Proposition U
{{Short description|Referendum in Los Angeles, California, USA}}
Proposition U was a ballot initiative for the city of Los Angeles. Proposed by Zev Yaroslavsky, Joel Wachs,{{Cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-03-25-me-311-story.html|title=Wachs Makes Transition From Chic to Down-Home|author=Richard Simon |date=March 25, 1987|website=Los Angeles Times}} and Marvin Braude, and placed on the ballot in November 1986, Prop. U aimed to slow development in the city. Voters approved Prop. U by a 2-1 margin. The passage of the ballot initiative halved the allowable residential density throughout much of Los Angeles.{{Cite journal |last=Severen |first=Christopher |date=2023 |title=Commuