. 93
Figure. 6.0: Northeast Trees at San Fernando Gardens, 2011. 97
Figure. 6.1: Sherwin Williams Painters Training, circa 2010. 98

viii
Figure. 6.2: Section 3 Resident Jobs Program at Nickerson Gardens, circa
2014.
100
Figure. 7.0: Children from the Pueblo Del Rio Housing Project plant a tree as
part of a school tree planting ceremony, 1949.
108

ix
Abstract
In the United States, public housing is a Federal program intended to provide
housing to low-income residents with a highly subsidized rental unit to both alleviate
rent burden and stabilize a household. This subsidy enables households to spend their
money on basic necessities such as food and transportation. However altruistic,
eventually Federal investment in public housing decreased, resulting in dilapidated
units, concentrated poverty, violence, and overall disinvestment. Public housing came to
symbolize the government’s failure to create successful low-income developments.
Specifically, in the city of Los Angeles, the early ground-breaking history of public
housing is largely unknown. The city’s public housing agency, the Housing Authority of
the City of Los Angeles (HACLA), strove to make housing a human right. HACLA
provided housing for the poor, disregarded discriminatory Federal stipulations, and used
public housing as a means to integrate races. These ideals were manifested into the
Garden Apartments building type – low-density housing built amongst swaths of green
communal spaces. These spaces connected residents to the outside, and to their
surrounding community.
As Los Angeles’ public housing developments pass the seventy-year-old mark,
all demonstrate their age. Federal funds for public housing are still dwindling, and
HACLA cannot adequately maintain its properties. As a result of this deferred
maintenance and lack of investment, HACLA has resorted to “remuddling” or
demolishing their public housing.
The initial ideals of public housing – to make housing a human right, to uplift
families out of poverty, to eliminate racial segregation, and to create communities -
underlines the significance of these properties and their role in Los Angeles’ history. By
recognizing and harnessing the initial intentions for these developments, and their
current role in housing the poor, this thesis argues that heritage conservation has the
potential of being a valuable tool in simultaneously uplifting the physical structure of
these developments and strengthening community development.

Introduction
When riding the Metro Blue Line from Downtown Los Angeles to Long Beach
there are numerous portions of the journey that pass by large public housing
developments. For those that do not live nearby or in Los Angeles’ numerous public
housing developments, this is one of the few instances where these stigmatized
communities constantly come into physical view. When public housing was being built in
Los Angeles, many of these developments were intentionally hidden from the rest of the
city or often in places that were slums. While traveling south towards Long Beach on the
Blue Line, the first of these developments is Pueblo Del Rio - a public housing site that
includes 660 housing units.
1
As one proceeds to travel along the Blue Line, a few stops
away in the neighborhood of Watts are four developments that were forcibly built close
to one another to hide poverty from neighborhoods that did not want public housing.
2

For instance, at 103
rd
– Watts Towers Station, and the Willowbrook – Rosa Parks
Station, immediately to the east and west of these stations are enormous
concentrations of public housing. These four developments – Jordan Downs, Hacienda
Village, Nickerson Gardens, and Imperial Courts – collectively possess 2,454 units of
housing for Los Angeles’ extremely low-income (ELI) families.
3
To onlookers, these
public housing developments are islands of minorities, poverty, violence, and
disinvestment.
4
Although public housing developments in Los Angeles’ are often
demeaned, these substantial facilities have become crucial resources for those in need.
Public housing is a rare and valuable resource in the city of Los Angeles.
Housing is becoming increasingly expensive and the availability of subsidized housing
is becoming more crucial for survival. According to the Southern California Association

1
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Transforming One Neighborhood at a Time (Los Angeles:
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Residents/Housing%20Developments.pdf.
2
Jacqueline Leavitt and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris. "'A Decent Home and A Suitable Environment':
Dilemmas of Public Housing Residents in Los Angeles." Journal of Architectural and Planning
Research 12, 3, (1995): 224-225.
3
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Transforming One Neighborhood at a Time (Los Angeles:
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Residents/Housing%20Developments.pdf.
4
Lawerence J. Vale. “Introduction: Public Housing Transformations - New Thinking About Old
Projects.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 12, 3 (1995): 182-183. In the early 1990s,
HACLA proposed to install perimeter fencing around some of the public housing developments. Some
developments such as Nickerson Gardens have tall fencing.

2
of Non-Profit Housing (SCANPH), an organization that supports and advocates for the
development of affordable housing, in 2015, the average rent for an apartment in Los
Angeles County was approximately $1,796 per month.
5
In order for housing to be
considered affordable, a family should not spend more than thirty-percent of their
income on rent.
6
Thus, a working family needs to “earn nearly thirty-four dollars per hour
– or $71,840 per year - to afford the average rent in Los Angeles. [However], the annual
median renter household income is $39,016.”
7
Although public housing is stigmatized,
these developments enable ELI families to have a place to live. Public housing helps to
prevent families from living on the street, overcrowding homes, and living far away from
work.
The developments along the Metro Blue Line are only a portion of the many
public housing developments across the city of Los Angeles.
8
With multiple housing
developments in Los Angeles, and their heavily subsidized rent, physically maintaining
these developments is difficult, and as a result, they have suffered from deferred
maintenance. This disinvestment exacerbates the ongoing misperception that public
housing developments are substandard. HACLA, the entity charged with maintaining
these public housing units and all subsidized housing in the city of Los Angeles, relies
on Federal operating subsidies, and leverages other numerous government subsidies to
operate these developments.
9
The immense number of aging units has forced HACLA
to compromise, alter, redevelop, and demolish these developments. For instance, rather
than rehabilitate Jordan Downs, HACLA is replacing the entire development and with

5
Ibid.
6
The term affordable housing is a general term that encompasses housing that is accessible and below
market rate. Public housing is a subset within affordable housing that is owned by public housing
agencies, which receive funding from the Federal government. Public housing serves those that earn
thirty-percent of the area median income and lower.
7
Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing, Out of Reach in 2015 – Los Angeles County (Los
Angeles: Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing, 2015),
http://www.scanph.org/sites/default/files/Out/of/Reach/in/2015/Los/Angeles/County/29_0.pdf.
8
The thesis will only focus on publicly-owned public housing developments in the city of Los Angeles.
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles manages public housing developments in the city of Los
Angeles. The Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles manages public housing within in Los
Angeles County in the following communities: Marina Del Rey, Santa Clarita, unincorporated Los Angeles
County, La Puente, Whittier, Long Beach, Lomita, Valencia, and La Crescenta.
9
“About Us,” Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, accessed November 15, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/aboutus.

3
new construction. For some Jordan Down’s residents, this is unsettling, as they are
unsure whether they will be guaranteed a home in the new development.
Not only do public housing developments help families survive, these places hold
a layered history embedded in numerous themes of selflessness. At the inception of
public housing in Los Angeles, HACLA strove to provide housing for poor residents.
During World War II, HACLA provided workers’ housing to migrants that came to work
for wartime manufacturing. Postwar, these developments shifted to serve families that
could not afford housing. HACLA recognized that residents of all backgrounds needed
housing, and these developments were among the first in the nation to be racially
integrated. Additionally, undocumented residents were given the opportunity to live in
public housing. Thus, this altruism makes public housing in Los Angeles historically
significant. During McCarthyism, HACLA’s actions and goals led some governmental
officials and primarily the public, to believe that HACLA was a communist agency.
Additionally, the misuse of Title 608, Federal Housing Act funding, and the subsequent
Windfall Scandals ceased public housing development in 1955.
10
Nevertheless, for the
past seventy years, not only has HACLA managed public housing, the entity has
gradually built a breadth of supportive services that connect residents to social and
economic opportunities. However, few of those social programs directly impact the
physical building fabric of these public housing developments. For instance, programs
for youth have led to additional infrastructure such as portable libraries, or playground
equipment. Other programs train residents in the construction trades by having them
maintain the aging buildings themselves. Not only does investment improve the physical
environment for residents, it generates an opportunity for residents to further pull
themselves out of poverty.
11
Despite the positive impacts of these physical
improvements and job training programs, when acknowledging the historic significance
of these housing developments, the potential impact of these programs can be even
greater. Past examples of public housing rehabilitation across the country have

10
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
25,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
11
Ari B. Bloomekatz, “Painting Job-Training Program Helps LA Public Housing Residents.” Los Angeles
Times, April 14, 2009. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/14/local/me-painting14.

4
revitalized communities in a myriad of ways: by recognizing and appreciating the past,
creating jobs, and most importantly allowing residents to have pride in their
developments. By reexamining the public housing history, de-stigmatizing these
developments, illuminating the inappropriate financial structures that PHAs must cope
with, and highlighting rehabilitation examples across the country, much can be learned
to aid HACLA in reinvesting in and rehabilitating public housing. This could greatly
reduce public housing stigmatization. The current public housing model that HACLA has
built is robust and progressive, and by leveraging their current relationships and
programs through a heritage conservation perspective, public housing in Los Angeles
can be a model in effectively pulling residents out of poverty.
Chapter one asserts the importance of public housing and why some
developments should be retained as historic resources. It will go over the public housing
history throughout the nation, and explore why these developments have garnered
negativity. Chapter one has three case studies that highlight public housing as an
architectural and societal movement that focused on housing the poor. At its inception,
Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis was perceived to be architecturally progressive because it was
intended to serve the poor. However, underlying discriminatory urban planning schemes
in St. Louis eventually led to demolition. Images of poverty, violence, and disinvestment
at Pruitt-Igoe have influenced many Americans’ negative opinions of public housing.
However, for the residents who live in public housing, when faced with having their
homes taken away, they highlight that these places are people’s homes. For example,
in New Orleans, Lafitte public housing residents protested to keep their homes.
Hurricane Katrina had destroyed their homes, and despite failing infrastructure,
residents protested demolition. Unfortunately, similar to numerous public housing
developments throughout the nation, Lafitte public housing was demolished and
replaced with a development in a New Urbanist style. Nevertheless, there are
successful cases of public housing rehabilitation in the context heritage conservation.
12

For instance, in Austin, Texas, there are two public housing developments listed on the

12
Heritage conservation and historic preservation will be used interchangeably in this thesis. Heritage
conservation is utilized to encompass both the intangible and tangible significance of historic resources.
Historic rehabilitation will be used specifically for maintenance approaches.

5
National Register of Historic Places that have leveraged preservation incentives to
upgrade and maintain these developments.
Chapter two focuses on public housing developments within the city of Los
Angeles. The chapter will illuminate the work and history of HACLA – the entity that
operates and maintains public housing in the city of Los Angeles. For HACLA, public
housing was a means to make quality housing accessible to the poor, and their mission
continues to this day. Chapter two highlights the reasons as to why these developments
are significant. They housed the poor. They supported wartime workers. Therefore,
planners and architects sought to create housing that connected people of various
backgrounds together through innovative architecture. Using the garden apartments
style, public housing in Los Angeles was architecturally different from the rest of the
nation’s public housing developments, which were considered as “Towers in the Park” –
high rises with large setbacks of green space. Los Angeles’ public housing
developments are highly differentiated from their surroundings of single-family homes.
They dominate the landscape horizontally because they are low-density complexes on
large parcels of land. This allowed for community building, and public housing became
places where Angelenos were racially integrated for the first time. However, their vast
scale and numerous unit counts explains HACLA’s difficulty in providing adequate
maintenance. Alongside highlighting the importance of public housing in Los Angeles,
Chapter two will examine HACLA’s ability to allocate their efforts and finances to invest
in these public housing developments. Chapter two highlights HACLA’s current funding
sources and examines how they have benefited or undermined public housing
developments.
Chapter three analyzes public housing financing structures and the flaws which
ultimately lead to disinvestment. Since PHAs such as HACLA are dependent on Federal
funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), these funds
are scarce, highly regulated, and monitored. Historically, these funding schemes
encourage PHAs to strive for redevelopment and have undermined heritage
conservation ideals. By recounting the stories of five public housing developments
under HACLA’s control, chapter three highlights HACLA’s compliance with HUD
restrictions and the struggle to support the historic integrity of these buildings. These

6
case studies describe HACLA’s past efforts to upgrade their public housing stock, but
this has forced the PHA to undertake negative alterations on their public housing
developments. HUD’s financing efforts to upgrade public housing developments occurs
through demolition, redevelopment, and alterations. HUD also mistakenly believes that
redevelopment is the best solution for aging public housing. HUD’s current available
financing is intended to erase the history and social contribution of public housing
developments.
Chapter four highlights the different efforts to rehabilitate and preserve public
housing throughout the nation, and in Los Angeles. Although Los Angeles’ public
housing is consistently marred, the tenets on which public housing was built is rich with
selflessness. By recognizing architects, planners, city leaders, and community groups,
and their benevolence to provide housing, heritage conservation has been a powerful
means to highlight and de-stigmatize resources with difficult significance. In Chicago,
there is an effort to acknowledge and disseminate public housing’s significance. While
in Los Angeles, advocating for public housing occurs through two avenues – through
heritage conservation and dignified housing as a human right. In terms of heritage
conservation, the Los Angeles Conservancy has launched initiatives to illuminate the
historic significance of these developments. From a housing provision perspective,
residents and organizations have advocated for more investment in public housing. The
initial altruistic tenets of public housing are unknown to many architectural historians
and residents. Finally, chapter four recounts the stories of residents at William Mead
Homes, a public housing development listed on the California Register and is eligible for
the National Register. Their stories underline their profound connection with their home
and neighbors. Yet, their definition of the importance for William Mead Homes, lies
primarily in survival and little in historic significance. However, by recalling public
housing history, this can de-stigmatize these communities, allow for a greater
appreciation for these developments. Chapter Four will underline the need to recognize
these developments and to disseminate this information to the public.
Chapter five harnesses the movement to illuminate the significance of public
housing and uses a conservation lens to reconfigure HACLA’s current system of
physically assessing their developments, and proposes a new maintenance plan

7
through heritage conservation tools. Chapter five sets parameters for the types of
funding sources that HACLA should obtain because these sources would not
compromise these developments. Then it will review HACLA’s current methodology to
assess properties’ physical state and their maintenance plans. In 2013, HACLA
undertook extensive Physical Needs Assessments (PNAs) for all of its public housing
developments. These reports revealed the physical state of the developments and
proposed improvements for energy efficient solutions to reduce energy costs. Within
these reports, historic significance is rarely noted, and not considered as a factor among
the proposals for substantial material alterations. Most importantly, these PNAs are
used as a resource for HACLA in determining what capital improvements to undertake.
Chapter five will look back to HACLA developments, William Mead Homes and Mar
Vista Gardens, as they have been threatened with alterations. Chapter five will
reexamine the PNAs for these two developments, and illuminate goals that may
compromise material significance. By referencing Preservation Briefs and the Secretary
of the Interior’s Standards, chapter five will also use two examples of character defining
features for each development and briefly propose a maintenance plan that considers
historically significant materials.
Chapter six further utilizes these revised maintenance plans by integrating them
with HACLA’s existing social programs, which enable residents to holistically invest in
the developments. By integrating the physical work of resident and community-based
organizations such as Northeast Trees and HACLA’s Section 3 Program into a
conservationist purview, residents can simultaneously garner income and invest the
physical integrity and physical condition of these developments. Chapter six will
underline the economic benefits of heritage conservation by reiterating the increase in
jobs and capital from rehabilitation. Additionally, chapter six will look at examples within
heritage conservation that use rehabilitation as a means to connect underprivileged
individuals to jobs.
The culmination of this thesis reiterates HACLA’s next steps and takes into
account looming issues that public entities such as HUD and HACLA will need to
consider as it reinvests in these developments. Ongoing issues such as the lack of
affordable housing, density pressures, and climate change posit larger and more difficult

8
choices for HACLA. However, by understanding the importance of maintaining this rare
housing type and significant historic resource, this paradigm shift has the ability to
empower public housing residents and to pull them out of poverty.

9
Chapter 1: Public Housing and Heritage Conservation throughout the Nation
Saving housing has always been a social issue of habitation. When looking at it from a
heritage conservation purview, public housing is the nexus of saving social habitation
and built environment. Public housing is not only about buildings, but also it is about the
cultural landscape, and [that] these residents have suffered more than the buildings.
13

Public housing in the United States is one of the few housing types that serve ELI
families and families that are financially struggling. In order for families to qualify for
subsidized housing, HUD uses the parameter called Area Median Income (AMI). For
example, if the median annual income for a fictional county is $100,000, for a one-
person household to be considered ELI, they would only make $30,000 a year. In the
case of Los Angeles County, the AMI is $60,600. Therefore, to be considered as a
household earning thirty-percent AMI in Los Angeles, that one-person household must
make $18,180 per year. However, the thirty-percent AMI amount fluctuates depending
on the number of people in a household. For instance, for a household of four living in
public housing, a combined $24,450 must be earned to qualify as an ELI household.
14

There are different AMI brackets such as forty-percent and fifty-percent, but for public
housing residents, they qualify for thirty-percent AMI. For many public housing
residents, they rely on various income streams and layer their subsidies such as Social
Security and Rental Vouchers to pay for housing. Since public housing developments
are deeply subsidized, preserving public housing is crucial for struggling households.
However, the combination of concentrated poverty and decreasing financial resources
from the Federal government for PHAs has encouraged disinvestment. (Figure 1.0) This
has been demonstrated to lead to violence and slum housing at notorious public
housing developments such as Cabrini Green in Chicago and Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis.
Nevertheless, for the residents living in public housing developments, it is their home,
and there have been repeated battles to preserve public housing despite its squalor.

13
Andrew Dolkart, “Welcome and Opening Remarks” (lecture, Columbia University GSAPP, New York,
NY, March 31, 2012).
14
“FY 2015 Income Limits Documentation System – Los Angeles County,” United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development, accessed November 15, 2015,
http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2015/2015summary.odn.

10

Fig 1.0: Disinvestment in Jordan Downs, n.d. Source: Herald-Examiner Collection, Los Angeles Public
Library.

Ongoing Stigmatization: Pruitt-Igoe in Saint Louis, Missouri
Pruitt-Igoe in Saint Louis, Missouri is the notorious public housing development
often cited by opponents as a reason to demolish public housing. In 1954, Pruitt-Igoe
was constructed as a solution to overcrowding in St. Louis. Therefore, thirty-three,
eleven-story buildings were built. Violence, crime, and drugs were pervasive. There
were images of vandalized hallways, broken infrastructure, and elevators that did not
work. According to the documentary, The Pruitt Igoe Myth, in one account, “it was
quickly torn apart by residents who could not adapt to high-rise city life.”
15
Demolished
after only twenty-years, Pruitt-Igoe has come to symbolize the failure of government-
sponsored housing and development.
Originally, planners and architects believed that Pruitt-Igoe would improve the
lives of low-income residents. “Pruitt-Igoe’s large scale and grandeur of the buildings

15
“Urban History,” Chad Freidrichs, The Pruitt-Igoe Myth. accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.pruitt-
igoe.com/urban-history/.

11
[reflected] optimistic spirit.”
16
However, there were larger externalities beyond the
building envelope. Similar to war manufacturing cities, St. Louis was undergoing a
postwar urban decline. St. Louis lost half of its population in less than a generation, and
Pruitt-Igoe was built to address this decline. The public housing development was also
used to racially segregate the city and to demolish poor and working-class
neighborhoods. Pruitt-Igoe’s planners and architects “stressed uniformity and ‘hygiene’
in the domestic sphere, political life, and neighborhood composition.”
17
Beyond St.
Louis’ urban decline, at a Federal level, housing legislation that created large-scale
public housing developments failed to fund operating expenses. Insufficient funding for
operating expenses is the greatest problem in public housing, and this problem still
plagues PHAs and public housing residents. In St. Louis, this problem began before
construction. “Building contractors inflated their bids to the point that public-housing
construction costs in St. Louis were sixty-percent above the national average. When the
PHA would not raise its unit cost ceilings to accommodate the contractor bids, the city
responded by raising densities, reducing room sizes, and removing amenities.”
18
By
increasing density for housing that is highly subsidized, it was harder for the PHA to
maintain Pruitt-Igoe’s scale. PHAs garner little income from residents’ rents. Therefore,
with the lack of funds for operating expenses, and numerous residents, Pruitt-Igoe could
not sustain itself. For other PHAs throughout the nation, the size of their developments
were not as large as Pruitt-Igoe, but PHAs continued to build housing developments
that did not generate income to cover operating expenses, which paid for property
management, facility maintenance, and social programs. Rather Federal subsidies are
used to cope with maintenance, but the amount of these subsidies is declining. These
mistakes not only led to the demise of public housing, it led Americans to become leery
of Federal spending on the poor. Pruitt-Igoe’s demise has generated a relentless
negative perception of public housing.

16
Ibid.
17
Ibid.
18
Alexander Von Hoffman, “Why They Built the Pruitt-Igoe Project.” Joint Center for Housing Studies,
Harvard University, accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.soc.iastate.edu/sapp/PruittIgoe.html.

12
Reminding Each Other of Home: Four Public Housing Units in New Orleans,
Louisiana
The housing agencies’ tabula rasa planning mentality recalls the worst aspects of the
postwar Modernist agenda, which substituted a suburban model of homogeneity for an
urban one of diversity. The proposal for ‘traditional-style’ pastel houses, set in neat little
rows on uniform lots, is a model of conformity that attacks the idea of the city as a place
where competing values coexist. Solutions like this might preclude the violent bulldozing
of neighborhoods in a city so short of housing. A willingness to make case-by-case
historical distinctions would result in a more historically layered urban composition, one
that could, eventually, include contemporary architectural ideas as well.
19

In New Orleans, the fight to retain public housing underlines that public housing
should not be disregarded, but their demise in this city underlines the repeated attempts
by PHAs throughout the nation to undo public housing. After Hurricane Katrina, the city
of New Orleans demolished their brick, public housing garden apartments, for
“‘traditional-style’ pastel houses set in neat little rows of uniform lots.”
20
In New Orleans,
public housing was derelict due to PHA corruption. “In the mid-1990s, Federal
inspectors found that of a selection of seventy-five apartments that they examined,
seventy failed quality standards, describing the conditions as ‘deplorable, unsafe and in
many instances unfit for human habitation.’ … Inspectors discovered that twenty-one
handymen at one development claimed a total of 1,019 hours of overtime in just two
weeks, an average of forty-nine hours per person. In reality, they were doing little work,
and areas of the project were flooded with sewage from broken pipes.”
21
Similar to
PHAs throughout the nation, when infrastructure deteriorates, the PHA applies for HUD
funding for any assistance. The proposal impacted more than 4,500 existing housing
units. Additionally in 2002, when HANO was accused of financial mismanagement, HUD
seized the four complexes, also known as the Big Four. After Hurricane Katrina ravaged
the city, the Housing Authority of New Orleans (HANO), applied for a proposal that
would demolish four dilapidated public housing complexes. Concerned residents,
preservationists, the Louisiana Landmarks Society, and a local representative of the

19
Nicolai Ouroussoff, “History vs. Homogeneity.” New York Times, February 27, 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/arts/design/22hous.html?fta=y.
20
Ibid.
21
Clifford J. Levy, “Storm Forces a Hard Look at Troubled Public Housing.” New York Times, November
22, 2005. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/22/us/nationalspecial/storm-forces-a-hard-look-at-troubled-
public-housing.html.

13
National Trust for Historic Preservation had also challenged HANO to examine the
value of the city’s public housing stock. These advocates wanted to “[tap] into a higher
level of creative intelligence. [To enlist] a similar level of imaginative talent to rethink
[how] the city’s public housing could help alleviate trenchant social divisions here.”
22

Residents believed that these public housing developments, “[embodied] a time when
America still seemed capable of a more hopeful vision, one in which architecture,
planning and social policy collaborated to create a more decent society.”
23
New Orleans’
public housing residents demonstrated the importance of the developments through the
fight for their homes. Tenants shouted at housing officials at public meetings, protested
outside former Mayor C. Ray Nagin’s home, and sued HUD. According to longtime
resident, Alvin Richardson, he believed his connection to public housing could
overcome demolition. “I’m a young man who grew up in the projects. I grew up in the
Iberville project, the Desire, the Calliope, the St. Thomas, St. Bernard, and I survived
them all. You can’t do nothing to me because I survived the ghetto.”
24
Alvin
Richardson’s connection to his home exemplifies the despair that families experience
when their homes are redeveloped. Despite numerous stories from residents, due to the
already dilapidated state of these garden apartments, and damage caused by Hurricane
Katrina, these public housing developments were demolished and New Urbanist
housing was built.
New Orleans replays the problematic and repeated pattern of public housing
redevelopment. When public housing is redeveloped, affordable housing is lost and
architecturally, some conservationists may argue that the architectural style of public
housing becomes vapid. The traditional and newly constructed homes are used to erase
the past.
25
The B.W. Cooper complex, also known as Calliope, was renamed the
Yvonne Marrero Commons. The original brick garden apartments were demolished for
less sturdy wood framed New Urbanist architecture. In the case of the Yvonne Marrero
Commons, the New Urbanist architecture reduced density, and the total housing supply

22
Ibid.
23
Nicolai Ouroussoff, “History vs. Homogeneity.” New York Times, February 27, 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/arts/design/22hous.html?fta=y.
24
Adam Nossiter. “In New Orleans, Ex-Tenants Fight for Projects.” New York Times, December 26, 2006.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/26/us/nationalspecial/26housing.html?pagewanted=1.
25
New Urbanist style was often used to replace public housing developments.

14
inevitably decreased. In total, the Big Four developments were home to 3,077 families
before Hurricane Katrina. Now, after being razed and redeveloped, there are only 1,829
housing units. Only about forty-percent of the new units are offered at traditional public
housing rents, and the remaining units are charged at market rate.
26
HANO thought that
they could replace many of the old units with housing vouchers, but Hurricane Katrina
left families impoverished, and the requests for housing vouchers had doubled in
number. Since so many housing units were flooded and market rents increased, 18,000
families, or one in ten New Orleans households, started to use housing vouchers.
Tenants argued “that the plan undermined the return of the city’s poorest residents,
virtually all of them African-American.”
27
Public housing redevelopment in New Orleans
was erased and left many families with no homes. Ten years after Hurricane Katrina,
“Some former residents of public housing now look back with fierce loyalty and a
qualified fondness. ‘You were a part of the Calliope,’ said Rodney Lavalais, who has the
name tattooed on his right arm alongside an image of his mother.”
28
New Orleans’
public housing battles underlined both the need for housing, and the need to retain
community identity.

Successful Public Housing Preservation and Ongoing Battles: Santa Rita and
Rosewood Courts in Austin, Texas
There are instances where the significance of public housing has been
recognized, and heritage conservation has been the most effective means to highlight
public housing. In Austin, Texas, two public housing developments have been found to
be nationally significant historic resources. Santa Rita Courts was the first public
housing development funded and built under the 1937 Housing Act.
29
The 1937
Housing Act established local PHAs. Santa Rita Courts is the first of three public
housing developments built in Austin in 1939. Unlike Pruitt-Igoe where discrimination

26
Ibid.
27
“10 Years After Katrina,” New York Times, August 28, 2015.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/26/us/ten-years-after-
katrina.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-
news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0.
28
Ibid.
29

Throughout this thesis, the word development will be used instead of project. Project holds negative
connotations.

15
was overtly practiced by St. Louis’ PHA, the Housing Authority of the City of Austin
(HACA) built housing for different races. Due to segregation, HACA had to build three
separate housing developments. Santa Rita Courts is comprised of forty units that were
occupied by Latino families. Additionally, Santa Rita Courts demonstrated President
Lyndon B. Johnson’s advocacy for public housing. The funding and construction of
Santa Rita Courts is seen to be one of Lyndon B. Johnson’s greatest Congressional
achievements. The development is “a cornerstone in his efforts to embody New Deal
idealism - civil rights and voting rights.”
30
Therefore, Santa Rita Courts is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places.
Rosewood Courts is the public housing development that housed sixty black
families. It is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Although it is known to
be significant for the same reasons as Santa Rita Courts, there have been battles
between HACA and advocates for saving this development. The development is in
operation, and it has not lost its integrity. “The excellent integrity of the [development]
shows in its continuing relationship between built and open spaces, and the enduring
workmanship and feeling, with few structural changes.”
31
Additionally, the development
is located adjacent to Emancipation Park, a gathering place for Juneteenth celebrations,
which marked the day in 1865 when Texans first received word of the Emancipation
Proclamation.
32
Currently, Rosewood Courts is being “closely watched in the Austin
development and preservation communities,” due to compromising decisions in the
past.
33
In 2012, the seventy-five-year-old property needed work and HACA applied for
and received a $300,000 Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI) grant from HUD.
34

Similar to HANO, HACA applied to HUD funding. In particular, the CNI grant is alarming
because this grant encourages redevelopment. In response, community residents and
preservationists have proposed Rosewood Courts to simply be upgraded to meet the
PHA’s energy-efficiency standards. According to Fred McGhee, an archaeologist and

30
Melanie Martinez, “Heritage Quiz – Santa Rita Courts,” Preservation Austin, Fall 2013, 7, accessed
September 2, 2015, https://www.preservationaustin.org/uploads/Oct._2013_newsletter.pdf.
31
Meghan Druedig, “Public Housing Community Rich in African-American History Faces Change in
Austin,” National Trust for Historic Preservation, February 7, 2014, accessed September 5, 2015,
https://savingplaces.org/stories/public-housing-community-african-american-history-faces-change-austin.
32
Ibid.
33
Ibid.
34
Ibid.

16
Preserve Rosewood leader, whom wrote the community’s National Register nomination,
"there is nothing structurally wrong with [the property] -- it needs maintenance."
35

Unfortunately, in August 2015, balancing public housing and preservation resulted in the
city’s local Historic Landmark Commission’s failure to recommend initiation of historic
zoning for Rosewood Courts.
36
Unusually, the City of Austin’s Historic Preservation
Office and HACA also opposed granting local historic zoning status to the property.
Despite Rosewood Court’s National Register of Historic places eligibility, and the
community’s pursuit for local historic zoning, HACA proposed a sixty-million dollar
redevelopment plan that will add units, allow for on-site homeownership, and reopen
Emancipation Park. The plan would only preserve six of the original buildings.
According to HACA’s Eileen Schrandt, the project manager for the Rosewood Courts
Initiative, in order to meet the housing standards laid out by the Texas Department of
Housing & Community Affairs, retaining and upgrading the original housing project,
would mean a loss of units – from the current 124 units to about seventy-eight.
However, “the new plan, in contrast, would add seventy-six new affordable units, [and]
historic zoning would make permitting difficult and could end the redevelopment
project.”
37
Schrandt’s stance highlights the difficulty of onlookers to see the importance
of retaining a public housing development’s significance. Rather, her statement is
rooted in the belief of the Federal government’s past mistakes in creating a public
housing program that does not generate enough income to physically sustain the
development. Despite compromising the development, adding more units at higher
AMIs is her goal.
We want to be able to offer a better quality of life, and balance that with historic
preservation. But we don’t think that means preserving every single unit in every
single building of the 25 buildings that are there right now. It’s basically saying
that a better quality of life isn’t deserved by the people who live there, if we keep
absolutely every single one of the 124 units that are there today.
38

35
Ibid.
36
Elizabeth Pagano, “Rosewood Courts’ Historic Zoning Denied,” Austin Monitor, August 26, 2015,
accessed September 7, 2015, http://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2015/08/rosewood-courts-historic-
zoning-denied/.
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid.

17
However, out of the over 600 properties in Austin with landmark status, only eight
commemorate black history, and for preservationists and residents, Rosewood Courts
would contribute to that. The property met all the criteria for historic zoning. “This is
public property, this is not private property, so the issue of a tax advantage is not an
issue here…This would be a nomination of a piece of public property that is iconic not
just in the history of our city, but in the history of our country,” said McGhee.
39
Beyond
remembering the past, according to Reverend Freddie Dixon, who is on the board of the
Austin African American Cultural Heritage District, recognizing Rosewood Courts is also
powerful in abating gentrification pressures in Austin.
East Austin, as you know, is a changing neighborhood. … Many of the
newcomers who are coming to the city of Austin know nothing about the history
of East Austin and the changing of East Austin. We need to hold onto that place
because many of the ancient landmarks that we know that are Austin are passing
away. And this area, housed on Emancipation Park, is a significant area here. I
do think we owe that to those persons who have lived there, to those persons
who have made legislation possible for them to be there.
40

Although Rosewood Courts is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places, redevelopment plans are being conjured. Nevertheless, the issues in New
Orleans and Austin illustrate how public housing is a resource for history and survival.
Heritage conservation can be an effective means of de-stigmatizing the people and
stories of these developments.

39
Ibid.
40
Ibid.

18
Chapter 2: Public Housing in Los Angeles
Los Angeles has one of largest collection of garden apartments and public
housing developments in the nation. Throughout the United States, President Lyndon B.
Johnson’s goal for humane housing conditions, and the subsequent increase in Federal
initiatives focused on housing, increased housing units. In Los Angeles, public housing
developments are highly differentiated from the International Style and modernist towers
that other PHA counterparts in the United States built. This is due to numerous reasons:
the Garden City principles practiced by local architects, the city’s flat landscape,
Southern California’s temperate climate, and the availability of land in Los Angeles. Los
Angeles’ climate allowed garden apartments to thrive. “Designers embraced the
connection between outdoors and indoors for residences.”
41
In Los Angeles, housing
stakeholders were community driven and designed with the habitant and community in
mind. They built garden apartments to achieve social equality.

Importance of Public Housing in Los Angeles and Current State of Significance
Los Angeles’ public housing history begins from substandard housing conditions,
and World War II led to enormous public housing development. Slums were dispersed
throughout Los Angeles. According to writer and architectural critic Esther McCoy,
“thirty-percent of all dwellings in Los Angeles had no inside toilet, fifty-percent had no
bathtub, and twenty-percent were unfit for human habitation.”
42
In the 1938, two
architectural groups created two projects with the goal of clearing slums. The Beaudry
Street Slums were transformed into Ramona Gardens, and the Utah Project became
Aliso Village.
43
(Figure 2.0) After these first two public housing units were constructed,
public housing development increased exponentially.

41
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
28,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
42
Don Parson, Making a Better World: Public Housing, the Red Scare, and the Direction of Modern Los
Angeles (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005).
43
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
28,

19
Impact on Los Angeles’ Economic Development
Los Angeles had a large presence of defense-related industries. The population
increased by 165,000 between 1940 and 1942 due to the influx of defense workers.
44
In
response to World War II, in 1940, the 1937 Housing Act was modified to exempt
defense workers from the strict low-income rules for public housing. The Community
Facilities Act, known as the Lanham Act, sought to create 700,000 permanent and
temporary units of public housing in Los Angeles for defense workers.
45
This further
increased the affordable housing supply in Los Angeles. In 1941, HACLA “established a
policy of preference for families of low-income defense workers for all developments
except Ramona Gardens.”
46
In addition to giving defense workers preference in existing
public housing developments, several complexes, including Imperial Courts and Jordan
Downs were constructed specifically to alleviate the wartime housing shortage.

Fig 2.0: Utah Street Renderings, 1934. Source: Herald-Examiner Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
44
Ibid., 21.
45
Ibid., 33.
46
Ibid., 34.

20
After World War II, the Federal Housing Act of 1949 enabled the construction of
more public housing developments. Nickerson Gardens, San Fernando Gardens, and
Mar Vista Gardens were built, as well as expansions at Jordan Downs, Rancho San
Pedro, Pueblo Del Rio, and Estrada Courts. These were higher density than those
constructed before and during World War II, and with less open space. Although
designers utilized Garden City planning principles, Federal guidelines on unit count and
cost restricted the amount of land that could be allocated to community facilities and
common green space.
47
As indicated by Michael Ramos, a resident at Imperial Courts
in Watts, “The open space and the grass let me have friends growing up. My neighbors
ended up being life-long friends because we always played handball against the
apartments and the open space allowed us to do that.”
48
Additionally, Imperial Courts
exemplified housing built for World War II workers, converted to public housing, and
expanded under the auspices of HACLA after the war.
49
In 1941 and 1942 alone, the
City and County Authorities constructed sixteen complexes. As a result, over 9,000
units of housing were created.
50
Currently, there are thirteen developments owned and
managed by HACLA with over 6,000 units. (Table 1)
Table 1. HACLA’s Public Housing Developments
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’ Public Housing Developments – Extant
Name Address Neighborhood Units Year Built Age
Avalon Gardens 701 E. 88
th
Place
Los Angeles, 90002
South LA 164 1942 73
Estrada Courts &
Extension
3232 Estrada Street
Los Angeles, 90032
Boyle Heights 414 1942/1954 73
Gonzaque Village 1515 E. 105
th
Street
Los Angeles, 90002
Watts 184 1942 73
Imperial Courts 11541 Croesus Street
Los Angeles, 90059
Watts 490 1944/1955 71
Jordan Downs 9800 Grape Street
Los Angeles, 90002
Watts 714 1944/1955 71
Mar Vista Gardens 11965 Allin Street Mar Vista 601 1954 61

47
Ibid., 27.
48
Michael Ramos, interview by Leslie Palaroan, Personal Interview, Los Angeles, October 25, 2015. This
person’s name has been changed for privacy.
49
Further analysis of these sites is required in order to determine which segments of the complexes (if
any) date to the war era.
50
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
25,
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Transforming One Neighborhood at a Time (Los Angeles:
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Residents/Housing%20Developments.pdf.

21
Los Angeles, 90230
Nickerson Gardens 1590 114
th
Street
Los Angeles, 90059
Watts 1,066 1955 60
Pico Gardens & Las
Casitas
51

1526 E. 4
th
Street
Los Angeles, 90033
Boyle Heights 296 N/A N/A
Pueblo Del Rio &
Extension
1801 E. 53
rd
Street
Los Angeles, 90058
South LA 660 1942/1955 73
Ramona Gardens 2830 Lancaster Avenue
Los Angeles, 90033
East LA 498 1941 74
Rancho San Pedro &
Extension
275 W, 1
st
Street
Los Angeles, 90731
San Pedro 478 1942/1953 73
Rose Hills Courts 4466 Florizel Street
Los Angeles, 90032
Montecito
Heights
100 1942 73
San Fernando Gardens 10995 Lehigh Ave
Los Angeles, 91331
Pacoima 448 1955 60
William Mead Homes 1300 N. Cardinal Street
Los Angeles, 90012
Chinatown 415 1942 73
Total Units: 6,528 and Average Age: 69
Table 1. HACLA’s Public Housing Developments
52

Community Building Through the Radburn Plan
Not only did public housing help alleviate the housing shortage; it was designed
to achieve humane housing conditions through thoughtful planning. With a fundamental
belief that all people deserve optimal housing conditions regardless of income or social
standing, the planners and designers were conscientious about every aspect of their
design, including the site plan. The site plan allowed for the arrangement of automobile
circulation and storage, the organization of internal living spaces, more landscape, and
recreational facilities. Using Clarence Stein’s Radburn Plan, which is the use of
superblock planning, the developments encompassed multiple acres, and their layout,
deviated from the rectilinear urban grid. (Figure 2.1) The Radburn ideal sought to
achieve “decentralized, self-contained settlements, organized to promote environmental
considerations by conserving space, harnessing the automobile, and promoting
community life.”
53
Their designs separated pedestrians from automobiles. With
superblock site planning, designers were able to relegate automobile traffic and garages

51
Pico Gardens and Las Casitas have been redeveloped. The development possesses both the new
construction of detached single-family homes and townhomes, and older public housing stock.

52
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Transforming One Neighborhood at a Time (Los Angeles:
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Residents/Housing%20Developments.pdf.
53
Eugenie L. Birch, “Radburn and the American Planning Movement,” University of Pennsylvania
Scholarly Commons (1980): 123, accessed January 23,
2016, http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=cplan_papers.

22
to the perimeter of the property. Housing units were turned toward gardens or parks
rather than the street, and ample space was dedicated to a common green or park.
(Figure 2.2) These complexes possessed community buildings, recreational facilities,
laundry rooms, and clothes drying yards. Some developments also had educational and
child care facilities.
54
The developments were intended to provide residents with “fresh
air and open spaces with provisions for recreation. [This] would create strong
community bonds and sociability, which would enhance and enrich [residents’] lives in
ways they would not normally be able to [be achieved] in a city apartment or typical
suburban situation.”
55
Planners and architects “believed that superblocks stood as safe
islands amidst crime ridden slums.”
56
Later, in 1942, these recreational and community
facilities were necessary as violence increased in the city, and HACLA “insisted that
recreational space and community activities must be provided for all sixteen
developments.”
57
Recreational facilities became a vital and integral part of the designs,
encouraging residents to get out into the landscape and interact with one another.
(Figure 2.3) HACLA believed that “a well-balanced civilization is one which cares for
such fundamental needs of its food, clothing, shelter and health. Along with these, man
should have a chance to give expression to his cultural desires for play, for education
and for the fulfillment of his ideals.”
58
According to Historian Don Parsons, opportunities
for community building were also called community modernism. For instance,
architecturally and socially progressive Aliso Village, designed by Ralph Flewelling and
Lloyd Wright, offered protected green space away from the street, simple light-filled
dwellings, a school and adjacent nursery school, and sheltered play areas for

54
“Housing Unit Gets Tenant,” Los Angeles Times. January 3, 1941, 11.
55
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
34,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
56
Eugenie L. Birch, “Radburn and the American Planning Movement,” University of Pennsylvania
Scholarly Commons (1980): 132, accessed January 23,
2016, http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=cplan_papers.

57
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
34,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
58
Ibid., 40.

23
children. Another development, Pueblo del Rio was designed by a team of renowned
architects, including Paul R. Williams, Richard Neutra, Gordon B. Kaufmann, and
Wurdeman & Becket. (Figure 2.4) It featured modern, sunny apartments with access to
both private and communal outdoor spaces, and an average of one-and-a-half fruit
trees per household. Unlike huge towers and mega blocks of public housing, socially
conscious architects, and planners developed innovative and livable projects in Los
Angeles.

Fig. 2.1: Estrada Courts Aerial looking west, n.d. Source: Housing Authority Collection, Los Angeles
Public Library.

24

Fig. 2.2: Gonzaque Village, 2009. Source: Laurie Avocado, “Ozie B. Gonzaque Village,” Flickr.

25
Fig. 2.3: The Dominguez family children play ball in front of their apartment at Rose Hill Courts, 1951.
Source: Housing Authority Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

26

Fig. 2.4: Los Angeles Housing Authority Architects, on the far right is Richard Neutra, circa 1940. Source:
Housing Authority Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

Striving for Equality through Housing
Most importantly, Los Angeles’ public housing history manifested the nation’s
struggle to address social inequality. When over 10,000 African-American and Southern
families migrated to the region during World War II, they worked in shipyards, aircraft
plants, and other war industries that hired blacks for the first time. The demand for
housing increased, and HACLA, adopted a non-discrimination policy for their public
housing units. Unlike their PHA counterparts throughout the nation, as HACLA
increasingly invested in more public housing, public housing developments were also
one of the first areas in the nation that integrated families during segregation. A few
decades later, cities across America began demolishing public housing projects

27
because these developments had come to symbolize decades of failed racist urban
policies.
In Los Angeles, public housing had been an extremely popular New Deal
program. It “was viewed as a force for positive social change, and supported by a broad
coalition of civic, labor, religious, and community organizations.”
59
In addition to
addressing substandard housing, providing housing for defense workers, and setting
forth innovative design principles, public housing most importantly created conditions
where families of different ethnicities lived in integrated communities for the very first
time. The Federal Housing Authority (FHA) implemented discriminatory housing
practices throughout the United States. They utilized the existing social and economic
background of the population in a given community to determine the most desirable
type of housing needed there. The United States Housing Authority (USHA) guidelines
furthered this idea and stated, “that the racial composition of new projects should match
that of the neighborhoods in which they would be built.”
60
Therefore, public housing was
built to further segregate communities of color. In Los Angeles, public housing was a
positive New Deal Program that advocated for positive social change, and was
supported by a broad coalition. A coalition of diverse groups including HACLA, the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, The Urban League, the
Spanish American Congress, labor organizations, and Jewish organizations worked
together to integrate public housing units. If HACLA had followed USHA guidelines, the
existing population around Ramona Gardens’ would have been used as a guide to
mirror the racial composition of families moving into the new development. However,
Ramona Gardens was one of the first interracial public housing projects in the country.
61

In 1943, HACLA rescinded its racial quota policy based on the already segregated
population of the community. HACLA’s progressive ideals also offered housing to non-
U.S. citizens, primarily non-naturalized Mexican citizens, by amending the FHA Act to
allow “allied and friendly aliens.”
62
These residents were admitted to Ramona Gardens,

59
Ibid., 43.
60
Ibid., 46.
61
Ibid., 47.
62
Ibid., 48.

28
Aliso Village, Estrada Courts, and Pico Gardens housing projects.”
63
(Figure 2.5) To
support integration, HACLA also trained its employees “to help ensure that racial
harmony and participation would be facilitated within the housing developments and the
surrounding community.”
64
Additionally, HACLA adopted a lease clause that guaranteed
eviction for “those who contributed to a disturbance based on “racial intolerance.”
65
In
1947, Los Angeles’ public housing was extensively integrated – fifty-five-percent were
white, thirty-percent were black, and nineteen-percent were Latino.
66
In 1959, the
demographics of public housing units in Los Angeles shifted. Public housing
developments became fourteen-percent white, sixty-five-percent black, and nineteen-
percent Latino.
67
Unfortunately, racial harmony did not last and white tenants had left
the developments for homes in the suburbs.
68
Los Angeles’ public housing came to be
perceived as “Negro Housing.” Whites then protested the potential of new
developments in their neighborhoods, and developments that were intended for White
neighborhoods were relocated to Watts.
69
Three new projects were built in Watts
between 1953 and 1955, and this transformed Watts into an impoverished and racially
isolated neighborhood.
70
HACLA’s progressive housing policies sought to generate
thousands of public housing units for low-income Angelenos, and housing opponents
even accused HACLA of communist infiltration.

63
Zaragosa Vargas, Labor Rights Are Civil Rights: Mexican American Workers in Twentieth-Century
America (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005) 225-226.
64
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
49,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
65
Richard Rothstein, “Race and Pubic Housing: Revisiting the Federal Role,” Economic Policy Institute,
December 17, 2012, accessed October 17, 2015, http://www.epi.org/publication/race-public-housing-
revisiting-Federal-role/.
66
Ibid.

67
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
48,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
68
This is due to discriminatory urban planning practices such as redlining, white flight, predatory lending,
and blockbusting.
69
Richard Rothstein, “Race and Pubic Housing: Revisiting the Federal Role,” Economic Policy Institute,
December 17, 2012, accessed October 17, 2015, http://www.epi.org/publication/race-public-housing-
revisiting-Federal-role/.
70
Ibid.

29

Fig. 2.5: The anniversary of Rose Hill Courts with children from Rose Hill Courts, 1948. Source: Housing
Authority Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

Advocating for More Equity and the End of Public Housing Construction
During the Cold War, Southern California emerged as a stronghold of the Red
Scare and McCarthyism. Private sector real estate boards, property owners, and the
politicians sought to end public housing. Public housing was perceived to be a "part of a
conspiratorial effort by well-placed communists [...] to destroy traditional American
values through a carefully calculated policy of racial and class struggle."
71
(Figure 2.6)
Chavez Ravine, a neighborhood northwest of downtown, exemplifies HACLA’s struggle
to combat public perception as a communist agency. Chavez Ravine was declared a
slum, and HACLA had commissioned architects Robert Alexander and Richard Neutra

71
Don Parson, Making a Better World: Public Housing, the Red Scare, and the Direction of Modern Los
Angeles (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005), 188.

30
to design more public housing for the neighborhood. Elysian Park Heights, the proposed
development, was thought to stem from communism. [HACLA’s] employees protested,
they were subsequently dismissed, blacklisted, and sent to testify before the House Un-
American Activities Committee.”
72
According to Frank Wilkinson, former assistant
director of HACLA, “[Chavez Ravine] is the tragedy of my life, absolutely. I was
responsible for uprooting, I don’t know how many hundreds of people, from their own
little valley and having the whole thing destroyed.” He testified to the House Un-
American Activities Committee, was fired from him job, and sentenced to one year in
jail. To Carol Jacques, a former Chavez Ravine resident, “[We] didn’t want to move. [We
did not] want to lose [our] friends. [We] didn’t want to lose their homes.”
73
In July 1950,
all residents of Chavez Ravine received letters stating to sell their homes in order to
make the land available for the proposed Elysian Park Heights, and they would have the
right of first refusal for these new homes. The right of first refusal enables those that
have been displaced due to a development project, the opportunity to be a tenant in the
new development.
74
Elysian Park Heights included two-dozen thirteen-story buildings,
more than 160 two-story bunkers, playgrounds, and schools. Through eminent domain,
which permits the government to purchase property from private individuals in order to
construct projects for the public good, the public officials bought the land and leveled
many of the existing buildings. The houses were sold, auctioned, and even set on fire
and used as practice sites by the local fire department. The majority of residents
received insubstantial or no compensation for their homes and property, and land titles
were erased.
75
At the end of 1951, land had been cleared in the neighborhood, and
construction begun. City Council called an emergency meeting and cancelled the
development due to communist perception. The California Supreme Court voided the
cancellation, but the Council sponsored a 1952 referendum and voters rejected Chavez

72
Lyra Kilston. “Good Design Is for Everyone: The Evolution of Low-Income Housing in L.A.,” KCET,
March 16, 2015, accessed January 9, 2016, http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los-
angeles/michael-maltzan-star-apartments-public-low-income-housing-history.html.
73
“Chavez Ravine: A Los Angeles Story,” Independent Television Service, accessed January 9, 2016.
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/chavezravine/cr.html.
74
Harris Ominsky, “Options: First Refusal Rights Could Be Thorny in GP-Solo Law Trends & News Real
Estate, 2007,” GP-Solo Law Trends & News Real Estate 3 no. 2 (2007):
http://www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/publications/law_trends_news_practice_area_e_newslette
r_home/realestate_ominsky.html.

75
Ibid.

31
Ravine. The city sold the land to the Dodgers baseball team for its stadium.
76
The local
housing authority was demonized, and “this conflict was so incendiary that public
housing became the primary issue during Los Angeles's 1953 mayoral race, and the
incumbent candidate who supported it was branded a communist and lost.”
77
The
winner, Norris Poulson, then canceled the city's public housing contract with the Federal
government.

Fig. 2.6: The anti-housing Small Property Owners League, picketed outside City Hall with signs blasting
the pro-housing faction, 1952. Source: Herald-Examiner Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

Communist sentiment was not the only factor that led to the end of public
housing developments in Los Angeles. During the late 1940s and early 1950s, public

76
Richard Rothstein, “Race and Pubic Housing: Revisiting the Federal Role,” Economic Policy Institute,
December 17, 2012, accessed October 17, 2015, http://www.epi.org/publication/race-public-housing-
revisiting-Federal-role/.
77
Eric Avila. Popular Culture in the Age of White Flight: Fear and Fantasy in Suburban Los Angeles.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004, 38-40.

32
housing developments continued to be built, but true adherence to Garden City
principles waned. Instead, developments such as Jordan Downs’ were built with
increased unit counts and little recreational space. This was due to Title 608, which
encouraged greater density and returns on investment. During the war, in 1942,
Congress created Title 608. Initially, Title 608 encouraged private developers and
investors to erect low- and moderate-income rental housing. After the war, Veterans
needed housing, and the U.S. Congress liberalized Title 608. Therefore, private
developers could obtain FHA-backed mortgages of ninety-percent for the development
of large-scale multi-family residential housing projects.
78
Liberalization caused reduced
mortgage amortization, lengthened loan maturity, and reduced capital requirements.
This resulted in a high loan-to-value ratio, liberal land valuation, and high estimates of
development costs occurred.
79
Developers approximated their costs with no cost
certifications, and these regulation lapses made the program attractive for developers.
“In 1947, FHA mortgage commitments totaled $360 million. Between 1946 and 1952,
eighty-percent of FHA-sponsored developments were insured under Title 608. Four
hundred and sixty thousand units were built.”
80
Title 608 later expired which made multi-
family housing difficult. In addition, the “Windfall Scandals” led to the investigations of
corrupt private developers. Developers were accused of inflating the cost figures for
land and padding construction costs, taking mortgage loans in excess of the reported
costs of developments, and pocketing the difference as unearned cash, “aided and
guided” by FHA officials.
81

78
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
44,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
79
National Park Service United States Department of the Interior, National Register Nomination, Arcadia
Apartments, (Louisville, KY: National Park Service United States Department of the Interior, 2010),
http://heritage.ky.gov/nr/rdonlyres/583d7916-fff3-4c8c-88d0-
77d1b5463651/0/arcadiaapartmentsjeffco.pdf.
80
National Park Service United States Department of the Interior, National Register Nomination, Lincoln
Place Apartments DRAFT, (Los Angeles: National Park Service United States Department of the Interior,
2015), 14,
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1067/files/ca_los%20angeles%20county_lincoln%20place_revised%20july
%202015.pdf.
81
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
21,

33

HACLA’s Current Significance and Role
During the ensuing decades, many of these sites have increased in historic
significance. For example, at Estrada Courts, residents and community members have
painted approximately fifty murals – the highest concentration of murals in Boyle
Heights. Between 1973 and 1980, notable Chicano artists created these murals in
association with the 1970s Chicano Civil Rights and arts movements. Despite
SurveyLA, a citywide survey that identifies and documents significant historic resources,
it is unknown whether all public housing developments in Los Angeles are significant.
(Table 2) For instance, although Imperial Courts and Jordan Downs are inextricably
linked with Los Angeles’ pursuit in providing housing, the developments themselves
may not meet eligibility criteria for state or Federal designation. Compounding this
issue, are additions and extensions to multiple developments, which do not appear to
be significant. Nevertheless, according to SurveyLA, there are a few developments
eligible for the National Register – Avalon Gardens, Estrada Courts, Gonzaque Village,
Pueblo Del Rio, San Fernando Gardens, and William Mead Homes.
82
Documentation is
the first step in capturing public housing history and its impact on Los Angeles’
development.

https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
82
“HistoricPlacesLA,” Office of Historic Resources Department of City Planning, accessed July 14, 2015,

http://historicplacesla.org/.

34
Table 2. Statements of Significance for Each Public Housing Development
Name Significance Statement(s) Status Code
Avalon
Gardens
• One of the earliest housing projects in Los Angeles designed and
built for defense workers.
• Associated with a distinguished group of architects.
• Excellent, early example of a Garden Apartment complex in Los
Angeles.
• Exemplary of garden city planning principles.
3S
83

3CS
84

5S3
85

Estrada
Courts &
Extension
• Excellent example of an intact garden apartment complex in
Boyle Heights, developed by HACLA. The original development
(1942) was designed by noted architects Robert Alexander,
Winchton Risley, David Witmer, and Loyall Watson and noted
landscape architect Hammond Sadler; the extension (1954) was
designed by architect Paul Robinson Hunter and landscape
architect Fred Barlow, Jr.
• Significant as one of the earliest public housing projects
constructed in the City of Los Angeles, associated with slum
clearance efforts financed under the Federal Housing Act of
1937.
• Intact concentration of approximately 50 murals, most of which
were painted between 1973 and 1980 by several notable Chicano
artists; associated with the Chicano civil rights and arts
movements of the 1970s. Less than 50 years of age and not of
exceptional importance; therefore not eligible for listing in the
National Register.
3S
3CS
5S3

Gonzaque
Village
(originally
Hacienda
Village)
• One of the earliest housing projects in Los Angeles designed and
built for defense workers.
• Associated with a distinguished group of architects.
3S
3CS
5S3
Imperial
Courts
• Does not meet eligibility standards. Constructed in phases
beginning in 1944, majority was constructed outside the period of
significance. Not one of the earliest examples.
7Q
86

Jordan Downs • The theme for post-1945 public housing complexes has not yet
been developed. This property will be re-evaluated pending
further research and analysis during a later phase of SurveyLA.
QQQ
87

Mar Vista
Gardens
• Excellent example of a post-World War II garden apartment
complex.
• The theme for post-1945 public housing complexes has not yet
been developed; this property will be re-evaluated pending further
research and analysis during a later phase of SurveyLA.
• Not one of the first ten public housing projects in Los Angeles;
later examples of public housing will be evaluated as a group
pending further research and analysis.
QQQ
Nickerson
Gardens
• The theme for post-1945 public housing complexes has not yet
been developed. This property will be re-evaluated pending
further research and analysis during a later phase of SurveyLA.
QQQ
Pueblo Del • One of the earliest housing projects in Los Angeles designed and 3S

83
Appears eligible for NR as an individual property through survey evaluation.
84
Appears eligible for CR as an individual property through survey evaluation.
85
Appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation though survey evaluation.
86
Needs more evaluation.
87
Needs more evaluation.

35
Rio &
Extension
built for defense workers. Associated with a distinguished group
of architects.
• Excellent example of a garden apartment complex, exhibiting
garden city planning principles such as superblock site planning,
common green space and separation of vehicular and pedestrian
traffic.
3CS
5S3
Ramona
Gardens
• No information. 2S2
88

Rancho San
Pedro &
Extension
• One of the first ten public housing projects in Los Angeles. 3S
3CS
5S3
Rose Hills
Courts
• No information. 2S2
San Fernando
Gardens
• Excellent example of an intact garden apartment complex
developed and operated by the Housing Authority of the City of
Los Angeles and designed by notable architects Arthur B. Gallion
and Victor D. Gruen. A rare example of a garden apartment
complex in the area.
• Significant for its association with the development of public
housing undertaken by a city agency with Federal funding in the
postwar era; one of the last public housing complexes to have
been constructed in Los Angeles with Federal housing dollars.
• Association with HACLA's non-discrimination and non-
segregation policies, having opened as a racially integrated public
housing project.
3S
3CS
5S3
William Mead
Homes
• Pre-War Modern architecture and as one of the first government
housing projects in the City of Los Angeles.
3S
3CS
5S3
Table 2. Statements of Significance for Each Public Housing Development from SurveyLA
89

Today, HACLA has grown to serve 58,685 households through a myriad of
programs. HACLA primarily operates eighteen housing and social programs for public
housing residents. (Table 3) Each program financially supports public housing
developments in Los Angeles, but each of these programs has its own funding
stipulations. One aspect of these stipulations includes growing and integrating
supportive social services into public housing developments. For instance, the HUD –
Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD – VASH) vouchers are similar to Section 8
vouchers because they subsidize rent for residents.
90
However, HUD - VASH vouchers
serve Veterans. Compounding subsidizing rent, HUD – VASH vouchers can be used to

88
Individual property determined eligible for NR by a consensus through Section 106 process. Listed in
the CR.
89
SurveyLA findings were collected from HistoricPlacesLA (historicplacesla.org) an online platform that
inventories the City of Los Angeles’ significant historic resources.
90
Section 8 vouchers set a minimum rent for a household. The voucher is used to pay for the rest of the
rent so the landlord (HACLA) receives fair market rent. This generates income and helps fund operating
costs.

36
pay for supportive services for Veterans who are currently homeless.
91
The Veterans
that qualify for these vouchers have access to Veteran Affairs’ Hospitals where they can
receive services. Additionally, HACLA utilized the Shelter Plus Care (S+C) Program to
provide rental assistance and to connect residents to supportive services. S+C assists
hard to serve homeless individuals with disabilities and their families. These individuals
primarily include those with serious mental illness, chronic problems with alcohol and
drugs, and HIV/AIDS or related diseases.
92
For HUD-VASH and S+C, recipients of
these programs are provided with both housing and social services. For these eighteen
programs, there is little expected turnover, therefore underlining public housing as a
vital resource for those in need.
Although HACLA is primarily funded to provide housing, HACLA has developed a
long history of seeking grants, partnerships, and leveraging opportunities to support
healthy communities by providing recreational, social and other supportive services to
improve residents’ quality of life. (Figure 2.7) Currently, there are four partnerships to
provide services in four public housing communities in different areas of the city.
93

Under HACLA’s Educational Development Initiative, HACLA has created a non-profit
organization called Kids Progress Inc., which builds strategic partnerships to ensure that
youth have access to educational programs and opportunities. One program of this
initiative is the Community Satellite Library. The program offers residents remote access
to the Los Angeles Public Library’s print and electronic collections, including help for
students and resources in the public housing communities. These libraries are offered in
the Estrada Courts and Ramona Gardens housing developments. Overall, in 2015,
HACLA served 147,561 residents in their developments. 56,852 residents had Section 8
assistance, 47,658 residents lived in HUD project-based contract administration units
for.
94
1,319 affordable housing units were built with HACLA funding.
95
Finally, within the
public housing units, there is a one-percent vacancy rate.
96

91
“HUD-VASH Eligibility Requirements,” United States Department of Housing and Urban Development,
accessed July 17, 2015, https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/hud-vash/hud-vash-eligibility-
requirements/.
92
“S+C Eligibility Requirements,” United States Department of Housing and Urban Development,
accessed July 17, 2015, https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/spc/spc-eligibility-requirements/.
93
“Resident Services,” Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, accessed July 17, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/residentservices.
94
16,316 units are in the City of Los Angeles.

37
Program Name Units/Families Served in 2014 Expected Turnover
1. Public Housing 6,971 379
2. Section 8 Vouchers & Ports 35,110 1,756
3. HUD - VASH 1,696 185
4. Non – Elderly Disabled 288 8
5. Family Unification 188 14
6. Tenant Protection 1,498 72
7. Mainstream Year 5 73 4
8. Welfare to Work (Obsolete) 324 17
9. Project-Based Voucher 2,806 251
10. Limited Preference WL Homeless 3,684 264
11. Limited Preference TBSH 252 6
12. Section 8 Homeownership 37 3
13. Public Housing Drug Elimination N/A N/A
14. HOPE VI 91 0
15. Shelter Plus Care 2,510 327
16. New Construction 1,704 85
17. Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation 1,270 147
18. HOPWA 183 9
Total Households Served: 58,685
Table 3. Impact of HACLA’s Programs
97

95
These are affordable units financed through bonds, tax credits, and other private and public funds.
They are not eligible for public housing subsidies. However, some of these units may receive Section 8
PBV subsidies, which makes housing deeply affordable for ELI families.
96
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, HACLA by the Numbers, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority
of the City of Los Angeles, 2015).
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/LayerGallery/uploads/2015/7/7/FactSheetupdate.pdf.
97
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Year 2015
Agency Plan, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015), 14,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2015%20Final%20Agency%20Plan%2
010-3-2014%20FINAL.pdf.

38

Fig. 2.7: Nickerson Gardens Playground, circa 2010. Source: Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

Unfortunately, it is apparent that the amount of public housing is not enough to
serve struggling households. Although there are only 6,232 housing units, there were
38,813 families on HACLA’s waiting list in 2014. (Table 4) For the families that live in
the units, 92.5-percent of the households are ELI - they are earning thirty-percent of the
AMI. When public housing was first built in Los Angeles, it was to address this need, but
now, there is no public housing production. Public housing’s demise and stigmatization
has prevented HACLA from building public housing. Rather than invest in public
housing, at a Federal level, HUD has restructured their financing structures to prevent
concentrations of ELI residents. In order to access Federal funding for affordable
housing, AMIs must differ and there are stringent regulations on building quality.

39
Household Demographics # of Families % of Total Families
Waiting List Total 38,813
Extremely Low-Income 35,902 92.5
Very Low Income 2,561 6.6
Low Income 350 0.9
Families with Children 21,766 56.1
Elderly Families 4,576 11.8
Families with Disabilities 12,471 32.1
Latino 15,408 39.7
African American 17,349 44.7
Caucasian 3,262 8.4
Asian/Other 2,794 7.2

Bedroom Size
1 (Includes 0 Bedroom) 24,875 64.1
2 9,140 23.5
3 4,468 11.5
4 308 .8
5 22 .1
Table 4. Housing Needs of Families on the Waiting List Public Housing Tenant-based Assistance
98

HACLA’s Funding Sources, Budget, and Maintenance
The current public housing supply is not enough to serve struggling households.
Due to the Windfall Scandals, the last housing project constructed by HACLA was in
1955. Nevertheless, beyond providing housing, over seventy years later, HACLA has
leveraged over 686,237,632 dollars through Federal funding, grants, public loans,
private loans, and collaborations with a multitude of non-profit organizations to build and
improve housing with social services.
99
Despite this accomplishment, HACLA is
struggling to physically manage these developments and to provide more deeply
subsidized units. With major Federal and state funding gone, HACLA has become
dependent on multiple partnerships, rental subsidies, and voucher programs. (Table 5)
Therefore, HACLA’s lack of funding commitments to existing building maintenance has
caused many communities to decline physically and socially.
100

98

Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Year 2015
Agency Plan, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015), 32,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2015%20Final%20Agency%20Plan%2
010-3-2014%20FINAL.pdf. The HACLA’s public housing waiting list is closed.

99
Ibid., 8. Affordable housing includes different housing types – shelters, transitional housing,
apartments, and homes.
100
Lyra Kilston. “Good Design Is for Everyone: The Evolution of Low-Income Housing in L.A.,” KCET,
March 16, 2015, accessed January 9, 2016, http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los-
angeles/michael-maltzan-star-apartments-public-low-income-housing-history.html.

40
Sources Planned $ Planned Uses
Federal Grants
(Fiscal Year 2014)
Public Housing Operating Fund 21,840,474 Operations
Public Housing Capital Fund 14,104,966 Capital Improvements
HOPE VI Demolition and Revitalization - -
Annual Contributions for Section 8
Tenant-Based Assistance
566,462,063 Housing Assistance
Other Grants Community Development Block Grant 0 Community Service
Center
HOPWA, New Construction, Moderate
Rehab, Shelter Plus Care, Continuum
of Care, Supportive Housing, Family
Self-Sufficiency
52,914,314 Housing Assistance
Resident Opportunity and Self-
Sufficiency Grants
332,094 Senior Citizen
Assistants (RSDM)
WIA Cluster (Adult, Youth, Dislocated
Worker)
2,190,885 Workforce Training
Public Housing Dwelling Rental Income 27,738,604 Operations
Non-Federal
Sources
Healthy Marriage Promotion and
Fatherhood Grant
100,000 Resident Services
AB 1913 Housing Based Day
Supervision
554,232 Resident Youth
Total Resources 686,237,632
Table 5. 2015 HACLA Agency Plan Financial Resources – Planned Sources and Uses
101

The Aragon Family has been living in William Mead Homes for twenty-four years
and counting, but maintenance has been an issue. Joanne Aragon was a resident of
William Mead Homes throughout her childhood and teenage years. She now lives in a
house in a nearby neighborhood, but she frequently visits her mother, Jasmin, who still
lives in William Mead Homes. “Growing up here, William Mead was convenient. My
school is in the same development. HACLA lowered our rent when my mom was out of
work. There is a WorkSource Center, which helps people get jobs. When I was younger,
there were gangs, but not so much anymore. It’s a quiet neighborhood. People keep to
themselves.”
102
However, in terms of maintenance, HACLA “need[s] to improve in
getting work orders done in timely manner. Their fumigation system is ineffective. When
doing some landscaping, they should have the workers clean up as opposed to the
residents.”
103

101
“Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Year 2015 Agency Plan,” The Housing Authority of the
City of Los Angeles, accessed July 20, 2015, 18,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2015%20Final%20Agency%20Plan%2
010-3-2014%20FINAL.pdf.
102
Joanne Aragon, interview by Leslie Palaroan, Personal Interview, Los Angeles, January 6, 2016. This
person’s name has been changed for privacy.
103
Ibid.

41
Most pipes seem to be very old. [The] locations of the lights in the apartments are badly
placed.”
104
(Figure 2.8) Unfortunately, it will be difficult solving these issues because
HACLA’s overall public housing financing is decreasing. HACLA has been operating at
a loss. From 2008 – 2011, HACLA’s operating expenses have been increasing, making
it difficult for HACLA to generate income for their housing developments. (Table 6)

2008 2009 2010 2011
Total Operating Revenue $860,175,680 $992,526,445 $1,068,469,934 $1,077,259,223
Total Operating Expenses $914,935,657 $1,011,832,003 $1,044,906,027 $1,084,043,060
Net Operating Income $54,759,977 $19,305,558 $23,563,907 $6,783,837
Total Non-Operating Revenue
and Expenses, Net $2,020,890 $6,219,084 $5,820,225 $1,579,694
Income (Loss) Before Capital
Contributions $56,780,867 $25,524,642 $17,743,682 $8,363,531
Capital Contribution from HUD $9,288,569 $13,542,081 $6,567,711 $17,197,233
Change in Net Assets $47,492,298 $11,982,561 $24,311,393 $8,833,702
Net Assets at Beginning of the
Year $446,477,470 $398,985,172 $387,002,611 $468,538,229
Net Assets at End of the Year $398,985,172 $387,002,611 $411,314,004 $477,371,931
Table 6. HACLA’s Published Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Assets from 2008 –
2011
105

According to HACLA’s latest 2014 financial audit, “Section 8 Voucher program
will remain stable; however, funding for Low Rent Public Housing program will continue
to be reduced. Public housing authorities will continue to struggle as they face long-term
challenges to match operating needs against available revenue.”
106
This has not
changed throughout the years. According to HACLA’s 2012 Annual Report, HACLA’s
spends an enormous amount of their budget - ninety-two-percent, on maintaining

104
Ibid.
105
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Creating Sustainable Neighborhoods: 2009 Annual
Report, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2009),
24, http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/HACLA_AR_2009.pdf.
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2010 Annual Report HACLA: Our Residents, Our
Communities, Our Successes, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2010),
24, http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2010AREnpdf.pdf.
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles 2011
Annual Report: Investing in Tomorrow, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2011),
26, http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/209100_HACLA_ENG_n_proof.pdf
106
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Annual
Financial Report - Years Ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 (With Independent Auditor’s Report
Thereon), (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2014),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2014%20financial%20audit.pdf.

42
housing developments.
107
However, residents are living in substandard conditions.
Therefore, in 2013, HACLA undertook an assessment of each development.
Additionally, there are inspections that aid HACLA in determining what to fix. Despite
this methodology, HACLA is grappling with how to not only maintain these
developments, but how to maintain them in a manner that does not compromise their
historic integrity.

107
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 75 Years Providing Affordable Housing 2013 Report,
(Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2013), 22,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2012%20HACLA%20AR.pdf. This
percentage is counting Section 8 vouchers as maintenance expenditures. Section 8 subsidizes rental
amounts for the tenants, but that voucher generates revenue to maintain the building’s operating costs.

43

Fig. 2.8: Bad Conditions in Jordan Downs Resident’s Unit, 1988. Source: Herald-Examiner Collection,
Los Angeles Public Library.

44

Chapter 3: Fighting to Preserve and Invest in Public Housing
With public housing developments aging and deteriorating, and with a limited
budget, HACLA has demolished sites, and are proposing to alter character-defining
features of existing developments. Throughout the decades, HACLA has demolished
thousands of units. Citywide, an estimated 7,906 units and beds have been
demolished.
108
Currently, there is another plan to demolish a prominent public housing
development in Watts - Jordan Downs is in the process of applying for Federal sources
to completely redevelop the neighborhood.
109
At a smaller scale, HACLA has altered
developments in order to modernize them according the 2013 PNAs recommendations.
According to the Los Angeles Conservancy, an organization that advocates for historic
places, HACLA has undertaken alterations that do not comply with Section 106
standards. For instance, at William Mead Homes, HACLA is proposing to replace metal
casement windows with vinyl windows.
110
To further modernize units and spur
community development, HACLA has upgraded developments with the help of
residents. At Nickerson Gardens, HACLA has rebuilt sidewalks, painted walls, and
replaced plumbing, but without an assessment on the historic significance of these
developments, changes may compromise historic integrity. Once again, these issues
stem from the financing structures of public housing developments, and how these
structures encourage PHAs to disinvest in public housing. In order to understand the
disconnect between public housing and heritage conservation, one must reflect on how
stigmatization guides Federal investment financing structures, and how any investment
used by PHAs enables them to erase public housing through demolition,
redevelopment, and modernization.

108
Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R. Keylon, Garden
Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012),
83-84,
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment%20Context%20
Statement.pdf.
109
Saul Gonzalez, Doretha Perkins, Douglas Gutherie, and Jacqueline Leavitt, interview by Audie
Cornish, KCRW, July 12, 2012, http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/remaking-watts-
infamous-jordan-downs-housing-project.
110
“Windows in Publicly Owned Garden Apartments,” Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed May 28,
2015. https://www.laconservancy.org/issues/windows-publicly-owned-garden-apartments.

45

Understanding Public Housing Financing
In order to understand why public housing is often in disrepair, one must consider
how public housing is financed. At a national level, public housing is one of the nation's
three main rental assistance programs, along with Section 8 vouchers and project-
based rental assistance (PBVs). Public housing developments provide affordable
homes to 2.2 million low-income Americans. While HUD oversees the public housing
program, it is administered locally by about 3,000 PHAs.
111
These PHAs own and
manage the public housing developments themselves, but some contract with private
management companies or transfer ownership to a private subsidiary or another entity
that operates the development under public housing rules. In terms of generating
income from rents, generally, a family must be “low-income” — meaning that its income
may not exceed eighty-percent of the local median income — in order to qualify for
public housing. At least forty-percent of the new families that PHA admits each year
must be ELI with incomes no greater than thirty-percent of the local median. This is
approximately equivalent to the national poverty line. On average, agencies exceed this
requirement by a large margin. For HACLA, all tenants are ELI. After certain deductions
are taken out, ELI tenants pay thirty-percent of their income for rent and utilities, and
even less depending on the family’s circumstances. PHAs can also choose to require
families to pay a minimum rent of up to fifty dollars even if this is more than thirty-
percent of their income, and families can opt to pay a flat rent based on local market
rents regardless of their income. This is the key differentiation between public housing
and affordable housing. Although public housing is inherently affordable, developments
clearly called affordable housing, do not give families the option to pay a flat rate.
Affordable housing developments may layer subsidies, but each unit has to pay a rent
set by the developer and HUD. Additionally, it is difficult to develop affordable housing
units all at thirty-percent AMI because funding sources prevent a development from
being one-hundred-percent ELI. For public housing, with rents charged at such a low
rate, it is difficult for PHAs to garner income to operate their developments.

111
“Public Housing,” United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, accessed November
20, 2015. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph.

46
According to HUD, about eighty-five-percent of public housing units meet or
exceed HUD standards for decent, safe housing, but the developments — nearly all of
which were built before 1985 — have accumulated large underlying deferred
maintenance and improvement needs. This is due to diminishing Federal funds, and low
rents that do generate income that is enough to operate and maintain the development.
A 2010 HUD study estimated the total unmet capital needs in public housing
developments at more than twenty-six billion dollars. No funds have been provided to
build additional public housing since the mid-1990s. Since then, PHAs have demolished
or otherwise removed from the program more than 285,000 units due to deterioration
resulting from long-term underfunding and other factors. PHAs have built new units to
replace only about one-sixth of those that have been removed. The Federal government
funds public housing through two main streams – The Public Housing Operating Fund
and the Public Housing Capital Fund (Capital Fund). The Public Housing Operating
Fund, covers the gap between the rents that public housing tenants pay and the
developments’ operating costs. The Capital Fund, funds renovation of developments
and replacement of items such as appliances and heating and cooling equipment.
112

However, it is difficult for HACLA to maintain their public housing developments.

Contradicting Stipulations between HUD and Heritage Conservation
Public housing has stipulations that are stricter than conventional affordable
housing financing. Public housing captures multiple Federal funding sources that are
tied to restrictions. For instance, in the case of rental subsidies, PBVs, can only be used
at developments that are designated to accept PBVs.
113
There are other larger funding
sources that have stipulations that in effect, destroy public housing. The HOPE VI
program has been the most disruptive funding source in demolishing numerous public
housing units throughout the United States. HOPE VI was created to redevelop slums,
and it was used to justify public housing redevelopment and demolition. In order to save
and garner funding, HACLA has decreased the housing stock through HOPE VI. For

112
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Policy Basics: Introduction to Public Housing, (Washington, DC:
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2015),
http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/policybasics-housing.pdf.
113
“Project Based Vouchers,” United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, accessed
August 18, 2015, http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=DOC_9157.pdf.

47
instance, when the Pico Aliso Housing project was built in Boyle Heights, it held 685
units of housing. When it was redeveloped, there was a net loss of 308 units, and was
renamed Pueblo del Sol.
114
According to Jacqueline Levitt, an urban planning professor
at the University of California at Los Angeles, public housing is a “stepchild of the
government. [PHAs throughout the United States have never replaced more] than the
number of units that were demolished. At Pico Aliso, [there] was a one to four unit
replacement.”
115
Many public housing units were demolished and replaced with mixed
income developments that house fewer people. There were greater restrictions and
requirements for the low-income residents trying to return or apply to the new
development. For instance, in the case of Chavez Ravine, although HACLA had
promised a first right of refusal, many residents could not financially qualify for the units.
Nationally, throughout the HOPE VI programs, there were no one-for-one replacement
requirements. Therefore, America has been losing roughly 10,000 units a year since
1995.
116
As of 2014, 140,000 units have been permanently lost through HOPE VI. Back
in St. Louis, HOPE VI rapidly replaced public housing. As a result, preservationists filed
a lawsuit against St. Louis’ PHA. When Darst-Webby, a public housing development in
St. Louis, was set for demolition, there was no replacement plan for affordable units.
The units disappeared and preservationists believed that this exemplified private land
grabs by HOPE VI.
117
HOPE VI also functioned on the belief that New Urbanist
principles would resolve public housing issues, but the program “traded sturdy
structures for lighter construction.”
118
Rather, HOPE VI became an inadequate response
to the market, maintenance, and architectural issues surrounding public housing. The
program destroyed communities.

114
Saul Gonzalez, Doretha Perkins, Douglas Gutherie, and Jacqueline Leavitt, interview by Audie
Cornish, KCRW, July 12, 2012, http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/remaking-watts-
infamous-jordan-downs-housing-project.
115
Ibid.
116
Jake Blumgart, “4 Public Housing Lessons the U.S. Could Learn from the Rest of the World,” The Next
City, August 24, 2014, accessed August 28, 2015. https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/better-public-housing-
lessons-failure-success-us-world.
117
Andrew Dolkart, “Welcome and Opening Remarks” (lecture, Columbia University GSAPP, New York,
NY, March 31, 2012).
118
Elizabeth Milnarik,“The Preservation of Form and Function in American Public Housing” (lecture,
Columbia University GSAPP, New York, NY, March 31, 2012).

48
Another funding source that PHAs are starting to leverage is called the Choice
Neighborhood Initiative (CNI). It is designed to “address public housing or HUD-
Assisted Housing through a comprehensive approach [towards] neighborhood
transformation…[CNI] ensures that current public and assisted housing residents will be
able to benefit from this transformation, by preserving affordable housing or providing
residents with the choice to move to affordable and accessible housing in another
existing neighborhood of opportunity.”
119
In terms of housing, the goal was to “replace
distressed public and assisted housing with high-quality mixed-income housing that is
well-managed and responsive to the needs of the surrounding neighborhood…To
achieve [this goal] communities must have in place a comprehensive neighborhood
revitalization strategy or Transformation Plan.”
120
Currently, HACLA is utilizing the grant
to undertake dispositions and extensive renovations.
Last year, Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD), another program established
as a means to house the nation’s poorest, has the potential of compromising public
housing. RAD privatizes public housing by allowing local housing authorities to
mortgage land and buildings to private capital. Private capital investors would then use
low income tax credits to provide subsidized rent through project-based Section 8
contracts. The program merely shifts units from the public housing program to the
Section 8 program so that providers may leverage the private capital markets to make
capital improvements.
121
RAD also gives owners of three HUD “legacy” programs –
Rent Supplement, Rental Assistance Payment, and Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation
the opportunity to enter into long-term contracts that facilitate the financing of
improvements.
122
Repairs would then be able to be made or the properties could be
demolished or rebuilt. The units that would be rebuilt would replace the number that was
demolished. In simplest terms, a PHA could either sell or lease a public housing building
to a private developer; the developer in turn would agree to make certain renovations,

119
“Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grant Program,” United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development, accessed August 20, 2015,
http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/ph/cn/docs/fr5800n-choice.pdf.
120
Ibid.
121
“Five Things You Should Know About RAD Public Housing Conversions,” United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development, accessed August 20, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/RAD.
122
Ibid.

49
and to respect tenants’ rights. The traditional public housing funding mechanism, which
is direct subsidies to PHAs, would be replaced by tax credits and housing vouchers
under Section 8. The total subsidy encourages the developer to undertake the public
housing development and maintain low rents for tenants. RAD turns public housing into
being general affordable housing.
123
Yet by switching public housing that imitates the
affordable housing model, there is an “erosion of tenant legal protections…For example,
under current public housing law, if a landlord or housing authority mistreats a tenant,
the tenant may pursue redress without resorting to expensive and lengthy lawsuits. But
under RAD, the contracts will be between private developers and housing authorities,
which could make it much more difficult for tenants to hold landlords accountable.”
124

Although no tenants will have to be re-screened to establish eligibility to live in
RAD properties, and an any demolished units would be must be replaced with the same
number of units as was originally there, there are more rising problems from
RAD. PHAs can intentionally leave units empty in an effort to lessen their administrative
fees or for eventual demolition. In 2014, Congress only authorized 60,000 units to be
converted. HUD received applications for more than 180,000 units to be converted.
However, according to James Hanlon, the director of the Institute for Urban Research at
Southern Illinois University – Edwardsville, the university is conducting research on the
first round of housing units approved for RAD. He emphasizes his findings are very
preliminary, but, “Economically viable or otherwise better-off housing projects are
potentially more likely to be converted, as opposed to more severely distressed [or]
poorer projects. [Therefore] better-off projects might be more attractive to potential
investors.”
125
With more than 300,000 units of public housing stock removed from 1900
to 2010 because of chronic underfunding, the better-positioned buildings with stable-
income tenants are apt to be selected for RAD conversion. Therefore, worst-off places
will fall into disrepair. For example, in Baltimore, where 4,000 of the city’s public housing
units have been proposed for conversion to private ownership through RAD, tenants

123
Rachel M. Cohen, “The RAD-ical Shifts to Public Housing,” The American Prospect, accessed August
16, 2015, http://prospect.org/article/can-private-capital-save-public-housing-tenants-have-their-doubts.
124
Ibid.
125
Alexis Stephens, “Risks vs. Rewards: Inside HUD’s Favorite New Program,” The Next City, October 9,
2014, accessed August 22, 2015. https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/public-housing-privatized-hud-rad-
section-8.

50
and tenants’ rights groups have been protesting the program’s implementation.
Additionally, stakeholders are concerned about using the buildings as collateral, loan
repayment viability by PHAs, and exposing housing developments to the financial
market. Nevertheless, the RAD program does not increase HUD’s budget.
Regardless of programs such as HOPE VI, CNI, and RAD, HUD simply does not
have resources that target public housing rehabilitation and preservation. In 1995, when
public housing preservation became a contentious issue from an equity and
conservation standpoint, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) issued
guidelines to defuse the potential for conflict. The ACHP is an independent Federal
agency that promotes the preservation, enhancement, and productive use of our
nation’s historic resources, and advises the President and Congress on national historic
preservation policy. They encourage Federal agencies to factor historic preservation
into Federal project requirements. AHCP’s guidelines were vague. They simply
“[relaxed] strict rehabilitation standards as they applied to the interiors of simple
buildings.”
126
Their guidance provided flexibility, but left State Historic Preservation
Office Staff to decide what would happen with public housing developments. The ACHP
merely posts updates on best practices, case studies, and related articles, and heavily
depends on Section 106 of National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) to address
public housing developments and conservation. The ACHP and their Affordable
Housing Task Force revisited their 1995 “Policy Statement on Affordable Housing and
Historic Preservation,” in 2005 to create a final advisory council policy statement, but
the updated 2006 statement still has flaws – it focuses on affordable housing and is
more dependent on Section 106 to prevent negative alterations to buildings. Unlike
public housing, affordable housing, can utilize Federal tax incentives such as the Low-
Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit (HRTC)
because they are income-generating properties and have different underwriting and
financing stipulations compared to public housing financing. Due to LIHTC and HRTC,
affordable housing developments are reviewed by the National Park Service (NPS) for
adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines

126
Robert E. Stipe, A Richer Heritage: Preservation in the Twenty-First Century (Chapel Hill, North
Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 108-109.

51
for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings through a more stringent process. This does not
happen for public housing developments. Section 106 requires Federal Agencies such
as HUD and HACLA to “consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties
and provide the ACHP a reasonable opportunity to comment on undertakings.”
127
With
public housing units continuing to be demolished, this illuminates the issue that Section
106 is not enough to conserve public housing developments. Conservationists have to
reconcile the stricter interpretation of the NPS’s Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation, and housing officials are often antagonistic to both historic preservation
and the reuse of older structures.
128
Even for general affordable housing developers,
Federal preservation standards and affordable housing credits have been hampered by
inconsistencies and conflicts among the Secretary’s Standards, Federal housing credits,
and state-mandated local housing codes.
129
The tools that the ACHP has produced are
specifically for those that want to produce affordable housing, not public housing.
Therefore, there is conflict between HUD stipulations and conservationists’ convictions.
Rather than leverage the existing infrastructure at public housing sites, HACLA is
incentivized to demolish public housing developments because there is no guide to
historically conserve public housing. HACLA’s ongoing public housing demolitions and
alterations are exemplified by changes in Normont Terrace, Jordan Downs, Rose Hill
Courts, Mar Vista Gardens, and William Mead Homes.

Demolishing and Decreasing Housing Supply at Normont Terrace
Situated in the Harbor City neighborhood in Los Angeles, Normont Terrace was a
public housing development, but it was redeveloped as affordable housing. From
redevelopment, displaced residents were not guaranteed housing, and units were
replaced with higher rents and different architecture. This privatization undermines one
of the basic standpoints of public housing in Los Angeles - to provide for the poorest.
Normont Terrace first was built in 1942 as temporary military housing but later served
as a public housing development. However, the development’s transformation

127
“About,” Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, accessed January 9, 2015.
http://www.achp.gov/aboutachp.html.
128
Robert E. Stipe, A Richer Heritage: Preservation in the Twenty-First Century (Chapel Hill, North
Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 108.
129
Ibid.,109.

52
underlines HACLA’s struggle to preserve public housing. To neighbors, Normont
Terrace bred gang activity. Therefore, HACLA underwent comprehensive
redevelopment of the site, and in 1996, Normont Terrace became Harbor Village
Apartments. Harbor Village consists of 624 attached and detached residences. 224
units are for homeownership, and the remaining 400 became subsidized rental units.
The rentals are townhomes, garden apartments, and detached homes. (Figure 3.0) The
acquisition and redevelopment was funded through LIHTC and Tax Exempt Bond
Financing. To attempt to increase affordability, Section 8 vouchers were used.
Residents are also provided with comprehensive social service programs. After the
expiration of the development’s fifteen-year LIHTC compliance period in 2012, HACLA
went into a limited partnership with Related California, a private real estate firm, and
Union Bank.
130
HACLA exercised its purchase option to purchase a 400-unit low-income
rental unit project to its instrumentality, LA Cienega LOMOD (LOMOD). “Harbor Village
is not simply Normont Village with a face lift. Their new community is gated and has 24-
hour security.”
131
In 2014, the development underwent more renovation - this included
remodeled interiors with new kitchen/bathroom fixtures, cabinets and countertops,
kitchen appliances, and dual glazed windows. Additionally, twenty units were fully
rehabbed to Federal accessibility standards.
132
This redevelopment highlights HACLA’s
pitfalls in preserving public housing developments. Harbor Village erased Normont
Terrace’s history and privatized housing. By privatizing housing, this depletes extremely
affordable units are removed from the market. Yet, this is only one instance of
redevelopment in HACLA’s history. HACLA has demolished fifteen developments
possessing 7,906 units. (Table 7) HACLA has plans to demolish more.

130
“Company Profile,” Related California, accessed September 10, 2015.
http://www.relatedcalifornia.com/ourcompany/corporateinfo.aspx.
131
Julie Tamaki. “New Development Revitalizes Area of Harbor City,” Los Angeles Times, February 7,
1999, http://articles.latimes.com/1999/feb/07/realestate/re-5693.
132
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 75 Years Providing Affordable Housing 2013 Report, (Los
Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2013), 17-18,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2012%20HACLA%20AR.pdf.

53

Fig. 3.0: Harbor Village, 2015. Source: Public Housing Gallery, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

54
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’ Public Housing Developments - Demolished
Name Address Neighborhood Units Year Built Age
Aliso Apartments First Street and Clarence Boyle Heights 336 1954 61
Aliso Village 1401 E. 1
st
Street
Los Angeles,
Boyle Heights 802 1942 73
Banning Homes N. Gaffey St. and Anaheim St. San Pedro 2000 1950 65
Basilone Homes Glenoaks Blvd Sun Valley 140 1947 68
Cabrillo Homes 2001 River Avenue Long Beach 1942 73
Channel Heights Western Avenue and 25
th

Street
Harbor Area 600 1942 73
Dana Strand Village 401 Hawaiian Avenue Harbor Area 384 1942 73
Normont Terrace 990 West 256
th
Street Harbor Area 460 1942 73
Pico Gardens 500 Pecan Street Boyle Heights 260 1942 73
Pico Gardens & Las
Casitas
133

1526 E. 3th Street Boyle Heights 296
Portsmouth Homes 2323 Portsmouth Road San Pedro 128 1945 70
Rodger Young Village Northeast Griffith Park Griffith Park 1500 1946 69
Victory Park Cal 4105 1942 73
Western Terrace 1655 Seaport Drive San Pedro 1000 1945 70
Wilmington Hall 450 Neptune Street San Pedro 1945 70
Total Number of Units Demolished: 7,906
Table 7. Demolished Public Housing Units
134

Redeveloping and Disrupting the Jordan Downs Community
HACLA has looming revitalization plans for Jordan Downs. Jordan Downs has
700 units of public housing in which some families have lived for generations. HACLA
has employed The Michaels Organization and BRIDGE Housing as the joint developers
and property managers for Jordan Downs. HACLA will continue to own the land, but all
three organizations plan to demolish all of the buildings for a much larger “urban
village.” Learning from their past demolitions, HACLA will require one-to-one
replacement of the existing 700 public housing units.
135
In addition to the units, there will
be approximately 1,800 subsidized homes and houses to be sold at a fair-market value
which will help offset the costs of supporting lower income units. Master planning
started in 2008, and it includes neighborhood retail, community centers, and parks. The
joint developers “will also develop a comprehensive plan - Human Capital Plan, to

133
It is unclear if Pico Gardens and Las Casitas qualify as public housing in the context of historic
significance. This is a redeveloped site with new construction single-family homes and older townhomes.
134
Alan Michelson, “Aliso Apartments, Los Angeles, CA,” University of Washington, 2005, Pacific Coast
Architecture Database (PCAD Id: 2963), http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/building/2963/. Some of these
developments were intended to be temporary and not permanent housing.
135
Bridge Housing, “L.A. Approves Specific Plan for Jordan Downs,” Bridge Housing News & Media, May
7, 2013, accessed June 13, 2015, http://bridgehousing.com/news-media/la-approves-specific-plan-jordan-
downs..

55
provide family support, job training, and community programs for residents to move
toward self-sufficiency.”
136
According to HACLA’s CEO and President, Doug Guthrie,
“The idea is to upgrade the neighborhood without the displacement of low-income
people that comes with gentrification.”
137

During the 1950s, Jordan Downs sheltered factory workers. The development
was said to be “a city within a city of two story structures.”
138
(Figure 3.1) With time, it
became notorious for gangs such as the Great Street Crips, and crime. The violence
has since subsided and it has become a “breathing neighborhood.”
139
Despite its violent
history, according to Brandon Carter, a resident, Jordan Downs “feels like a family
community. My mother grew up here, my grandmother grew up here…kids have
potential…but there are no resources.”
140
In addition, Dorthea Parkins, another resident,
does not want Jordan Downs to be redeveloped. “Everybody respects each other. I was
born and raised [in Jordan Downs]. The buildings have been here for so long. I am used
to this.” However, according to another resident named Sharon, “The structures have
problems…the pipes, the roaches, the mice, the mildew, the rust on the floor. [These
buildings] have been here for years. [I am] ready for the places to be knocked down.”
141

In 1992, there was an effort to redevelop Jordan Downs, and residents were concerned
about the right of first refusal. (Figure 3.2) Similar to the Chavez Ravine, for renters, this
translates to whether or not tenants can return to public housing after redevelopment. In
2015, in order for residents to move back into Jordan Downs, they have to be in “good
standing” with HACLA. Families have to comply with the lease, and there is a program
called “Shields for Families” that prepares families for redevelopment. The
redevelopment plan provides flexibility to build out the urban village in phases. Despite
the plans for one to one replacement and redevelopment in phases, Jordan Downs’

136
Ibid.
137
Saul Gonzalez, Doretha Perkins, Douglas Gutherie, and Jacqueline Leavitt, interview by Audie
Cornish, KCRW, July 12, 2012, http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/remaking-watts-
infamous-jordan-downs-housing-project.
138
Drew Bachrach, “Watts Waits: The Redevelopment of Jordan Downs,” filmed 2015, Vimeo video,
posted June 17, 2015, https://vimeo.com/131012405.
139
Ibid.
140
Saul Gonzalez, Doretha Perkins, Douglas Gutherie, and Jacqueline Leavitt, interview by Audie
Cornish, KCRW, July 12, 2012, http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/remaking-watts-
infamous-jordan-downs-housing-project.
141
Ibid.

56
redevelopment is worrying housing advocates because affordable housing supply is
becoming depleted and HACLA has a history of demolition without providing equitable
replacement. Compounding this concern, the city of Los Angeles has less than a five-
percent vacancy rate, and the residents in Jordan Downs cannot afford market rate
housing. Over fifty-percent of Jordan Down’s residents are unemployed.
142
The new
urban village decreases public housing availability, Jordan Down’s history, and the
physical fabric of the neighborhood. In December 2016, the State of California’s
Strategic Growth Council’s Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities Program
awarded BRIDGE Housing with $6,500,000 to start on Phase I.
143
Although Jordan
Downs is not deemed to be historically, significant, this fight underlines the importance
of conserving public housing from a housing and survival perspective.
144

142
Ibid.
143
California Strategic Growth Council, Strategic Growth Council Approves $32.4 Million Through
Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, (Sacramento: California Strategic Growth
Council, 2015), https://www.sgc.ca.gov/docs/PressRelease_AHSCFall2015NOFA.pdf.
144
Jordan Down’s historic significance may change according to new frameworks for evaluation.

57

Fig. 3.1: Jordan Downs, 2015. Source: Public Housing Gallery, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

58

Fig. 3.2: Jordan Downs’ athletic coach, Deryl Carter excited after announcements for a new baseball field
and other improvements, 1988. Source: Herald-Examiner Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

Planning to Demolish Rose Hills Courts
Rose Hill Courts is a one hundred unit public housing development built in the
1940s and HACLA has plans to demolish the buildings.
145
According to HACLA, “the
buildings have outlived their planned life cycle.”
146
The property has a large termite
infestation that extends to subterranean level around the foundation walls, piers, and
plumbing. According to the latest physical needs assessment, Rose Hill Courts has over
16,000,000 dollars in capital needs of which 11,000,000 dollars are related to termite

145
Similar to Jordan Downs, Rose Hill Courts may need further evaluation for significance, but it is set to
be demolished.
146
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Year 2015
Agency Plan, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015), 25, 113, 131,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2015%20Final%20Agency%20Plan%2
010-3-2014%20FINAL.pdf.

59
damage reconstruction. (Figure 3.4) The engineer’s recommendation is to repair,
reinforce or demolish the structure and bring property to current seismic codes. HACLA
has recently conducted two resident meetings at the site to discuss the termite damage
and HACLA’s next steps. Unlike the funds that maintain public housing developments,
there are numerous HUD funds for redevelopment. (Table 8) Residents are concerned
with where they are going to go. Yet, HACLA’s short-term solution is to monitor and
treat the occupied units, but when tenants move out, the vacated units will not be leased
out. For the long-term options, residents will have to be relocated. Finding extremely
affordable housing for families that will be displaced will be difficult.

Fig. 3.4: Rose Hill Courts, 2015. Source: Public Housing Gallery, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

60
HUD Program Effects of Rose Hill Courts
Comprehensiv
e
Modernization
It is a substantial rehabilitation effort to upgrade the property to market rate condition
and extend its life expectancy by an additional 30 – 40 years. Under this scenario,
units will continue to be deficient in terms of size, design, and amenities.
Section 18
Demolition
Demolish the property if the property is deemed obsolete as to physical condition,
making them unsuitable for housing purposes, and no reasonable program of
modifications is cost-effective to return them to useful life. This scenario comes into
play if HACLA does not have funds to redevelop the property.
Section 18
Demolition,
Disposition,
Redevelopment
Under this option, if the property satisfies the Criterion for Obsolescence, in which
case Rehabilitation is not cost-effective, the Authority could apply to HUD to
demolish the property and dispose of it to a Partnership comprising of HACLA and a
Development Partner for redevelopment of low income replacement units using
mixed finance sources of funding including tax credits.
Redevelopment
through Rental
Assistance
Demonstration
(RAD)
HUD is advocating that PHAs convert their public housing sites to RAD, a new HUD
initiative to preserve units by converting Public Housing subsidies at current levels to
long-term Section 8 contract rents. Under this option, HACLA would partner with a
development partner to demolish, finance, and rebuild.
Table 8. HACLA’s Proposed Redevelopment Solutions for Rose Hills Courts

Modernization Upgrades and Alterations at William Mead Homes and Mar Vista
For public housing developments that do not have a forthcoming redevelopment
plan, they still undergo modernization upgrades that compromise the material integrity
of the buildings. Disregarding developments such as Harbor Village, the integrity of the
remaining public housing developments is undeniable. The National Register of Historic
Places recognizes a property's significance based on a property’s integrity through
seven aspects or qualities: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling,
and association. Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. “To be
listed in the National Register of Historic Places, a property must not only be shown to
be significant under the National Register criteria, but it also must have integrity. The
evaluation of integrity is sometimes a subjective judgment, but it must always be
grounded in an understanding of a property's physical features and how they relate to
its significance.”
147
At an arm’s length, all public housing development sites convey
seven out of the seven aspects of integrity.
148
As exemplified by HOPE VI and CNI
funding, HUD funding can still completely uproot historic housing developments. Other
smaller funding sources from HUD can also compromise the material integrity of public
housing developments. PHAs are subject to two types of maintenance evaluation –

147
“How to Evaluate the Integrity of a Property,” National Park Service United States Department of the
Interior, accessed January 11, 2016. http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_8.htm.
148
Previous alterations made by HACLA may have compromised material integrity, but a survey and a
historic structures report must be performed before integrity is examined at each development.

61
inspections and PNAs. HUD requires PHAs to undergo physical property inspections on
public housing and multi-family assisted housing. For HACLA, 20,000 inspections are
completed annually with the aim of ensuring safe and sanitary housing for assisted
families.
149
Inspections include rating every item on a list of physical points to inspect,
with deductions for issues. Issues are weighted by severity and each inspection is
weighted with a one- hundred-point scale. The frequency of inspections increases when
scores are lower. Properties that score below eighty points are considered problematic
enough to warrant annual inspections to ensure resolution of issues and
improvement.
150
In addition to these standard inspections are PNAs. The purpose of the
PNA is to bring each of its sites up to modernization and energy conservation
standards. In 2013, this assessment was performed and completed on over 6,800
public housing units owned and operated by HACLA. The study shows a physical need
of $533 million. This need is further broken down into four priorities. (Table 9) The huge
capital need for the public housing coupled with limited capital funding allows HACLA to
set forth a strategic capital spending/improvement plan, subject to commission
approval. The PNA and improvement plan are also “predictive road maps that will
include resident outreach and transparency [to residents because] addressing capital
needs that involve the health and safety of residents as well as accommodations for the
disabled residents of public housing.”
151
In order for HACLA to apply for grants such as
HUD Modernization funding and the Capital Fund Program, these assessments are
mandatory.
152
For instance, in 2015, HACLA utilized grants for their water saving
initiatives, which included the replacement of no hose bibs, aerators, showerheads, and

149
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Year 2015
Agency Plan, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015), 11,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2015%20Final%20Agency%20Plan%2
010-3-2014%20FINAL.pdf.
150
Alison Becker, Watts Community Studio, (Los Angeles: Los Angeles City Council
District 15, Office of Councilman Joe Buscaino, 2013),
https://wattscommunitystudio.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/wcs-final-report.pdf.
151
“Physical Need Assessment of Public Housing,” United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development, accessed December 2, 2015,
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/capfund/p
hysicalassessment.
152
Affordable Housing Finance Staff, “HUD Announces $1.8 Billion in Funding to Public Housing
Authorities,” Affordable Housing Finance Policy & Legislation, February 12, 2015, accessed September 2,
2015. http://www.housingfinance.com/policy-legislation/hud-announces-18-billion-in-funding-to-public-
housing-authorities_o.

62
tanks. This resulted in seventeen million dollars in savings. HACLA has replaced 4,100
toilets with one-gallon toilets. Their goal is to replace the remaining 2,430 toilets with
ones that have 0.8-gallon tank, which saves 18,770 gallons per day.
153
These overhauls
are also performed on the exteriors of these developments.
Priority 1 Non-operational equipment or conditions that will worsen if not repaired.
Priority 2 Work to replace antiquated systems, such as galvanized water pipe replacement.
Priority 3 Predicted replacements, such as water heaters.
Priority 4 Long-term projections, such as roof replacement.
Table 9. HACLA’s Prioritization for Replacement
154

Despite their significance, garden apartments and public housing remains a
growing concern from demolition to irreversible alterations. The Los Angeles
Conservancy estimates that fifteen publicly owned garden apartments have been
demolished and others are threatened with incompatible alterations.
155
HACLA is
proposing to undertake a full-scale window replacement project at two of its historic
garden apartments – William Mead Homes and Mar Vista Gardens. Both of these
properties have been deemed eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places. Their horizontal windows are among the primary character-defining features of
historic garden apartments because they “have facilitated the spirit of indoor/outdoor
living, giving residents access to fresh air and landscaped views.”
156
(Figure 3.5)
However, these windows are largely in poor condition because of deferred and
inadequate maintenance. HACLA’s proposes to remove the original windows and install
vinyl windows. (Figures 3.6-3.7) However, since the project involves Federal funding, it
is undergoing review for compliance with Section 106 review of the National Historic
Preservation Act. This window replacement project will also have to go through the
CEQA review process.
157
The Los Angeles Conservancy has asserted that the window
replacement project would “jeopardize the continued eligibility of the William Mead

153
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 75 Years Providing Affordable Housing 2013 Report, (Los
Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2013),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2012%20HACLA%20AR.pdf.
154
Ibid.
155
“Windows in Publicly Owned Garden Apartments,” Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed May 28,
2015, https://www.laconservancy.org/issues/windows-publicly-owned-garden-apartments.
156
Ibid.
157
Ibid.

63
homes and Mar Vista Gardens.
158
Currently, Section 106 is the only tool that is used to
determine whether alterations can occur, and this is only triggered when Federal
funding is involved. There are no other tools. As for residents that live in public housing,
heritage conservation can be seen to be detrimental. According Vanessa Ramos, a
resident at William Mead Homes, conservation can be seen as a means to deprive
residents from upgrades. “HACLA said they were planning on upgrading our windows,
toilets, and water fixtures. We are still waiting for this to happen, but a historic
preservation group has stopped this project. We have been waiting a long time for
better things.”
159
However, as buildings age, there needs to be a greater understanding
of how preservation can holistically improve public housing developments.

158
Los Angeles Conservancy, Section 106 Review for the William Mead Homes and Mar Vista Gardens
and Windows Replacement Project, Los Angeles, CA. (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Conservancy, 2014),
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/issues/Section%20106%20comments,%20William%
20Mead%20Homes%20and%20Mar%20Vista%20Gardens,%20LA%20Conservancy,%2010.9.2014.pdf.
159
Vanessa Ramos, interview by Leslie Palaroan, Personal Interview, Los Angeles, January 6, 2016. This
person’s name has been changed for privacy. Similar statements have been transcribed into HACLA’s
Annual Agency Plans in 2016, 2015, and 2014.

64

Fig. 3.5: Children Posing in Ramona Gardens’ Windows, 1945. Source: Housing Authority Collection, Los
Angeles Public Library.

65

Fig. 3.6: William Mead Homes, 2015. Source: Public Housing Gallery, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

66

Fig. 3.7: Mar Vista Gardens, 2015. Source: Public Housing Gallery, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

67
Chapter 4: De-stigmatizing Public Housing through Education
In order to prevent public housing disregard, numerous organizations are trying
to undo public housing misperception. Misperception is the greatest motivation for
disinvestment and ongoing insufficient Federal funding allocations to public housing.
Harnessing public housing’s altruistic history is becoming a tool to preserve public
housing. For instance, in Chicago, public housing advocates are building a public
housing museum to underline how public housing helped build the city. While in Los
Angeles, the Los Angeles Conservancy is illuminating the significance of garden
apartments in Los Angeles’ economic development. Through community engagement
such as tours, videos, and convening, education is a powerful tool in debunking
misperceptions. In addition to recounting heritage, public housing advocates also strive
for safer housing conditions and to maintain the current supply of housing. Public
housing advocates use a social equity stance to preserve public housing – housing is a
right for everybody. A longstanding advocate for public housing is an organization called
ReThink. At a National level, ReThink “creates awareness for, and inspires people to
learn about public housing.”
160
At a local level, the Los Angeles Community Action
Network (LACAN) launched a public housing committee to organize tenants to prevent
the privatization of public housing and to improve the health and safety conditions of
public housing tenants. In 2010 and 2011, LACAN worked to halt plans to privatize
public housing developments.
161
These initiatives underline the hostile political
atmosphere in which these developments were built, and their resilience to serve the
poor. Public housing developments were tarnished with economic problems, racial
segregation, and predatory real estate practices, but these housing developments have
also been the basis for positive community growth.

The First Public Housing Museum in Chicago, Illinois
Chicago was home to some of the first urban public housing efforts in the nation.
Public housing developments in Chicago have been razed, “and what remains are the

160
“About,” Rethink Housing, accessed October 10, 2015. http://www.rethinkhousing.org/about.
161
Los Angeles Community Action Network, A Brief Timeline of LA CAN’s Housing Work, (Los Angeles:
Los Angeles Community Action Network, 2012), http://cangress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/LA-
CAN-Housing-Work-Timeline.pdf.

68
stories.”
162
Public housing housed thousands of Chicagoans, and community advocates
are seeking to recount this story. In the late 1990s, resident leaders of the local PHA,
the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA), wanted to recount the stories of CHA residents.
In 2006, this diverse group came together to preserve and transform the only remaining
building of the historic Jane Addams Homes on the Near West Side to a Public Housing
Museum. Currently, the CHA, residents, civic leaders, preservationists, historians, and
cultural experts are promoting a new architectural landmark to recognize public housing.
The three-story brick building opened in 1938 as the first Federal government housing
project in Chicago. It housed hundreds of families over six decades, and has been
vacant since 2002. The Jane Addams Homes was one of the three demonstration
projects in Chicago built under the Public Works Administration Act, which was created
to provide jobs and help revive the Depression-era economy.
163
Designed by a team of
architects led by John Holabird, the buildings were named after the Nobel Prize-winning
founder of Chicago's Hull House. Jane Addams Homes not only provided housing, but
also offered childcare, employment counseling, and other pioneering social services.
Similar to the Lower Eastside Tenement Museum New York City, the District Six
Museum in Cape Town, South Africa, and Chicago’s Hull House Museum, the National
Public Housing Museum will be a place for social reflection, public dialogue, and
education.
164
This will result in greater pride and ownership over Chicago’s public
housing.

Preserving from a Conservationist View: Garden Apartments of Los Angeles
Similar to Chicago, there is a movement in Los Angeles to conserve public
housing. To real estate developers, the vast amount of open space that garden
apartments take up is perceived to be a waste of development potential. In Los
Angeles, as the demands for higher density accelerates, HACLA is further inclined to

162
“Our Vision,” National Public Housing Museum, accessed June 20, 2015. http://www.nphm.org/our-
vision/place/.

163
Ibid.
164
Ibid.

69
demolish and redevelop public housing.
165
The Los Angeles Conservancy has
spearheaded the L.A. Garden Apartment Network to provide resources for owners and
residents of historic garden apartments. “The Network is intended as a means of
building greater understanding and appreciation of garden apartments, where strong,
thriving communities have been fostered throughout Greater Los Angeles, in part,
because of the design of these built environments.
166
This effort has contributed to a
greater awareness concerning the garden apartments. In particular, public housing sites
such as Mar Vista Gardens, Estrada Courts, and William Mead Homes have been
highlighted alongside private garden apartments.
The Los Angeles Conservancy has held workshops and tours around Garden
Apartments. In fall 2012, “I Heart Garden Apartments Day!” included a workshop, self-
guided tour, and lunch at Village Green, which is a private garden apartment
development listed as a National Historic Landmark. In 2014, the Los Angeles
Conservancy hosted tours of private garden apartments Chase Knolls, Lincoln Place,
Village Green, and Wyvernwood.
167
At the L.A. Garden Apartment Network event,
Wyvernwood residents continued to share stories of their community. Village Green
resident Lucy Fried said, “I was very moved by the story told by the Wyvernwood
speakers and am thrilled at the Conservancy's idea of a network.” She deepened her
understanding of garden apartments and their relation to public housing at the
symposium.
[Garden apartments] gave me a whole new sense of the scope and complexity of
the socioeconomic and architectural history it embodies. It was the first time I had
ever thought of Village Green as part of a family of similar developments. I had
never thought of the human connection between our condominium complex and
public housing complexes, even though I had noted many times the similarity in
style. And all of that made me appreciate Village Green from a preservation
standpoint, as I never had before.
168

165
“We Heart Garden Apartments!,” The Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed June 21, 2015,
https://www.laconservancy.org/gardenapartments.
166
“History of Garden Apartments,” The Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed June 21, 2015,
https://www.laconservancy.org/history-garden-apartments.
167
“Join the L.A. Garden Apartments Network,” The Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed June 21, 2015,
https://www.laconservancy.org/join-la-garden-apartment-network.
168
Steven Keylon, “Greater Visibility for Los Angeles Garden Apartments,” The Cultural Landscape
Foundation, December 10, 2012, accessed June 21, 2015. http://tclf.org/news/features/greater-visibility-
los-angeles-garden-apartments.

70
Strengthening these preservation fights for garden apartments is the historic context
statement published in 2012 by the Architectural Resources Group in collaboration with
landscape historian Steven Keylon. This document provides a framework for evaluation
of significance for both private and public garden apartments, and highlights public
housing developments’ history. (Figure 4.0) The goal was to better understand the
history and context under which these developments maybe considered significant. Yet,
advocating merely from history and architectural type is not enough. By harnessing the
efforts of residents to preserve garden apartments, this collective effort can save these
communities and public housing developments. Privately owned garden apartments
such as Chase Knolls, Lincoln Place and Wyvernwood were the subjects of hard-fought
preservation battles, and this has rarely occurred with public housing units. At the
privately owned, Wyvernwood, residents are still trying to prevent Miami based
developer, Fifteen Group, from redeveloping the land. Numerous groups such as the
Committee of Hope, the Los Angeles Conservancy, The National Trust for Historic
Preservation, East LA Community Corporation, and the Los Angeles Collective Media
are banding together to preserve Wyvernwood from redevelopment.
169
Wyvernwood
has been determined to eligible for listing on the National Register, but Fifteen Group
wants to replace the apartments with a mixed-use development that includes several
buildings as tall as twenty-four stories. Wyvernwood is not the only garden apartment
complex in Los Angeles threatened with redevelopment. In 2000, the Los Angeles
Conservancy began advocating for the preservation of Chase Knolls, and the following
year began a ten-year battle to save Lincoln Place in Venice. Fortunately, both were
saved and underwent rehabilitation, but this was due to private ownership.
170
Private
ownership enabled the owners to change the developments. For instance, Chase Knolls
will have new towers around the development. These three battles underline the power
of heritage conservation to support garden apartments, and these case studies
demonstrate that advocacy from a heritage conservation standpoint is powerful in
saving garden apartment developments. Despite having the same architectural

169
“About,” ¡Somos Wyvernwood!, accessed June 20, 2015,
https://sites.google.com/site/somoswyvernwood/home/about-usmeetthecommunity.
170
Steven Keylon, “Greater Visibility for Los Angeles Garden Apartments,” The Cultural Landscape
Foundation, December 10, 2012, accessed June 21, 2015. http://tclf.org/news/features/greater-visibility-
los-angeles-garden-apartments.

71
typology, public housing residents’ definition of preservation does not stem from history
and architectural features. Yet, similar to the Wyvernwood residents, preserving publicly
owned public housing is an issue of having a place to call home and the lack of
affordable housing options.

Fig. 4.0: Historic Context Statement and We Heart Garden Apartments Covers, 2012 – 2014. Source:
Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Garden Apartments, The Los Angeles Conservancy.

Preserving from an Equity Standpoint: Resident Advisory Councils and the
Participatory Budgeting Project
Individual efforts by residents to express their identities occur in the exterior of their
home and include gardening and flower planting in the front and back yards, painting
windows, decorative fencing, and stringing lights and ornaments at Christmas.
171

For public housing residents, the need to preserve and invest in public housing
developments primarily stems from an equity stance. Not only do residents want to

171
Jacqueline Leavitt and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris. "'A Decent Home and A Suitable Environment':
Dilemmas of Public Housing Residents in Los Angeles." Journal of Architectural and Planning
Research 12, 3, (1995): 225-226.

72
preserve the physical environment because it is their home, residents strive to upgrade
their substandard units due to improper maintenance. This is currently being performed
through two initiatives - Resident Advisory Councils (RACs), which originate from
provisions in the 1986 Housing Act - to promote public housing resident participation,
and the Participatory Budgeting Project (PB). These participatory groups empower
residents in the decision-making process for greater community development and
infrastructure improvements. The 1986 Housing Act provides public housing residents
with the right to organize and elect a resident council to represent their interests. In the
process of organizing councils, “the leaders began demanding respect for themselves
and their opinions. As one example of residents resisting outsiders’ perceptions, leaders
said ‘We do not like to be called the projects. We are a housing development, because
that’s what we are doing – developing this place into a community.’”
172
This regulation,
24 CFR Part 964, defines the obligation of HUD and PHAs to support resident
participation activities through training and other activities. RACs not only oversee
facilitate community building initiatives such as garnering funding for libraries,
organizing clean up days, and building playgrounds and community gardens, they
surprisingly help prioritize infrastructure upgrades.
173
(Figure 4.1) HACLA conducts
eight general leadership-training meetings with RAC board members over the course of
a year. Meetings include HACLA’s community budget process where resident leaders
participate in agency budget discussions, and receive training on how to prepare and
manage individual RAC budgets, conflict resolution, parliamentary procedures and
board member roles and responsibilities. RACs also provide input to the annual Agency
Plan and draft policy changes affecting residents such as Resident Parking Policies and
establishing a Non-Smoking Policy.
174
Individual RACs also meet with staff on a

172
Jacqueline Leavitt and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris. "'A Decent Home and A Suitable Environment':
Dilemmas of Public Housing Residents in Los Angeles." Journal of Architectural and Planning
Research 12, 3, (1995): 224.
173
“Resident Services,” Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, accessed May 10, 2015,
http://www.hacla.org/residentservices.
174
HACLA’s Annual Agency Plans includes transcripts from residents at each public housing
development. The transcripts include questions about operations, maintenance plans, and social service
provision. Annual Agency Plans are public documents and could be accessed at HACLA, public housing
developments, and online.

73
monthly basis and receive briefings on important topics from HACLA senior staff as
necessary.
175

Fig. 4.1: Community Clean Up with Aliso Village Children, circa 1950. Source: Housing Authority
Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

There is an additional movement that seeks to shift decision-making power
regarding budgeting from HACLA to public housing residents. The LA Human Right to
Housing Collective (The Collective) has implemented a participatory budgeting process
group to ensure the best use of diminishing capital funds. The Collective is a coalition of
community-based organizations and legal supporters with the belief that “public housing
provides the basis for meeting the human right to housing and also is crucial to

175

In the early 1990s, RACs were primarily comprised of women. They advocated for facilities and
infrastructure for their children. “Women Under Fire: Public Housing Activism in Los Angeles,” an article
by Jacqueline Leavitt recounts the story of Nickerson Gardens’ active female RAC leaders to invest in
their community.

74
individual and community health.”
176
This coalition has been successful in preventing
privatization plans for public housing in 2011 and 2012, eliminated illegal fees imposed
on residents, lowered rents by challenging HACLA’s utility allowance procedures, and
have engaged residents in participation processes with HACLA’s annual planning.
177

According to The Collective, “PB is a different way to manage public money and to
engage people in government. It is a democratic process, in which community members
directly decide how to spend part of a public budget. It enables taxpayers to work with
government to make budget decisions that impact their lives.”
178
PB enables residents
to assert their needs in their homes. For instance, in Pueblo Del Rio, residents wanted a
plumbing overhaul and security bars for windows. At Mar Vista Gardens, residents’
capital maintenance priorities were for windows, playground maintenance, floors,
parking lots, trash, and interior painting. In San Fernando Gardens, residents were
concerned that HACLA was forcing residents to reduce their water use by half in 2014,
which would cause great hardship to residents. Therefore, residents voted to create a
$450,000 capital grant and to set aside $660,000 for drought tolerant landscaping. In
addition to reallocating funds to pertinent infrastructure upgrades, San Fernando
Gardens’ residents have also created mechanisms that would alter HACLA’s
maintenance operations. (Figure 4.2) They created a parking policy, voiced the need for
improved customer services for repairs, and underlined the need to coordinate with city
agencies for street sweeping and street lighting.
179
The Collective’s long-term goals and
approach closely aligns with the need to save public housing in Los Angeles. They want
“to end all plans to privatize housing, invest limited capital improvement dollars into the
most pressing health and safety issues, and ensure long-term viability of the public
housing stock.”
180
They also want the Federal government to “stop all private financing

176
Nicholas Dahman and Becky Dennison. "Organizing for Healthy Communities: A Report from Public
Housing in Los Angeles." Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action
7.1 (2013): 78.
177
Ibid., 80.
178
“What is PB?,” The Participatory Budgeting Project, accessed June 20, 2015,
http://www.participatorybudgeting.org/about-participatory-budgeting/what-is-pb/.
179
LA Human Right to Housing Collective, Participatory Budgeting in HACLA: A Report of the LA Human
Right to Housing Collective, (Los Angeles: LA Human Right to Housing Collective, 2013), 8-11.
180
Nicholas Dahman and Becky Dennison. "Organizing for Healthy Communities: A Report from Public
Housing in Los Angeles." Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action
7.1 (2013): 81.

75
plans for public housing to prevent the loss of permanently affordable public housing
stock, fully fund operating subsidies, increase capital funding to address pressing health
and safety issues, stop demolitions, stop dispositions, and restore public housing
units.
181

Fig. 4.2: San Fernando Gardens, 2015. Source: Public Housing Gallery, Housing Authority of the City of
Los Angeles.

The Meaning of Heritage Conservation for Residents at William Mead Homes
The “Historic Context Statement,” RAC, and PB are efforts that advocate for
public housing preservation from different angles – as historic, as housing, and as a
community resource. However, it is unknown to current residents that their public
housing developments are rich with history. Residents at William Mead Homes were
interviewed, and many were unaware that their development was listed on the California
Register and eligible for National Register listing. Rather, their perceptions of the
development were grounded in maintaining and keeping their homes. For the three
generations of women in the Aragon Family, William Mead Homes’ listing on the

181
Ibid.

76
California Register was unfamiliar.
182
“We know that these buildings were built
sometime in the 1940s. They are sturdy. If there was an earthquake, I would be safe in
those buildings,” says Joanne.
183
When they were told that William Mead Homes had
historic significance, and the meaning of being listed on the California Register, they
recalled the time when there were rumors of demolishing the development. Joanne
states,
So, [the designation] makes it harder to demolish William Mead? That’s good to
know. HACLA told us a long time ago that they were going to demolish all of the
buildings. People started talking and worrying that they had to move. I think the
designation would be helpful to use if HACLA decides to demolish William Mead
like Jordan Downs. Where are people going to go?
184

It is a missed opportunity if public housing residents continue to be unaware of the
public housing developments’ historic significance. Although residents’ stance comes
from an affordability standpoint, they can use heritage conservation tools such as
designation to preserve their homes. By recognizing the significance of public housing,
the vulnerability of these developments, and the numerous efforts to preserve these
resources, the remainder of the thesis will integrate these ideals by demonstrating the
incorporation of heritage conservation tools into HACLA’s current financing and
management plan.

182
Joanne Aragon, interview by Leslie Palaroan, Personal Interview, Los Angeles, January 6, 2016. This
person’s name has been changed for privacy.
183
Ibid.
184
Ibid.

77
Chapter 5: Harnessing Conservation for Physical Investment
Architectural typology and equitable housing practices by HACLA recognize
garden apartments’ historic significance, but preservation tools, such as deeming a
property significant is not enough to protect designated public housing communities
from demolition. Should demolition be considered, eligibility for listing or listing require
that a heightened review process be initiated, and this is due to the previously
mentioned 2006 policy made by the ACHP. Section 106 requires projects utilizing
Federal funding or otherwise classified as Federal undertakings, and are scheduled to
affect either listed properties or those eligible for listing on the National Register, to
identify effects on the historic property. However, PHAs garner a numerous Federal
funding sources with various stipulations, and Section 106 becomes overlooked.
Section 106 requires that adverse effects be avoided if possible, but such effects may
still happen following a consultation process. This accountability occurs as part of either
the Environmental Assessment or the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). For
developments in the city of Los Angeles, when historically eligible resources are subject
to demolition, an EIR must be produced to aide developers in mitigating adverse effects.
These environmental clearances are prepared as a part of the Federal agency’s review
as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA is an
environmental law that “promotes the enhancement of the environment.”
185
The laws
require agencies to “seek ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects on
historic properties” through consultation and the evaluation of alternatives.”
186
In the
state of California, there is another layer of review – the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA “provides decision makers with information about the
environmental impacts” of developments before they are approved. CEQA also allows
the public to comment on the impacts of developments in their community. “Citizens can
help [developments] avoid and minimize impacts by developing project alternatives and

185
“National Environmental Policy Act,” United States Environmental Protection Agency, accessed April
20, 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/nepa.
186
Dawn E. Jourdan and Stephanie Zeier Pilat, “Preserving Public Housing: Federal, State, and Local
Efforts to Preserve the Social and Architectural Forms Associated with Housing For the
Poor,” Preservation Education 7, (2014): 27.

78
mitigation measures.”
187
Historic resources are a part of the environment and are
subject to CEQA review. The current mechanism is piecemeal – when HACLA’s Federal
funds are for alterations or demolition, Section 106 or CEQA review is activated. HACLA
is continuing to dispossess and demolish their public housing developments because
these developments are represented to be not of historic significance and
unmaintainable.
HACLA’s plans to demolish and modernize demonstrate that HUD stipulations
override Section 106. Despite public housing’s contributions to helping spur economic
development in Los Angeles, these blighted developments are deemed insignificant,
therefore leading to their demise. The first step in conserving the remaining public
housing units is for HACLA to undertake a survey of all of their public housing
developments’ eligibility or significance. Without a survey, in order for HACLA to
maintain potentially historically significant developments, they must be cognizant of
Federal funding sources’ requirements and implications, and their current maintenance
plan.

Review of HUD Funding with Respect to Section 106
Rather than disinvest in public housing, as is happening now, more funds should go to
maintaining public housing in good condition and upgrading the neighborhoods around
it. The existing buildings serve as a base upon which to build. If this housing is
preserved, places that “have not been opportunity areas” can “become opportunity
areas.” To maintain racial and economic diversity as neighborhoods are redeveloped,
the existing affordable housing stock must be preserved.
188

HACLA undeniably knows how to obtain funding and create partnerships to uplift
the residents’ lives in public housing developments. However, funding sources for
projects undermine public housing developments’ integrity. In order to maintain these
developments, HACLA needs to reevaluate the stipulations for their grants, loans, and
operating subsidies. The ACHP has identified financing that considers historic
significance. (Table 10) Although these financing sources help PHAs garner funding,

187
“CEQA Basics,” California State Parks Office of Historic Preservation, accessed January 10, 2016.
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21721.
188
Sheila Crowley, Affordable Housing Dilemma: The Preservation vs. Mobility Debate, (Washington, DC:
National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2012),
http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Affordable_Housing_Dilemma_Report_May-2012.pdf.

79
they are very specific in regards to what type of demographic that funding source should
serve, and how the funds should be utilized. Therefore, HACLA should also base their
financing decisions on outcomes with regards to heritage conservation. They cannot
pursue all the below funding sources. For instance, they listed HOPE VI, which has
destroyed public housing developments. Their list simply provides sources, but does not
fully highlight the negative outcomes of these funds. After HACLA undergoes a historic
survey of their housing developments, the second step is to determine the appropriate
funding sources to maintain significant public housing developments.
Table 10. Possible Federal Financial Assistance for Historic Preservation Projects and Affordable
Housing – Housing, Community, and Economic Development

Funding Program
189
Goal
HOME Investment
Partnerships Program
Funds a wide range of activities aimed at expanding the supply for
affordable housing for low and very low-income families. Rehabilitation
of affordable housing and site acquisition and improvements are
eligible activities.
Demolition/Disposition The Demo/Dispo program was created in an effort to help eliminate
old, run down public housing.

Homeownership A PHA may sell all, or a portion of, a public housing development to
eligible residents or resident organizations, for purposes of
homeownership, provided that a Homeownership Plan has been
submitted by the PHA and has been approved by HUD.

Lead-Based Paint Hazard
Control Grant Program
Targeted to addressing lead-based paint hazards in privately owned,
low-income, owner-occupied, and rental housing.
Weatherization Assistance
Program
Formula grants fund the weatherization of homes of low-income
individuals.
HOPE VI Rehabilitation of public housing including historic public housing. Since
1993, HOPE VI has been the engine driving the revitalization of the
Nation's most distressed public housing developments by providing
grants and unprecedented flexibility to address the housing and social
service needs of their residents.
Public Housing Capital
Fund Program
Grants from this program can be used to rehabilitate public housing,
including historic public housing and address deferred maintenance
needs.
Section 8 Moderate
Rehabilitation Single Room
Occupancy Program
Provides rental assistance for homeless persons in connection with the
moderate rehabilitation of single room occupancy dwellings. Owners
are compensated for the cost of some of the rehabilitation, as well as
the other costs of owning and maintaining the property through the
rental assistance payments.
VA Homeless Providers
Grant and Per Diem
Program
Grants through this program can be used for acquiring, remodeling,
altering, expanding, or constructing buildings for use as service
centers, transitional housing or other facilities for homeless veterans.
Section 202 Supportive
Housing for the Elderly
Provides capital advances to finance the construction, rehabilitation, or
acquisition of structures to serve as supportive housing for very low-

189
“Public Housing Programs,” United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, accessed
November 20, 2015,
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/programs.

80
Program income elderly persons and provides rent subsidies for the projects to
help make them affordable.
Section 811 Supportive
Housing for Persons with
Disabilities
Provides capital advances to finance the construction, rehabilitation, or
acquisition
Housing Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS Program
Provides housing assistance and related supportive services for low-
income persons with HIV/AIDS and their families. Eligible activities
include the acquisition and rehabilitation of community residences and
single room occupancy units.
Moderate Rehabilitation Provides project-based rental assistance for low-income families. The
program was repealed in 1991 and no new projects are authorized for
development. Assistance is limited to properties previously
rehabilitated pursuant to a housing assistance payments (HAP)
contract between an owner and a PHA.
Mixed-Finance Public
Housing

Mixed-Finance public housing allows HUD to mix public, private, and
non-profit funds to develop and operate housing developments. These
new developments are built for residents with a wide range of incomes,
and are designed to fit into the surrounding community.
Moving to Work (MTW)
Demonstration Grant
MTW is a demonstration program that allows housing authorities to
design and test ways to give incentives to families to become
economically self-sufficient, achieve programmatic efficiencies, reduce
costs, and increase housing choice for low-income households.
Operating Fund The Public Housing Operating Fund provides operating subsidies to
housing authorities to assist in funding the operating and maintenance
expenses of their own dwellings, in accordance with Section 9 of the
U.S. Housing Act of 1937, as amended. The subsidies are required to
help maintain services and provide minimum operating reserves.
Table 10. Possible Federal Financial Assistance for Historic Preservation Projects and Affordable
Housing – Housing, Community, and Economic Development
190

A Rehabilitation Maintenance Plan Supported with Preservation Briefs
For significant public housing developments the tangible elements both on the
exterior and interior of public housing should be preserved. Therefore, utilizing
Preservation Brief 17 – Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of
Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character, will guide in the planning
process for carrying out any ongoing or new use or rehabilitation of the building. This is
the third step in conserving public housing developments.
191
By using William Mead
Homes and Mar Vista Gardens, public housing developments as case studies for
Preservation Brief 17, this will help guide HACLA in assessing their buildings.
Preservationists often take a three-step process to identify a building’s visual character.
This approach involves first examining the building from afar to understand its overall

190
“Federal Financial Assistance for Historic Preservation Projects – Community and Economic
Development Programs: Housing,” Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, last modified May 16, 2008,
accessed May 28, 2015, http://www.achp.gov/funding-comm-housing.html.
191
This step is intended to aid in creating a historic structures report.

81
setting and architectural context. Then moving up very close to appreciate its materials,
craftsmanship, and surface finishes evident in these materials; and then going into and
through the building to perceive those spaces, rooms, and details that comprise its
interior visual character.
Identifying the overall visual character or a building is distinguishing physical
aspects without focusing on its details. Step one involves looking at the building from a
distance to understand the character of its site and setting, and it involves walking
around the building. Step two involves observing the building close range or at “arm’s
length.” This is where one can see all the surface qualities of the materials such as color
and texture. The surface qualities are important because they display the craftsmanship
and age that distinguishes historic buildings. Finally, step three is to identify the visual
character of the interior spaces. However, this is more difficult than dealing with the
exterior. In simple rooms, the primary visual aspects are features such as lighting
fixtures, or wooden floors.
192
Preservation Brief 17’s “The Architectural Character
Checklist/Questionnaire which identifies a building’s architectural character [is]
organized on the assumption that historic significance is embodied in those tangible
aspects that include the building’s setting, its form, and fabric.”
193

The William Mead Homes public housing development is where the Aragons
have lived for decades, and was the eighth development built by the HACLA due to the
1937 Housing Act. Chief architect P. A. Eisen completed it in 1942 in collaboration with
Norman F. Marsh, Herbert Powell, Armand Monaco, A.R. Walker, and David D. Smith.
Landscape architect Ralph D. Cornell designed the landscaping. The development was
named after William Mead, a local politician who was an advocate for improved living
conditions. William Mead Homes limited residency to low-income citizens who had lived
in Los Angeles for at least a year. The complex quickly filled with defense industry

192
Lee Nelson, Preservation Brief 17 – Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic
Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character, (Washington, DC: National Park Service United States
Department of the Interior),
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/preservedocs/preservation-briefs/17Preserve-Brief-
VisualAspects.pdf.
193
Ibid.

82
workers who worked in nearby industries. (Figure 5.0) It is listed in the California
Register and is eligible for the National Register.
194

Fig. 5.0: William Mead and Surrounding Industrial, 2009. Source: Laurie Avocado, “North Main,” Flickr.

In terms of shape, when approaching the brick apartment buildings, William
Mead Homes contains a combination of two- and three-story garden apartments on a
fifteen-acre property. The buildings are organized into five blocks that largely adhere to
the pattern of the surrounding grid. The three-story buildings are arranged in rows
parallel to Main Street, with the two story buildings intersecting at right angles. This
arrangement creates a series of sheltered, semi-private courtyard spaces throughout
the complex. The buildings are set back from the streets by strips of green space, with
paved walkways at each unit. An elementary school occupies an entire block centrally
located along the Main Street frontage of the housing complex. Typical of garden
apartments, William Mead Homes has flat roofs with a low-slope gable. The general
finish of the roofs is a built-up membrane, and the finishes vary in age. There is edge

194
“William Mead Homes,” Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed November 21, 2015,
https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/william-mead-homes.

83
drainage to the ground, built-up base and edge flashing, exposed soffits and fascia,
which were all in good to fair condition.
195
Openings such as windows and doors vary
from poor to good. The windows are steel-framed, multi-light casements with center
fixed sash. All of the doors are made out of wood. Entrance doors to the units are solid
core wood doors with steel security doors. The patio and balcony doors are also made
out of solid core wood doors, and the garage doors are overhead wooden doors with
manual or automatic openers. These garage doors are located in the community center
maintenance area. In terms of projections, there are small cast-in-place concrete front
and rear entry stoops and private cast concrete balconies on the second floor with metal
railings. Finally, in regards to trim and secondary features, William Mead Homes is
made out of brick masonry and cast concrete.
196

In the wake of the Federal Housing Act of 1949, Mar Vista Gardens was
completed in 1954 as one of a few publicly owned garden apartments built in Los
Angeles. Due to new Federal guidelines concerning unit count and cost, these
complexes typically featured less common green space and community facilities than
their earlier counterparts. It is eligible for the National Register.
197
Mar Vista Gardens is
comprised of two-story buildings that are separated by open yard areas, which hold
tenants’ gardens. The approximately, forty-five acre site contains 601 apartment units in
sixty-two buildings, a gymnasium, community center, and athletic fields. There are
playgrounds, large lawns with picnic tables and canopies. Openings such as windows
and doors are made out of metal. The doors to the units are made out of insulated metal
front and rear entrance doors with swinging metal storm/screen doors. However, the
single-paned, aluminum-framed windows are in poor condition. There are minor
projections, which are small cast-in-place concrete stoops at the front and rear of the
units. Finally, for trim and secondary features, the building is finished with concrete and

195
Christopher Conway, Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of William Mead -
Physical Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, (Los Angeles: EMG
Corporation, 2013), 26-29,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%20Assessments/
William%20Mead.pdf.
196
Ibid., 20-29. The PNA categorizes each building component of the building. The thesis highlights “site
improvements” and “building architectural and structural systems.”

197
“Mar Vista Gardens,” Los Angeles Conservancy, accessed November 21, 2015,
https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/mar-vista-gardens.

84
stucco. There are stucco-clad eaves, and wood-framed and concrete cantilevered
canopies at apartment entrances.
198

Every public housing development in Los Angeles undergoes a PNA and this
methodology and subsequent document does not assert the character defining features
or alterations of the development, but it comprehensively assesses the physical state of
the developments. Therefore, step four is to revise the existing PNAs to consider
character-defining features. For instance, when the aluminum windows were highlighted
for William Mead Homes and Mar Vista, the PNAs considered that these windows were
character-defining, but suggested that despite the window’s historic value, they should
be replaced.
199
For Joanne Aragon, she had heard other residents voice their desire for
wanting vinyl windows, but she wanted to keep the metal casement windows.
Those metal windows are sturdy like the rest of the building. These things belong
together. I wouldn’t want the vinyl windows. Even if they are vinyl, there are parts
of those new windows that are plastic and you can easily rob somebody’s
apartment. The metal windows are heavy. You can hear when somebody is
trying to break into your apartment. The metal ones have a special way of closing
and opening. You can open them out to the yard or into the house. I have never
seen that before. They have these latches that you can tell are “old school.” I feel
safer with the metal windows. I understand the case for vinyl windows, but I
would rather have the metal windows to be safe. I am glad [the preservationists]
fought against it. I feel a lot safer in my apartment with those windows opposed
to the sliding windows [HACLA] were proposing to install.
200

Furthermore, PNAs are a systematic review of all of the major physical
components of property to project future needs and costs to meet those needs. A PNA

198
Fred Jackson, Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of Mar Vista Homes - Physical
Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, (Los Angeles: EMG Corporation, 2013),
18-24,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%20Assessments/
Mar%20Vista%20Gardens.pdf.
199
Christopher Conway, Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of William Mead -
Physical Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, (Los Angeles: EMG
Corporation, 2013), 50,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%20Assessments/
William%20Mead.pdf.
Fred Jackson, Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of Mar Vista Homes - Physical
Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, (Los Angeles: EMG Corporation, 2013),
48,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%20Assessments/
Mar%20Vista%20Gardens.pdf.
200
Joanne Aragon, interview by Leslie Palaroan, Personal Interview, Los Angeles, January 6, 2016. This
person’s name has been changed for privacy.

85
is a strategic planning tool.
201
It is not a budget, but is a reference document for the
development of annual budgets, and HACLA had allocated money to replace the
historic windows. The PNAs for both developments served as documentation for a long-
term grant or loan. PHAs also include Energy Audits (EA) - a systematic review of the
energy use and requirements for real estate that seeks to identify opportunities for
energy savings. The 2005 Energy Policy Act encouraged the integration of utility
management and capital planning to maximize energy conservation in public housing.
While EAs and PNAs often involve a review of the same building systems, EAs are
completed independently of PNAs. The current Federal EA rule requires that an EA be
performed to state standards, but provides no standards of expectation for the result.
PHAs are exposed to EAs of poor value and little usefulness particularly in states that
lack standards. Then PNAs and EAs are performed to work with the Capital Fund
program, which provides funds annually via a formula to approximately 3,200 PHAs
across the country. PHAs may use Capital Fund grants for development, financing,
modernization, and management improvements. The Office of Capital Improvements
also oversees the Capital Fund Financing Program that authorizes PHAs to borrow
funds conditioned on a promise to pay the debt service from Capital Fund grants. The
Office of Capital Improvements provides technical assistance to PHAs as well as, to
HUD Field Offices relating to development, financing, modernization, and management
improvements of public housing developments. It prepares quarterly reports to
Congress on the status of the obligation and expenditure of Capital Fund grants and
implements the statutory sanctions for PHAs that are in noncompliance with the
statutory deadlines.
202
By inserting and integrating heritage conservation into PNAs,
public housing developments can retain their material integrity and prevent alterations to
character defining features, and garner funding.

201
Bruce Rieder, Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audits for Public Housing, (Los Angeles:
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013),
http://www.lisc.org/docs/events/ec2013/PNA%20and%20Energy%20Audits%20for%20Public%20Housin
g.pdf.
202
“About Us: Office of Capital Improvements – Office of Public Housing Investments,” United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development, accessed September 28, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/capfund/a
boutus.

86
Revisiting and Forecasting Physical Needs Assessments with Reference to the
Secretary of the Interior Standards (36 CFR 68)
Since the existing public housing developments are largely intact, and it is
assumed that building materials and character-defining features are essentially intact,
the Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitation are the criteria that
HACLA should strive for. This is step five – to perform maintenance under the Secretary
of the Interior Standards. “Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making
possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while
preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or
architectural values.”
203
The first step of a rehabilitation process for HACLA is to prepare
a historic structures report for qualified historic properties, then an ongoing maintenance
plan.
204
The historic structures report can be written with the results from Preservation
Brief 17, and a rehabilitation maintenance plan can build upon PNAs. For more
specialized materials, conservation professionals undertake laboratory testing such as
paint and mortar analysis, and hire conservators to perform sensitive work. Protection,
maintenance, and repair are emphasized while replacement is minimized. Preliminary
measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing
maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive
replacement and new construction. The PNAs seek to upgrade of mechanical,
electrical, and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties
functional, and the Secretary of the Interior Standards supports this as long upgrades
are limited, sensitive, and appropriate within in a preservation project.
205
Therefore,
PNAs have the potential of successfully supporting the historic significance of these
developments. For HACLA’s PNAs, the major independent building components were
observed and their physical conditions were evaluated in accordance with ASTM
E2018-01 and with the standards outlined in 24 CFR 968.315, the Comprehensive
Grant Program Guidebook 7485.3G, the Public Housing Modernization Standards

203
“Rehabilitation as a Treatment,” National Park Service United States Department of the Interior,
accessed January 3, 2016. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/treatment-rehabilitation.htm.
204
As stated in step one, the information derived from Preservation Brief 17 will help generate a historic
structures report.
205
Ibid.

87
Handbook 7485.2, and 24 CFR Part 5, Uniform Physical Condition Standards.
206
These
components include the site and building exteriors, interior areas, and the interior of the
buildings. The PNA also documents the physical condition of building systems and
related components are typically defined into three conditions: good, fair, poor, or a
combination. (Table 11) In addition to the PNAs, HACLA further divides each cost
observation into categories that help prioritize maintenance. (Table 12) PNAs also
include suggestions for energy efficiency, accessibility, and health and safety. By
reexamining the current requirements that HACLA has to comply with, there are
opportunities to integrate the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation with
public housing regulations.
Good Satisfactory as-is. Requires only routine maintenance over the evaluation period. Repair or
replacement may be required due to a system’s estimated useful life.
Fair Satisfactory as-is. Repair or replacement is required due to current physical condition and/or
estimated useful life.
Poor Immediate repair, replacement, or significant maintenance is required.
Table 11. Conditions of Physical Building Systems in HACLA PNAs

NA Not Applicable
CR Critical Repairs
NC Non-Critical Repairs (1-2 years)
NT Near Term (3-10 years)
LT Long Term (11-20 years)
EC Energy Conservation Measure
Table 12. Prioritizing Cost Maintenance According to PNAs

Energy Efficiency
HACLA’s PNAs include EAs, which utilize a Treat Software Building Energy
Model. Key metrics such as the building site energy use intensity, building source
energy use intensity, building cost intensity, and greenhouse gas emissions are used to
benchmark each public housing development’s energy usage. The EA also highlights
the breakdown of utilities by consumption, costs and annual profile, baseline
consumption in terms of energy/utility at the facility, and energy use index (Btu/sqft and
cost/sqft).
207
The EA also researches the feasibility of incorporating green energy

206
Christopher Conway, Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of William Mead -
Physical Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, (Los Angeles: EMG
Corporation, 2013), 12,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%20Assessments/
William%20Mead.pdf.
207
Ibid., 4.

88
technology such as wind energy and solar. Finally, the EA recommends energy savings
along with specific implementation considerations. Specifically, as the Los Angeles
Conservancy has voiced, the PNAs and EAs suggest installing replacement windows,
which would compromise William Mead’s character defining features. The PNA argues,
“[that] windows play a major role in energy use and comfort of a dwelling unit…all
windows at the property [should be replaced] with energy star rated vinyl windows.”
208

Contradicting this assertion, the William Mead Homes EA acknowledges that, “with mild
winters in LA, the energy savings are minimal compared to investment cost.”
209

Similarly, for Mar Vista Gardens, the property’s EA recommends dual paned insulating
glass, and window frames made of vinyl, fiberglass, or wood composites, which reduce
heat transfer and improve insulation.
210
This suggestion repeatedly occurs for all public
housing developments. Therefore, with no current framework to challenge, alterations
that will compromise the character defining features of public housing developments,
heritage conservationists can use these EAs to foresee changes.
With a greater emphasis on renewable energy in the building industry, heritage
conservationists can expect modernization upgrades in public housing. Modernization is
tied to larger initiatives set by former President, George W. Bush. On October 16, 2009,
HUD released a notice, PIH-2009-43 (HA), which encouraged the renewable energy
and green construction practices in public housing. Through the notice, HUD "strongly
[encouraged PHAs] to use solar, wind, geothermal/ground coupled heat pumps and
other renewable energy sources, and other 'green' construction and rehabilitation
techniques whenever they procure for maintenance, construction, or modernization."
211

The premise of this initiative is to "support the goals of the President's National Energy
Policy by reducing the burden of public housing energy costs while increasing comfort
and reducing health risks to public housing residents, and [minimizing] life-cycle
costs."
212
For HACLA, their water saving initiative achieves this. HUD is also advocating

208
Ibid., 50.
209
Ibid.
210
Ibid.
211
“Public housing Environmental & Conservation Clearinghouse.” United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development, accessed December 5, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/phecc/ginit
iative.
212
Ibid.

89
for no- and low-VOC paint, adhesives, and finishes, the use of Energy Star
and WaterSense qualified products, and the adoption of an Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) strategy.
In heritage conservation, energy efficiency has implications on rehabilitating
character-defining features. Rather, energy conservation is assessed for its potential
negative impact on the building’s historic character. (Table 13)
213
When HACLA
undertakes modernization upgrades, particular care must be taken not to obscure, alter,
or damage character-defining features in the process of preservation work. Buttressing
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, the National Park Service
also has “Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability” for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.
The guidelines focus on the fact that historic buildings are inherently sustainable, “and
this should be used to an advantage any proposal to upgrade them.”
214
Before
implementing any energy conservation measures to enhance the sustainability of a
historic building, HACLA needs to assess the existing energy-efficient characteristics of
the building. Rather than resort to energy modeling and flawed EAs, HACLA must
consider how “the design, materials, type of construction, size, shape, site orientation,
surrounding landscape and climate all play a role in [building performance.”
215
In the
case for public housing developments, and their garden apartments style, they were all
designed in regards to local climatic conditions. Their buildings maximized natural
sources of heating, lighting, and ventilation. In order for public housing developments to
be more resilient, HACLA also needs to identify and understand any lost original and
existing energy-efficient aspects and character-defining features of the building.
Numerous treatments may be used to upgrade a historic building to help it operate more
energy efficiently. Nevertheless, HUD and the City of Los Angeles have strict energy
standards and code requirements that dictate at that some of these treatments be

213
“Special Requirements Energy Efficiency,” National Park Service United States Department of the
Interior, accessed October 21, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_energyeff.htm.
214
“Introduction,” National Park Service United States Department of the Interior, accessed October 21,
2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/rehabilitation/guidelines/introduction.htm.
215
“Special Requirements Energy Efficiency,” National Park Service United States Department of the
Interior, accessed October 21, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_energyeff.htm.

90
implemented.
216
Rather than overhaul all systems and materials, HACLA should
revaluate how they can use their existing public housing infrastructure to support energy
efficiency, heritage conservation, and code requirements.
Table 13. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards – Preservation and Energy Efficiency
Feature Recommended Solutions Discouraged Solutions
Masonry,
Wood,
Architectural
Metals
• Installing thermal insulation in attics
and in unheated cellars and
crawlspaces to increase the
efficiency of the existing mechanical
systems.
• Installing insulating material on the
inside of masonry walls to increase
energy efficiency where there is no
character-defining interior molding
around the windows or other interior
architectural detailing.
• Applying thermal insulation with high
moisture content in wall cavities, which
may damage historic fabric.
• Installing wall insulation without
considering its effect on interior molding
or other architectural detailing.
•
Windows • Utilizing the inherent energy
conserving features of a building by
maintaining windows and louvered
blinds in good operable condition for
natural ventilation.
• Improving thermal efficiency with
weather stripping, storm windows,
caulking, interior shades, and if
historically appropriate, blinds and
awnings.
• Installing interior storm windows with
airtight gaskets, ventilating holes,
and/or removable clips to insure
proper maintenance and to avoid
condensation damage to historic
windows.
• Installing exterior storm windows,
which do not damage or obscure the
windows and frames.
• Removing historic shading devices rather
than keeping them in an operable
condition.
• Replacing historic multi-paned sash with
new thermal sash utilizing false muntins.
Installing interior storm windows that allow
moisture to accumulate and damage the
window.
• Installing new exterior storm windows,
which are inappropriate in size or color.
• Replacing windows or transoms with fixed
thermal glazing or permitting windows and
transoms to remain inoperable rather than
utilizing them for their energy conserving
potential.

Entrances
and Porches
• Maintaining porches and double
vestibule entrances so that they can
retain heat or block the sun and
provide natural ventilation.
• Changing the historic appearance of the
building by enclosing porches.

Interior
Features
• Retaining historic interior shutters
and transoms for their inherent
energy conserving features.
• Removing historic interior features which
play an energy-conserving role.

Mechanical
Systems
• Improving energy efficiency of
existing mechanical systems by
installing insulation in attics and
basements.
• Replacing existing mechanical systems
that could be repaired for continued use.

Building Site • Retaining plant materials, trees, and
landscape features which perform
passive solar energy functions such
• Removing plant materials, trees, and
landscape features that perform passive

216
“Sustainability,” National Park Service United States Department of the Interior, accessed October 21,
2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/rehabilitation/guidelines/sustainability.htm.

91
as sun shading and wind breaks. solar energy functions.
Setting • Maintaining those existing
landscape features which moderate
the effects of the climate on the
setting such as deciduous trees,
evergreen wind-blocks, and lakes or
ponds.
• Stripping the setting of landscape features
and landforms so that the effects of wind,
rain, and sun result in accelerated
deterioration of the historic building.
Table 13. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards – Preservation and Energy Efficiency
217

The American Disability Act and Accessibility
In terms of accessibility, it is important to identify the historic building’s character-
defining spaces, features, and finishes so that accessibility code-required work will not
result in their damage or loss. HACLA needs to comply with barrier-free access
requirements, in such a manner that, character-defining spaces, features, and finishes
are preserved. There are special provisions and alternatives to regular code in the
California Building Code (Title 24, Division 8, also known as the California Historical
Building Code) that may be used for qualified historical properties. There are also
alternatives, and the alternative minimum provisions for qualified historical properties in
the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). Within the PNAs,
there are the standards for ADDAG for public housing developments. HACLA abides by
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that requires a minimum of five-percent of
multi-family properties with fifteen or more units have a minimum of five-percent mobility
accessible units, and two-percent of the units for visual and/or audio impaired.
Exceptions can be considered due to undue financial burdens or structural restrictions.
HACLA has to conform to Reasonable Accommodations, which states “when a family
member requires accessible features or policy modification to accommodate a disability,
property owners must provide features or policy modification unless doing so would
result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its program or result in a financial and
administrative burden.”
218
Additionally, since alterations can be done to the existing

217
“Special Requirements Energy Efficiency,” National Park Service United States Department of the
Interior, accessed October 21, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_energyeff.htm.
218
“Special Requirements Accessibility Considerations,” National Park Service United States Department
of the Interior, accessed October 21, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_access.htm.

92
buildings, HACLA has to abide by the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS)
24 CFR part forty that was adopted by HUD. Alterations are defined as “work that costs
fifty-percent or more of the building’s value when the work performed occurs within a
twelve month period. Apartments modified for mobility-impaired residents are to comply
with UFAS. Finally, the development has to comply with the ADA guidelines for
Community Center and community facilities. To meet Section 504 requirements,
developments have to undergo full modifications to units – most of these units would
occur at ground level. The PNAs also denote upgrading developments to be compliant
in parking, interior common areas, medical clinics, ramps, path of travel, and signage.
With the numerous aforementioned housing Federal requirements, HACLA
should also work with local disability groups, access specialists, and heritage
conservation specialists to determine the most appropriate solution to access problems.
HACLA must work with the City of Los Angeles and HUD to find solutions that meet
accessibility requirements that minimize the impact on the historic building and its site,
such as compatible ramps, paths, and lifts. HACLA’s current history is to alter, damage,
and destroy character-defining features to comply with accessibility requirements.
HACLA should not undertake code-required alterations before identifying those spaces,
features, or finishes which are character-defining and must be preserved. HACLA
should shift to first seek expert advice from access specialists and conservation
professionals to determine solutions.
219

Health and Safety
With many complexes falling into disrepair to the extent that it harms tenants’
health, HACLA believes that demolition and redevelopment are the ultimate solutions to
solve substandard housing. Although PNAs do not address health and safety, when
applying the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, HACLA needs to
comply with health and safety codes, including seismic code requirements. However,
health and safety upgrades need to be done in such a manner that character-defining
spaces, features, and finishes are preserved. As for abating hazardous materials such

219
“Special Requirements Health and Safety Considerations,” National Park Service United States
Department of the Interior, accessed October 21, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_healthsafety.htm.

93
as asbestos and lead, testing has to have been conducted and methods reviewed for
impacts on historic character. For workers removing the lead and asbestos, HACLA
must provide workers with appropriate personal protective equipment for hazards found
in the worksite. For instance, the complete removal of asbestos and lead at Rose Hills
Courts should have been avoided. (Figure 5.1) There are other means to abate lead
and asbestos exposure such as encapsulation.

Fig. 5.1: Lead and Asbestos Abatement at Rose Hill Courts, circa 2012. Source: Housing Authority of the
City of Los Angeles.

Similar to managing accessibility requirements, HACLA must work with local
code officials to investigate systems, methods, or devices of equivalent or superior
effectiveness and safety to those prescribed by code so that unnecessary alterations
can be avoided. By collaborating with agencies, HACLA can install “equivalent health
and safety systems, methods, or devices that may be less damaging to historic spaces,
features, and finishes,” and find less invasive abatement methods.
220
For example, in

220
Ibid.

94
order to save historic properties from fires, installing sensitively designed fire
suppression systems, such as sprinkler systems can retain historic features and
finishes. Additionally, applying fire-retardant coatings such as intumescent paints
expand during fire to add thermal protection to steel and wood. Merely covering
character-defining wood features with fire-resistant sheathing will alter a historic
resource’s appearance. Many other fire-retardant coatings can damage and obscure
character-defining features. By highlighting the energy efficiency, accessibility, and
health and safety, regulations that HACLA must abide by, this allows heritage
conservationists to understand the management framework that HACLA must function
within. By recognizing these regulations, heritage conservationists can make feasible
recommendations to HACLA.

95
Chapter 6: Pulling Residents Out of Poverty and Stigmatization
With the public housing developments meeting their wear, and with little Federal
funding, HACLA has been forward thinking in addressing deferred maintenance.
Despite HACLA’s history of resorting to demolition, HACLA has proven to be creative in
pooling finances to support their public housing developments and their residents.
HACLA has programs that simultaneously contribute to social capital as well as
investing in the physical infrastructure of their buildings. Through private partnerships,
HACLA has been resourceful in minimizing their financial dependence on HUD for
social service delivery. HACLA has gradually increased the number of social service
programs for their public housing developments and has created a robust and
multifaceted approach to supporting youth at their developments. For instance, HACLA
has partnered with a non-profit organization called North East Trees, which educates
youth in environmental stewardship at public housing developments. The youth plant
trees in public housing developments, which foster interaction amongst youth and
encourage neighbors to be outside. Additionally, since public housing receives funding
from HUD, HACLA is subject to Section 3 – a legal basis for providing jobs for residents
and awarding contracts to businesses in areas receiving HUD assistance. “Under
Section 3 of the HUD Act of 1968, wherever HUD financial assistance is expended for
housing or community development, to the greatest extent feasible, economic
opportunities will be given to Section 3 residents and businesses in that area.”
221
As a
result, HACLA created the Resident Jobs Program, which trains residents in the trades
by upgrading and rehabilitating failing infrastructure at public housing developments. A
heritage conservation perspective on maintenance can support HACLA’s nexus of job
development and infrastructure improvement. Compared to new construction, heritage
conservation creates a significantly higher amount of jobs for residents. By harnessing
the current social programs that improve public housing infrastructure, public housing
combined with heritage conservation, can increase job opportunity and aid in alleviating

221
“Section 3,” United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, accessed October 30,
2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/section3/section3broc
hure.

96
poverty among residents. This is the final step and sixth step in utilizing heritage
conservation as a means to reinvest and advocate for public housing.

North East Trees, Sherwin Williams Painters Training, and the Resident Jobs
Program
With a significant amount of funding for social services, HACLA has developed or
adopted three initiatives to simultaneously reinvest in its aging infrastructure and spur
job development. North East Trees, a non-profit focused on environmental stewardship,
trains at at-risk-youth in the green industry, and they have been improving the green
spaces in public housing developments. The youth embark on hands-on education in
landscape architecture and environmental studies through gardening, tree planting, and
painting. Funding is provided by American Relief and Recovery Act, and is administered
by California ReLeaf another non-profit organization with a mission “to empower
grassroots efforts and build strategic partnerships that preserve, protect, and enhance
California’s urban and community forests.”
222
For example, ten young adults ages
eighteen to twenty-four from Ramona Gardens were introduced to the basics of
arboriculture and urban ecology, landscape design, habitat restoration, proper
tree selection, installation, and maintenance techniques. North East Trees also provides
life skills training on resume building and interview skills. The youth are also connected
to job opportunities from the U.S. Forest Service and the Mountains Recreation and
Conservation Authority. In terms of the physical effect North East Trees has on public
housing developments, the Ramona Gardens youth have planted approximately a total
of 276 shade trees at the public housing facilities where they live.
223
Ten youth from the
San Fernando Gardens public housing community planted 200 hundred trees in the
housing development. (Figure 6.0) The participating youth were trained in tree
identification, installation, and maintenance. The project enabled the youth to learn skills
useful in the green jobs and landscaping industries as well as to help their community.
Participant Jesus Mejia said, “It’s a workout, keeps me healthy, and it’s going to look

222
“About Us,” North East Trees, accessed May 25, 2015. http://www.northeasttrees.org/about.html.
223
“North East Trees, “Urban Forestry Youth Training at HACLA Site,” North East Trees, February 3,
2011, accessed May 25, 2015. https://northeasttrees.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/urban-forestry-youth-
training-at-hacla-site/.

97
good here in the community.”
224
The North East Trees Youth Environmental Stewards
Program seeks to continually develop a community-based workforce at HACLA’s public
housing developments to steward nature in resource challenged communities.

Fig. 6.0: Northeast Trees at San Fernando Gardens, 2011. Source: Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

Smaller programs such as Sherwin Williams Painters Training equip residents
with a primary skill in hopes that they will also obtain a job in that specialty. Once again,
in partnership with HUD, the Sherwin-Williams Company provides training to residents
with painting. The two-week program is sponsored by the HUD is funded primarily by
Sherwin-Williams Company. At the end of the training, they receive an Environmental

224
North East Trees, “Environmental Stewardship Program at San Fernando Gardens a Success!.” North
East Trees, August 25, 2011, accessed May 24, 2015.
https://northeasttrees.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/environmental-stewardship-program-at-san-fernando-
gardens-a-success/.

98
Protection Agency Certificate on Renovation, Repair, and Painting.
225
It focuses on
teaching residents about asbestos, mold, and lead-based paint. The program gives
residents materials and real-world experience through painting units in their own
housing projects. "There's more to just putting paint on the brush and then putting it on
the wall," said resident Joseph. The program has been in existence since about 2003
and ninety-one people had been trained during sessions at Jordan Downs, Estrada
Courts, Mar Vista Gardens, and Nickerson Gardens. (Figure 6.1)

Fig. 6.1: Sherwin Williams Painters Training, circa 2010. Source: Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

In addition to North East Trees and the Sherwin Williams Painting program,
HACLA also cooperates with the Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment
Department, the South Bay Center for Counseling, and the Watts Labor Community
Action Committee to provide employment training, job placement, and job retention
services to public housing residents. Residents are assigned an Eligibility Worker who

225
Ari B. Bloomekatz, “Painting Job-Training Program Helps LA Public Housing Residents.” Los Angeles
Times, April 14, 2009. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/14/local/me-painting14.

99
determines eligibility to work, as well as assists with classroom training for employment
certification, job placement, and job retention services. Additionally, HACLA is the only
PHA that operates certified WorkSource Centers in multiple public housing
developments. WorkSource Centers deliver workforce development services throughout
the region. On August 7, 1998, President Clinton signed into law the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). “The Act created a unique national workforce preparation
and employment system designed to meet the needs of both career seekers and
businesses. Because WorkSource California is funded through Federal WIA dollars,
most services are available at no cost.”
226
Finally, HACLA has also implemented
programs beyond construction and trades, such as the Environmental Stewardship
Program, solar certifications, advanced security officer trainings, construction
apprenticeships, process technician trainings, and Certified Nursing Assistant classes.
The Resident Jobs Program is HACLA’s most profound program in impacting the
physical fabric of the buildings while providing job training for residents. Section 3 is a
provision of the Housing and Urban Development Act 1968. The purpose of Section 3 is
ensure that employment and other economic opportunities generated by certain “HUD
financial assistance shall, to the greatest extent feasible, and consistent with existing
Federal, State and local laws and regulations, be directed to low-and very low income
persons, particularly those who are recipients of government assistance for housing,
and to business concerns which provide economic opportunities for low- and very low-
income persons”.
227
Now called the Resident Jobs Program, it provides public housing
residents with an opportunity to gain job experience and increase household income.
(Figure 6.2) The program was implemented in November 2011, and a month later,
seventy-nine residents were hired to work at various public housing developments.
228

Residents worked in various jobs such as painting, roofing, carpentry, and cement
masonry. This program has no fiscal impact on HACLA’s budget because of a bidding
process. Vendors who win contracts and projects are to hire residents as a part of their

226
“General Information,” WorkSource California, accessed January 11, 2016.
http://www.worksourcecalifornia.com/information/WS_general_information.htm.
227
“Section 3,” Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, accessed April 10, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/section3.
228
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, The Housing Authority Reaches Goal in ‘Million Dollar
Jobs’ Program, (Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2012),
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Press%20Releases/2012/MillionJobsUpdate.pdf.

100
workforce. As of 2013, 431 residents participating in the program have been paid over
4.4 million dollars, and have completed over 345 jobs.
229
This work has been on public
housing developments and affordable housing developments. The estimated total
capital improvement investment is over 3.7 million dollars.
230
Residents worked in
“various jobs including liaison, laborer, labor apprentice, painter, painter apprentice,
carpenter, carpenter apprentice, and cement mason apprentice.
231
However, these
results are without a heritage conservation perspective.

Fig 6.2: Section 3 Resident Jobs Program at Nickerson Gardens, circa 2014. Source: Section 3,
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

Economic Benefits of Heritage Conservation: HistoriCorps and Veterans Corps
In heritage conservation, there are programs teach residents how to preserve
and maintain buildings, and these programs generate an immense amount of wealth.

229
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 75 Years Providing Affordable Housing 2013 Report,
(Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2013), 15,
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2012%20HACLA%20AR.pdf. The total
hired is based on an actual number of persons on each project – the same resident may be working on
multiple developments.
230
Ibid.
231
Ibid.

101
Heritage conservation has the ability to create more jobs per dollar of construction than
new construction. Since heritage conservation projects are labor intensive, there are
organizations such as HistoriCorps, Youthbuild Philadelphia, and the National Trust that
train laborers in preservation. HistoriCorps, “a national organization works through
partnerships to mobilize volunteers to save and sustain our nation’s special places while
providing educational and outdoor experiences.”
232
In 2013, they partnered with the
Student Conservation and the Forest Service, to help Veterans re-enter civilian life and
find career-oriented employment. The Veterans Historic Preservation Team, worked on
three National Forest properties listed on the National Register. Over the course of
twelve weeks, Veterans develop trade skills.
233

In Philadelphia, YouthBuild allows local high school student dropouts to earn a
diploma, acquire valuable job skills, and provide important services to underserved
communities. YouthBuild Philadelphia was founded in 1992 with sixteen students, and
in 2015, the program has grown to provide over 200 young adults annually with training
in healthcare, information technology, business, and the building trades. In Philadelphia,
there are numerous vacant and abandoned properties. Youth have rehabilitated over
eighty properties across the city, and recently, the school’s building trade curriculum has
grown to include training in green building technology and heritage conservation.
234

The Historic Preservation Training Center (HPTC) utilizes heritage conservation
projects as “their main vehicle for teaching preservation philosophy, building crafts,
building technology, and project management skills.” Their mission is to train
preservation craftspeople, to preserve historic resources today, and to promote heritage
conservation as key to the future. HPTC has programs such as a three-year training
program for the NPS Exhibit and Preservation Specialists; services for the Treatment of
NPS, Federal, State, or locally owned historic properties; and extensive outreach
training programs aimed at building the skills of personnel responsible for the

232
“HistoriCorps Overview,” HistoriCorps, accessed June 24, 2015. http://historicorps.org/historicorps-
overview/.
233
“Veterans Historic Preservation Program,” HistoriCorps, accessed June 24, 2015.
http://historicorps.org/veterans-historic-preservation-program/.
234
“Vocational Training: Building Trades,” YouthBuild Philadelphia Charter School, accessed June 24,
2015. http://www.youthbuildphilly.org/construction.html.

102
maintenance and preservation of historic properties.
235
With a primary mission of
developing preservation trade skills for NPS, it also operates as a preservation
contractor that works on approximately twelve to thirteen million dollars in projects each
year.
236

Finally, The National Trust has an initiative to train more young people in
preservation crafts while helping to protect historic cultural sites on public lands. The
youth that are engaged in this program is called the Hands-On Preservation Experience
(HOPE) Crew. Crewmembers work on hundreds of sites to learn preservation trades
while they rehabilitate historic places. Similar to North East Trees, HOPE Crewmembers
are paid for their work and are part of a youth development program. Preservation
experts work with the HOPE Crews to provide project leadership and training.
Crewmembers receive preservation skills training including masonry, carpentry,
painting, and refinishing. The youth also have a preservation advisor, who helps guide
each project by answering preservation-related questions as well as helping the crew
members understand and appreciate the historic significance of the project. The
National Trust is in the beginning stages of this initiative, and is looking to build this
program.
237
These programs are similar to the existing programs at HACLA. By
underlining the financial impact of these heritage conservation based programs, HACLA
should embark on integrating heritage conservation into their maintenance plans.

Economic Impact of Heritage Conservation
In the last twenty years, there have been numerous studies using different
analyses and methodologies to show the economic impact of heritage conservation. All
of these methodologies have been remarkably consistent – heritage conservation is
good for the local economy through jobs, property values, heritage tourism,
environmental impact, social impact, and downtown revitalization. For instance, in 2010,
in Delaware, approximately one million dollars that were being spent on rehabilitation

235
“Historic Preservation Training Center: Program Overview,” National Park Service United States
Department of the Interior, accessed June 25, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/training/hptc/.
236
“HOPE Crew – Hands-On Preservation Experience,” National Trust for Historic Preservation,
accessed June 26, 2015.
http://www.preservationnation.org/hopecrew/?referrer=http://blog.preservationnation.org/2014/12/18/outd
oor-classroom-historic-preservation-training-centers-approach-preservation-education/#.Vb1CiJNViko.
237
Ibid.

103
created 14.6 jobs as opposed to 11.2 jobs in new construction.
238
In Kansas, of the
4,443 total jobs created from historic rehabilitation tax credits, almost half are in the
construction industry. The majority of the remaining jobs are distributed among the
services, retail, and manufacturing industries. Other sectors related to heritage
conservation projects such as agriculture, mining, transportation, and public utilities
were impacted as well.
239
Particularly in California, according to Economist Donovan
Rypkema, “for every million dollars of production, the average manufacturing firm
creates 21.2 jobs. A million spent in new construction generates 26.5 jobs. But that
same million dollars in the rehabilitation of an historic building [is] 31.1 jobs.”
240

Rypkema estimates that a million dollars of manufacturing in output will add on average
about $554,000 to local household incomes and a million dollars of new construction will
add $753,000 to local household incomes. The same investment in conservation will
yield over $833,000 to local household incomes.
241
When one looks at the California
developments that have used the historic tax credit in from 2001 – 2013, over
$2,410,859,677 has been spent on historic rehabilitation for only 145 developments.
The total number of jobs created was 33,578, of that number, 12,951 were construction
jobs, and 20,627 became permanent jobs. Those workers were paid $1,447,587,300 in
household income.
242
Additionally, researchers have found that one million dollars
invested in historic rehabilitation produces more jobs, income and state and local taxes
than one million dollars invested in new construction, highway construction, machinery
manufacturing, agriculture or telecommunications.
243
The labor-intensive process of
heritage conservation results in sixty and seventy-percent of the total construction costs

238
Donovan D. Rypkema and Caroline Cheong, Measuring the Economics of Preservation: Recent
Findings, (Washington, DC: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and PlaceEconomics, 2011),
https://www.cacities.org/Resources-Documents/Member-Engagement/Professional-
Departments/Community-Services/Measuring-the-Economics-of-Preservation.aspx.

239
Ibid.
240
Mimi Morris, The Economic Impact of Historic Resource Preservation, (Sacramento: California Cultural
and Historical Endowment, 2012),
http://resources.ca.gov/docs/cche/EconomicImpact_of_HistoricResourcePreservation.pdf.
241
Ibid.
242
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Federal Historic Tax Credit Projects – California, (Washington,
DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2014), http://www.preservationnation.org/take-
action/advocacy-center/additional-resources/historic-tax-credit-maps/CA_map-economic-impacts-
list_2014.pdf.
243
David J. Brown, “The Economic Power of Preservation,” National Trust for Historic Preservation,
March 22, 2013, accessed April 20, 2015, http://www.preservationnation.org/who-we-are/press-
center/speeches-op-eds/the-economic-power-of.html#.VTGH161Viko.

104
spent towards labor—skilled carpenters, electricians, plumbers, sheet metal workers,
painters, and other tradespeople. Heritage conservation outperforms many other
traditional stimulus investments. For instance, one million dollars invested in heritage
conservation has a greater economic impact in terms of jobs, income, and Federal,
state, and local taxes generated than a similar investment in highway construction,
machinery manufacturing, agriculture, and telecommunication. The report further states
that three-quarters of the economic impacts of historic rehabilitation stays in the same
local communities and states where the projects are located. This relatively high
retention rate reflects the fact that labor and materials are obtained locally.
244
When
applying this outlook to the current trades training at public housing developments, the
income that could be earned by residents could be greater and can pull residents out of
poverty.

244
Ibid.

105
Conclusion
Public housing development in Los Angeles exemplified the goals of minimum
dwelling and dignified housing for everyone as a social endeavor. The buildings
manifested a collective effort to define social problems, solve social conditions, and find
solutions. Throughout the nation, residents of public housing seek to save the existing
stock of public housing – “for social justice in terms of housing.”
245
However, less than a
dozen developments have been listed on the National Register of Places.
246
Due to
concerns about the demolition of public housing projects, the NPS released guidelines
for listing public housing communities on the National Register for Historic Places. For
most of the eligible public housing project properties, the primary historical significance
will likely rest in their association with the development of the important Federal public
housing programs of the 1930s and the 1940s. Secondary significance is found through
associations with the ideals of modern architecture and urban planning. The NPS
guidelines specify that, to be listed, a public housing project must be nationally
significant, not merely and artifact of national policy.
247
Heritage conservation is
increasingly looking at intangible significance, experiences, and the relationships that
form in these public housing developments. It is a place where residents grow up and
cities develop. Underlining this intangible significance can elevate more public housing
developments into local, state, and national listings.
Revitalization strategies must capitalize on the existing value of neighborhoods and
provide housing with minimal displacement. At every step of the heritage conservation
process, local leaders must ensure that decisions on community growth respect the
local heritage and enhance overall livability.
248
(Figure 7.0) Replacing housing is not a
solution for housing the poor. Rather, replacement contributes to the loss of
neighborhood patterns, embodied energy, inevitable urban maintenance, and loss to the
public sphere. Maintaining public housing requires sustained funding and solutions site

245
Andrew Dolkart, “Welcome and Opening Remarks” (lecture, Columbia University GSAPP, New York,
NY, March 31, 2012).
246
Dawn E. Jourdan and Stephanie Zeier Pilat, “Preserving Public Housing: Federal, State, and Local
Efforts to Preserve the Social and Architectural Forms Associated with Housing For the
Poor,” Preservation Education 7, (2014): 24.
247
Ibid., 30.
248
Robert E. Stipe, A Richer Heritage: Preservation in the Twenty-First Century (Chapel Hill, North
Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 148.

106
specific issues. Public housing challenges conventional heritage conservation to be
beyond recollection and sustainability. Rather public housing’s dual role in providing
shelter for families and manifesting HACLA’s goal provide housing for everyone,
underlines the need for to further conserve these historic resources.
In the case for HACLA, the PHA exemplifies what PHAs throughout the nation
suffer with - the negative perception of public housing as a national failure that
facilitated violence and poverty. However, when recalling the significance of public
housing in Los Angeles, these developments are highly significant because they were
built to holistically uplift those in need. Public housing in Los Angeles addressed slum
housing, supported World War II workers, utilized the Garden Apartments style to build
stronger workers and communities, and was used a means to integrate ethnicities and
races together. All of these reasons make Los Angeles’ public housing developments
crucial resources. Unfortunately, public housing is plagued with violent narratives that
which mask public housing’s selfless act to support the poor. Therefore, residents,
conservationists, community groups, and entities invested in public housing
preservation must unwind standard narratives about public housing, recover and honor
the intentions of public housing, and highlight positive stories from these developments.
According to Joanne, when asked about how awareness of William Mead Homes’
historic significance would impact her neighbors, she believes, that “some residents will
no longer hesitate to tell others they live in the projects.”
249
In order to achieve pride,
holistic reinvestment, the first step in achieving this is in surveying all public housing
developments for significance. Negative perceptions are perpetuated in how HUD
structures financing or lack of financing for public housing developments. HUD’s
continual disinvestment is displayed in not only diminishing funds, which force PHAs to
defer maintenance, but in the funding sources for PHAs. Funding sources such as
HOPE VI, CNI, and RAD encourage PHAs to demolish and redevelop their public
housing units. Therefore, within HUD, there are no funding sources that support public
housing without compromising the developments. As a second step, HACLA must be
thoughtful in garnering Federal funding that reinvests in public housing developments.

249
Joanne Aragon, interview by Leslie Palaroan, Personal Interview, Los Angeles, January 6, 2016. This
person’s Aragon, name has been changed for privacy.

107
Third, after surveying the remaining public housing developments, Preservation Briefs
can help assess a building’s physical character. Preservation Brief 17 will help in
creating a historic structures report that can be used a guide for maintenance. Fourth,
PNAs and EAs must be restructured with a conservation purview by striving to maintain
character-defining features such as the green spaces in Avalon Gardens and windows
at William Mead Homes. Fifth, maintenance plans created in accordance to the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation will help guide maintenance
teams and construction laborers in taking care of the developments. This will also
decrease unnecessary spending on modernization improvements and halt negative
alterations. Finally, the sixth step is to harness HACLA’s infrastructure improvement
programs, which connects residents to jobs. Residents who need jobs can holistically
improve public housing developments, and have ownership over their community.
Through continual investment in public housing, this will strengthen these historic
resources, residents, and communities. These developments will not be called projects,
and instead called homes.

108
Fig. 7.0: Children from the Pueblo Del Rio Housing Project plant a tree as part of a school tree planting
ceremony, 1949. Source: Housing Authority Collection, Los Angeles Public Library.

109
Bibliography
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. “About.” Accessed January 9, 2015.
http://www.achp.gov/aboutachp.html.

———. “Federal Financial Assistance for Historic Preservation Projects – Community
and Economic Development Programs: Housing.” Last modified May 16, 2008.
Accessed May 28, 2015. http://www.achp.gov/funding-comm-housing.html.

Affordable Housing Finance Staff. “HUD Announces $1.8 Billion in Funding to Public
Housing Authorities.” Affordable Housing Finance Policy & Legislation, February 12,
2015. Accessed September 2, 2015. http://www.housingfinance.com/policy-
legislation/hud-announces-18-billion-in-funding-to-public-housing-authorities_o.

Aragon, Joanne. “Personal Interview: Interview with Joanne Aragon.” By Leslie
Palaroan. Los Angeles, January 6, 2016.

Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Charles E. Chase, Katie E. Horak, and Steven R.
Keylon. Garden Apartments of Los Angeles: Historic Context Statement. Los Angeles:
Los Angeles Conservancy, 2012.
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/documents/Garden%20Apartment
%20Context%20Statement.pdf.

Avila, Eric. Popular Culture in the Age of White Flight: Fear and Fantasy in Suburban
Los Angeles. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004.

Bachrach, Drew. “Watts Waits: The Redevelopment of Jordan Downs.” Filmed 2015.
Vimeo video. Posted June 17, 2015. https://vimeo.com/131012405.

Becker, Alison. Watts Community Studio. Los Angeles: Los Angeles City Council
District 15, Office of Councilman Joe Buscaino, 2013.
https://wattscommunitystudio.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/wcs-final-report.pdf.

Birch, Eugenie L. “Radburn and the American Planning Movement.” University of
Pennsylvania Scholarly Commons (1980): 122-151. Accessed January 23,
2016. http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=cplan_pap
ers.

Bloomekatz, Ari B. “Painting Job-Training Program Helps LA Public Housing
Residents.” Los Angeles Times, April 14, 2009.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/14/local/me-painting14.

Blumgart, Jake. “4 Public Housing Lessons the U.S. Could Learn from the Rest of the
World.” The Next City, August 24, 2014. Accessed August 28, 2015.
https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/better-public-housing-lessons-failure-success-us-world.

110
Bridge Housing. “L.A. Approves Specific Plan for Jordan Downs.” Bridge Housing News
& Media, May 7, 2013. Accessed June 13, 2015. http://bridgehousing.com/news-
media/la-approves-specific-plan-jordan-downs.

Brown, David J. “The Economic Power of Preservation.” National Trust for Historic
Preservation. March 22, 2013. Accessed April 20, 2015.
http://www.preservationnation.org/who-we-are/press-center/speeches-op-eds/the-
economic-power-of.html#.VTGH161Viko.

California Strategic Growth Council. Strategic Growth Council Approves $32.4 Million
Through Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program. Sacramento:
California Strategic Growth Council, 2015.
https://www.sgc.ca.gov/docs/PressRelease_AHSCFall2015NOFA.pdf.

California State Parks Office of Historic Preservation. “CEQA Basics.” Accessed
January 10, 2016. http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21721.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Policy Basics: Introduction to Public Housing.
Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2015.
http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/policybasics-housing.pdf.

Cohen, Rachel M. “The RAD-ical Shifts to Public Housing.” The American Prospect.
Accessed August 16, 2015. http://prospect.org/article/can-private-capital-save-public-
housing-tenants-have-their-doubts.

Conway, Christopher. Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of William
Mead - Physical Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles. Los
Angeles: EMG Corporation, 2013.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%
20Assessments/William%20Mead.pdf.

Crowley, Sheila. Affordable Housing Dilemma: The Preservation vs. Mobility Debate.
Washington, DC: National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2012.
http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Affordable_Housing_Dilemma_Report_May-2012.pdf.

Dahman, Nicholas, and Becky Dennison. "Organizing for Healthy Communities: A
Report from Public Housing in Los Angeles." Progress in Community Health
Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 7.1 (2013): 77-82.

Dolkart, Andrew. “Welcome and Opening Remarks.” Paper presented at The Fitch
Colloquium: Why Preserve Public Housing, Columbia University GSAPP, New York,
NY, March 31, 2012.

111
Druedig, Meghan. “Public Housing Community Rich in African-American History Faces
Change in Austin.” National Trust for Historic Preservation, February 7, 2014. Accessed
September 5, 2015. https://savingplaces.org/stories/public-housing-community-african-
american-history-faces-change-austin.

Freidrichs, Chad. “Urban History.” The Pruitt-Igoe Myth. Accessed August 28, 2015.
http://www.pruitt-igoe.com/urban-history/.

Gonzalez, Saul, Doretha Perkins, Douglas Gutherie, Jacqueline Leavitt. “Remaking
Watts’ Infamous Jordan Downs Housing Project: Interview with Saul Gonzalez, Doretha
Perkins, Douglas Gutherie, Jacqueline Leavitt.” By Audie Cornish. KCRW, July 12,
2012, http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/remaking-watts-infamous-
jordan-downs-housing-project.

HistoriCorps. “HistoriCorps Overview.” Accessed June 24, 2015.
http://historicorps.org/historicorps-overview/.

———. “Veterans Historic Preservation Program.” Accessed June 24, 2015.
http://historicorps.org/veterans-historic-preservation-program/.

Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles. 75 Years Providing Affordable Housing
2013 Report. Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2013.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2012%20HACLA%2
0AR.pdf.

———. 2010 Annual Report HACLA: Our Residents, Our Communities, Our
Successes. Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles,
2010. http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2010AREnpdf.
pdf.

———-. “About Us.” Accessed November 15, 2015. http://www.hacla.org/aboutus.

———. Creating Sustainable Neighborhoods: 2009 Annual Report. Los Angeles:
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles,
2009. http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/HACLA_AR_2
009.pdf.

———-. HACLA by the Numbers. Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/LayerGallery/uploads/2015/7/7/FactSheetupdate.pdf.

———-. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Annual Financial Report - Years
Ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 (With Independent Auditor’s Report Thereon). Los
Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2014.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2014%20financial%2
0audit.pdf.

112
———. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Year 2015 Agency Plan. Los
Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/2015%20Final%20A
gency%20Plan%2010-3-2014%20FINAL.pdf.

———. “Resident Services.” Accessed July 17, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/residentservices.

———. “Section 3.” Accessed April 10, 2015. http://www.hacla.org/section3.

———. The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles 2011 Annual Report: Investing
in Tomorrow. Los Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles,
2011. http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/209100_HACL
A_ENG_n_proof.pdf.

———. The Housing Authority Reaches Goal in ‘Million Dollar Jobs’ Program. Los
Angeles: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2012.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Press%20Releases/2012/MillionJobsUpdat
e.pdf.

———. Transforming One Neighborhood at a Time. Los Angeles: Housing Authority of
the City of Los Angeles, 2015.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Residents/Housing%20Developments.pdf.

Independent Television Service. “Chavez Ravine: A Los Angeles Story.” Accessed
January 9, 2016. http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/chavezravine/cr.html.

Jackson, Fred. Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audit Report of Mar Vista
Homes - Physical Needs Assessment Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles. Los
Angeles: EMG Corporation, 2013.
http://www.hacla.org/Portals/0/Attachments/Public%20Documents/Physical%20Needs%
20Assessments/Mar%20Vista%20Gardens.pdf.

Jourdan, Dawn E, and Stephanie Zeier Pilat. “Preserving Public Housing: Federal,
State, and Local Efforts to Preserve the Social and Architectural Forms Associated with
Housing For the Poor.” Preservation Education 7, (2014): 19-30.

Keylon, Steven. “Greater Visibility for Los Angeles Garden Apartments.” The Cultural
Landscape Foundation, December 10, 2012. Accessed June 21, 2015,
http://tclf.org/news/features/greater-visibility-los-angeles-garden-apartments.

Kilston, Lyra. “Good Design Is for Everyone: The Evolution of Low-Income Housing in
L.A.” KCET, March 16, 2015. Accessed January 9, 2016.
http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los-angeles/michael-maltzan-star-
apartments-public-low-income-housing-history.html.

113
LA Human Right to Housing Collective. Participatory Budgeting in HACLA: A Report of
the LA Human Right to Housing Collective. Los Angeles: LA Human Right to Housing
Collective, 2014.
Leavitt, Jacqueline. “Women under Fire: Public Housing Activism in Los Angeles.”
Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 13, 2, (1993): 109-130.
Leavitt, Jacqueline and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris. "'A Decent Home and A Suitable
Environment': Dilemmas of Public Housing Residents in Los Angeles." Journal of
Architectural and Planning Research 12, 3, (1995): 221-239.
Levy, Clifford J. “Storm Forces a Hard Look at Troubled Public Housing.” New York
Times, November 22, 2005.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/22/us/nationalspecial/storm-forces-a-hard-look-at-
troubled-public-housing.html.

Los Angeles Community Action Network. A Brief Timeline of LA CAN’s Housing Work.
Los Angeles: Los Angeles Community Action Network, 2012. http://cangress.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/11/LA-CAN-Housing-Work-Timeline.pdf.

Los Angeles Conservancy. “History of Garden Apartments.” Accessed June 21, 2015.
https://www.laconservancy.org/history-garden-apartments.

———. “Join the L.A. Garden Apartments Network.” Accessed June 21, 2015.
https://www.laconservancy.org/join-la-garden-apartment-network.

———. “Mar Vista Gardens.” Accessed November 21, 2015.
https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/mar-vista-gardens.

———. Section 106 Review for the William Mead Homes and Mar Vista Gardens and
Windows Replacement Project, Los Angeles, CA. Los Angeles: Los Angeles
Conservancy, 2014.
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/issues/Section%20106%20comme
nts,%20William%20Mead%20Homes%20and%20Mar%20Vista%20Gardens,%20LA%2
0Conservancy,%2010.9.2014.pdf.

———. “We Heart Garden Apartments!.” Accessed June 21, 2015.
https://www.laconservancy.org/gardenapartments.

———. “William Mead Homes.” Accessed November 21, 2015.
https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/william-mead-homes.

———. “Windows in Publicly Owned Garden Apartments.” Accessed May 28, 2015.
https://www.laconservancy.org/issues/windows-publicly-owned-garden-apartments.

Los Angeles Times. “Housing Unit Gets Tenant.” January 3, 1941.

114
Martinez, Melanie. “Heritage Quiz – Santa Rita Courts.” Preservation Austin, Fall 2013.
Accessed September 2, 2015.
https://www.preservationaustin.org/uploads/Oct._2013_newsletter.pdf.

Michelson, Alan. “Aliso Apartments, Los Angeles, CA.” University of Washington, 2005.
Pacific Coast Architecture Database (PCAD Id: 2963).
http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/building/2963/.

Milnarik, Elizabeth. “The Preservation of Form and Function in American Public
Housing.” Paper presented at The Fitch Colloquium: Why Preserve Public Housing,
Columbia University GSAPP, New York, NY, March 31, 2012.

Morris, Mimi. The Economic Impact of Historic Resource Preservation. Sacramento:
California Cultural and Historical Endowment, 2012.
http://resources.ca.gov/docs/cche/EconomicImpact_of_HistoricResourcePreservation.p
df.

National Park Service United States Department of the Interior. “How to Evaluate the
Integrity of a Property.” Accessed January 11, 2016.
http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_8.htm

———. “Introduction.” Accessed October 21, 2015.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/rehabilitation/guidelines/introduction.htm.

———. National Register Nomination, Arcadia Apartments. Louisville, KY: National Park
Service United States Department of the Interior, 2010.
http://heritage.ky.gov/nr/rdonlyres/583d7916-fff3-4c8c-88d0-
77d1b5463651/0/arcadiaapartmentsjeffco.pdf.

———. National Register Nomination, Lincoln Place Apartments DRAFT. Los Angeles:
National Park Service United States Department of the Interior, 2015, 14,
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1067/files/ca_los%20angeles%20county_lincoln%20plac
e_revised%20july%202015.pdf.

———. “Historic Preservation Training Center: Program Overview.” Accessed June 25,
2015. http://www.nps.gov/training/hptc/.

———. “Rehabilitation as a Treatment.” Accessed January 3, 2016.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/treatment-rehabilitation.htm.

———. “Special Requirements Accessibility Considerations.” Accessed October 21,
2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_access.htm.

115
———. “Special Requirements Energy Efficiency.” Accessed October 21, 2015.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_energyeff.htm.

———. “Special Requirements Health and Safety Considerations.” Accessed October
21, 2015. http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-
treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_healthsafety.htm.

———. “Sustainability.” Accessed October 21, 2015.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/rehabilitation/guidelines/sustainability.htm.

National Public Housing Museum. “Our Vision.” Accessed June 20, 2015.
http://www.nphm.org/our-vision/place/.

National Trust for Historic Preservation. Federal Historic Tax Credit Projects –
California. Washington, DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2014.
http://www.preservationnation.org/take-action/advocacy-center/additional-
resources/historic-tax-credit-maps/CA_map-economic-impacts-list_2014.pdf.

———. “HOPE Crew – Hands-On Preservation Experience.” Accessed June 26, 2015.
http://www.preservationnation.org/hopecrew/?referrer=http://blog.preservationnation.org
/2014/12/18/outdoor-classroom-historic-preservation-training-centers-approach-
preservation-education/#.Vb1CiJNViko.

Nelson, Lee. Preservation Brief 17 – Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual
Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character. Washington, DC:
National Park Service United States Department of the Interior.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/preservedocs/preservation-briefs/17Preserve-
Brief-VisualAspects.pdf.

New York Times. “10 Years After Katrina.” August 28, 2015.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/26/us/ten-years-after-
katrina.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-
region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

North East Trees. “About Us.” Accessed May 25, 2015.
http://www.northeasttrees.org/about.html.

———. “Environmental Stewardship Program at San Fernando Gardens a Success!.”
North East Trees, August 25, 2011. Accessed May 24, 2015.
https://northeasttrees.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/environmental-stewardship-program-
at-san-fernando-gardens-a-success/.

———. “Urban Forestry Youth Training at HACLA Site.” North East Trees, February 3,
2011. Accessed May 25, 2015. https://northeasttrees.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/urban-
forestry-youth-training-at-hacla-site/.

116
Nossiter, Adam. “In New Orleans, Ex-Tenants Fight for Projects.” New York Times,
December 26, 2006.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/26/us/nationalspecial/26housing.html?pagewanted=1.

Office of Historic Resources Department of City Planning. “HistoricPlacesLA.” Accessed
July 14, 2015. http://historicplacesla.org/.

Ominsky, Harris. “Options: First Refusal Rights Could Be Thorny in GP-Solo Law
Trends & News Real Estate, 2007.” GP-Solo Law Trends & News Real Estate 3 no. 2
(2007):
http://www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/publications/law_trends_news_practice_
area_e_newsletter_home/realestate_ominsky.html.

Ouroussoff, Nicolai. “History vs. Homogeneity.” New York Times, February 27, 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/arts/design/22hous.html?fta=y.

Pagano, Elizabeth. “Rosewood Courts’ Historic Zoning Denied.” Austin Monitor, August
26, 2015. Accessed September 7, 2015.
http://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2015/08/rosewood-courts-historic-zoning-denied/.

Parson, Don. Making a Better World: Public Housing, the Red Scare, and the Direction
of Modern Los Angeles. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005.

The Participatory Budgeting Project. “What is PB?.” Accessed June 20, 2015.
http://www.participatorybudgeting.org/about-participatory-budgeting/what-is-pb/.

Ramos, Michael. “Personal Interview: Interview with Michael Ramos.” By Leslie
Palaroan. Los Angeles, October 25, 2015.

Ramos, Vanessa. “Personal Interview: Interview with Vanessa Ramos.” By Leslie
Palaroan. Los Angeles, January 6, 2016.

Related California. “Company Profile.” Accessed September 10, 2015.
http://www.relatedcalifornia.com/ourcompany/corporateinfo.aspx.

Rethink Housing. “About.” Accessed October 10, 2015.
http://www.rethinkhousing.org/about.

Rieder, Bruce. Physical Needs Assessment and Energy Audits for Public Housing. Los
Angeles: United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013.
http://www.lisc.org/docs/events/ec2013/PNA%20and%20Energy%20Audits%20for%20
Public%20Housing.pdf.

Rothstein, Richard. “Race and Pubic Housing: Revisiting the Federal Role.” Economic
Policy Institute, December 17, 2012. Accessed October 17, 2015.
http://www.epi.org/publication/race-public-housing-revisiting-Federal-role/.

117
Rypkema, Donovan D., and Caroline Cheong. Measuring the Economics of
Preservation: Recent Findings. Washington, DC: Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation and PlaceEconomics, 2011. https://www.cacities.org/Resources-
Documents/Member-Engagement/Professional-Departments/Community-
Services/Measuring-the-Economics-of-Preservation.aspx.

¡Somos Wyvernwood!. “About.” Accessed June 20, 2015.
https://sites.google.com/site/somoswyvernwood/home/about-usmeetthecommunity.

Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing. Out of Reach in 2015 – Los
Angeles County. Los Angeles: Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing,
2015.
http://www.scanph.org/sites/default/files/Out/of/Reach/in/2015/Los/Angeles/County/29_
0.pdf.

Stephens, Alexis. “Risks vs. Rewards: Inside HUD’s Favorite New Program.” The Next
City, October 9, 2014. Accessed August 22, 2015. https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/public-
housing-privatized-hud-rad-section-8.

Stipe, Robert E. A Richer Heritage: Preservation in the Twenty-First Century. Chapel
Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 2003.

Tamaki, Julie. “New Development Revitalizes Area of Harbor City,” Los Angeles Times,
February 7, 1999. http://articles.latimes.com/1999/feb/07/realestate/re-5693.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. “About Us: Office of
Capital Improvements – Office of Public Housing Investments.” Accessed September
28, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/progra
ms/ph/capfund/aboutus.

———. “Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grant Program.” Accessed August 20,
2015. http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/ph/cn/docs/fr5800n-choice.pdf.

———. “Five Things You Should Know About RAD Public Housing Conversions.”
Accessed August 20, 2015. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/RAD.

———. “FY 2015 Income Limits Documentation System – Los Angeles County.”
Accessed November 15, 2015.
http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2015/2015summary.odn.

———. “HUD-VASH Eligibility Requirements.” Accessed July 17, 2015.
https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/hud-vash/hud-vash-eligibility-requirements/.

118
———. “Physical Need Assessment of Public Housing.” Accessed December 2, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/progra
ms/ph/capfund/physicalassessment.

———. “Project Based Vouchers.” Accessed August 18, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=DOC_9157.pdf.

———. “Public Housing.” Accessed November 20, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/progra
ms/ph.

———. “Public housing Environmental & Conservation Clearinghouse.” Accessed
December 5, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/progra
ms/ph/phecc/ginitiative.

———. “S+C Eligibility Requirements.” Accessed July 17, 2015.
https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/spc/spc-eligibility-requirements/.

———. “Section 3.” Accessed October 30, 2015.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/secti
on3/section3brochure.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “National Environmental Policy Act.”
Accessed April 20, 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/nepa.

Vale, Lawerence J. “Introduction: Public Housing Transformations - New Thinking About
Old Projects.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 12, 3 (1995): 181-185.

Vargas, Zaragosa. Labor Rights Are Civil Rights: Mexican American Workers in
Twentieth-Century America. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2005. 225-226.

Von Hoffman, Alexander. “Why They Built the Pruitt-Igoe Project.” Joint Center for
Housing Studies, Harvard University. Accessed August 28, 2015.
http://www.soc.iastate.edu/sapp/PruittIgoe.html.

WorkSource California. “General Information.” Accessed January 11, 2016.
http://www.worksourcecalifornia.com/information/WS_general_information.htm.

YouthBuild Philadelphia Charter School. “Vocational Training: Building Trades.”
Accessed June 24, 2015. http://www.youthbuildphilly.org/construction.html.

119
Appendix A:
Bedroom and Income Limits for HACLA
Number of
Bedrooms
Number of Persons
Minimum
Number of Persons
Maximum
0 1 1
1 1 2
2 2 4
3 4 6
4 6 8
5 8 12

Number of
Persons In
Household
Extremely Low-Income
(30% of AMI)
Very Low Income
(50% of AMI)
Low Income
(80% of AMI)
1 $17,150 $29,050 $46,500
2 $19,950 $33,200 $53,150
3 $22,450 $37,350 $59,800
4 $24,900 $41,500 $66,400
5 $28,410 $44,850 $ 71,750
6 $32,570 $48,150 $77,050
7 $36,730 $51,500 $82,350
8 $40,890 $54,800 $87,650
9 $45,050 $58,100 $92,950
10 $49,210 $61,400 $98,250
11 $53,370 $64,750 $103,600
12 $57,530 $68,100 $108,900
13 $61,690 $71,400 $114,200

120
Appendix B:
Public Housing, Housing, and Heritage Conservation Acronyms
ACHP: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
ADAAG: Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines
AMI: Area Median Income
Capital Fund: Public Housing Capital Fund Program
CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act
CHA: Chicago Housing Authority
CNI: Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
The Collective: The LA Human Right to Housing Collective
EA: Energy Audit
EIS: Environmental Impact Statement
FHA: Federal Housing Authority
FPHA: Federal Public Housing Authority
HACA: Housing Authority of the City of Austin
HACLA: Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
HANO: Housing Authority of New Orleans
HAP: Housing Assistance Program
HRTC: Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit
IPM: Integrated Pest Management
HOPE: Hands on Preservation Experience
HPTC: Historic Preservation Training Center
HUD: United States Housing and Urban Development Department
LACAN: Los Angeles Community Action Network
LIHTC: Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
LOMOD: LA Cienega LOMOD
NPS: National Park Service
NEPA: National Environmental Protection Act
PB: Participatory Budgeting Project
PVB: Project Based Voucher
PHA: Public Housing Authority

121
PNA: Physical Needs Assessment
RAC: Resident Advisory Council
RAD: Redevelopment through Rental Assistance Demonstration
Section 106: Section 106 of National Historic Preservation Act
SCANPH: Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing
S+C: Shelter Plus Care Program
UFAS: Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards
USHA: United States Housing Authority
VASH: Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing
WIA: Workforce Investment Act of 1998

122
Appendix C:
Aerials and Photos of Public Housing Developments
The following sets of photos are of each public housing development in the city of
Los Angeles. The aerials display the acres that these developments encompass, the
common green areas, and their juxtaposition to the city’s grid. All developments have
access to a recreation center, a school, or both resources. If one were to visit these
garden apartments, there is an immense amount of resources for residents on-site and
off-site. For instance at William Mead Apartments, the development is isolated by
Metrolink rail tracks and industrial uses. Despite this, the development has vast
amounts of green space, parking, murals, clotheslines, two schools, a baseball field,
and a medical clinic. The close proximity of these resources feature architects’,
planners’, and city leaders’ intentions to create developments that fosters community
building.
The teal line indicates the boundaries of the public housing development. The
photos to the right of the maps are street-level photos from HACLA. Each photo
displays resident’s access to green open space and highlight a few of close by
resources. Each set of photos were adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and
the Public Housing Gallery from HACLA.

123
Avalon Gardens has a small community center, which is used by the RAC for
community programming. Across the street along Avalon Boulevard are the Dymally
Senior High School, Watts Learning Center Middle School, and the Green Meadows
Recreation Center.

Avalon Gardens, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority of
the City of Los Angeles.

124
Estrada Courts & Extension has medical provider - AltaMed Health Services and a
community center. The development is immediately west of Christopher Dena
Elementary School and the Lou Costello Jr. Recreation Center. Two blocks to the east
of Estrada Courts is Wyvernwood Garden Apartments.

Estrada Courts and Extension, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

125
Gonzaque Village (Hacienda Village) is across the street from Thomas Riley High
School, Compton Avenue Elementary School, Markham Middle School, the Augustus F.
Hawkins Post Office, Alma Reaves Woods Public Library, and Kaiser Permanente’s
counseling offices.

Gonzaque Village, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority
of the City of Los Angeles.

Imperial Courts has a recreation center.

Imperial Courts, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority of
the City of Los Angeles.

126
Jordan Downs has a recreation center and is across the street from David Starr Jordan
High School.

Jordan Down, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority of the
City of Los Angeles.

Mar Vista Gardens has a recreation center and the Mar Vista Community Service
Center. The development is across the street from Braddock Drive Elementary School,
and Stoner Avenue Elementary School.

Mar Vista Gardens, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority
of the City of Los Angeles.

127
Nickerson Gardens has a community center and the Nickerson Gardens Sage Center
– a daycare. The development is across the street from Flournoy Elementary, 112
th

Street Elementary School, and Verbum Dei High School.

Nickerson Gardens, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority
of the City of Los Angeles.

128
Ramona Gardens has a recreation center, AltaMed Health Services, and is abutting
Henry Alvarez Memorial Park. It is within walking distance of Murchison Street
Elementary, Santa Teresita Elementary School, and the Murchison Early Education
Center.

Ramona Gardens, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority
of the City of Los Angeles.

129
Rancho San Pedro & Extension has a community center.

Rancho San Pedro, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing Authority
of the City of Los Angeles.

Rose Hills Courts has a recreation center, is Rose Hill Park, and is across the street
from Our Lady of Guadalupe.

Rose Hills Courts, 2015. Source: Google Maps and Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

130
San Fernando Gardens encompasses a Catholic church, has a recreation center, is
across the street from Pacoima Charter School, and the David M. Gonzalez Recreation
Center.
San Fernando Gardens, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing
Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

131
William Mead Homes encompasses Ann Street Elementary School, Endeavor College
Prep, a recreation center, and AltaMed Health Services.
William Mead Homes, 2015. Source: Adapted by Leslie Palaroan from Google Maps and Housing
Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

132
Appendix D:
Interview Questions for Residents at William Mead Homes
1. How long have you been living in William Mead Homes?
2. What have you done to make this place a home?
3. What do you like/don’t like about living here?
a. What is a community asset here?
4. Does HACLA do a good job of maintaining the developments?
a. If no, what would you improve?
5. Do you know the history of this development?
a. If no, read Los Angeles Conservancy Overview and History of William
Mead Homes.
6. Now knowing the history, does it matter to you? Does it change your perception
of your neighborhood?
7. Do you think your neighbors would care about the history? Would telling them
about the history create more pride at William Mead?
a. If yes, what do you think would happen? What would you do?
8. Knowing that William Mead Homes is historically significant, what do you think
HACLA should do?
9. A few years ago, HACLA had proposed to replace the windows, but heritage
conservationists/historic preservationists fought against this, what are your
thoughts on this?

133
Appendix E:
Photos of HACLA Resident Jobs Program

HACLA Apprenticeship Program, circa 2014. Source: Section 3, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

134

Section 3 Resident Jobs Program at Nickerson Gardens, circa 2014. Source: Section 3, Housing
Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

135

Accessibility Ramps at Nickerson Gardens, circa 2014. Source: Section 3, Housing Authority of the City
of Los Angeles.

136

Repainting at Nickerson Gardens, circa 2014. Source: Section 3, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles.

137

Section 3 Resident Jobs Program Participants at Nickerson Gardens, circa 2014. Source: Section 3,
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Mapping heritage justice in the city of Los Angeles

PDF

Preserving street names in Los Angeles, California

PDF

Deconstruction: a tool for sustainable conservation

PDF

Using the UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape framework: a case study of the Pico-Union neighborhood

PDF

Historic preservation in the United States Air Force: exploring new frontiers

PDF

Celebrating conformity: preserving Henry Doelger's midcentury post-war suburb

PDF

Legacy business program implementation in American urban immigrant neighborhoods: a case study of Little Tokyo and Chinatown, Los Angeles

PDF

Saving Old Pasadena: where locals took on City Hall and won

PDF

Success stories: an exploration of three nonprofits working in preservation, affordable housing, and community revitalization

PDF

Preserving California City: an exploration into the city plan preservation of a mid-century, master-planned community

PDF

From Ramona to the Brady Bunch: assessing the historical significance of sites used in movies and television shows

PDF

Greening historic districts with solar roofs: an exploration of Western Heights in Los Angeles

PDF

Identifying and conserving Pacoima: a heritage conservation study of a minority enclave in the San Fernando Valley

PDF

Mobilizing heritage conservation as a tool for urban resilience: linkages and recommendations

PDF

Drag culture of Los Angeles: intangible heritage through ephemeral places

PDF

Yuba-Sutter: a case study for heritage conservation in Punjabi-American communities

PDF

Clinton Marr: bringing Modernism to the Inland Empire

PDF

Engaging today's youth at house museums: forging a vision for the Gamble House

PDF

Reconstructing Eden: the Armenian community of Yettem, CA

PDF

Seeing beyond the fog: preserving San Francisco's cultural heritage in the Clement Street Corridor

Asset Metadata

Creator Palaroan, Leslie-Anne Flores (author)

Core Title Empowering communities through historic rehabilitation: creating a maintenance plan for public housing developments in Los Angeles

School School of Architecture

Degree Master of Heritage Conservation

Degree Program Heritage Conservation

Publication Date 02/22/2016

Defense Date 01/28/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag affordable housing,Heritage Conservation,Historic Preservation,historic rehabilitation,OAI-PMH Harvest,Public housing

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Sandmeier, Trudi (committee chair), Hall, Peyton (committee member), Horak, Katie (committee member)

Creator Email lapalaroan@gmail.com,palaroan@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-211788

Unique identifier UC11278155

Identifier etd-PalaroanLe-4126.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-211788 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-PalaroanLe-4126.pdf

Dmrecord 211788

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Palaroan, Leslie-Anne Flores

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA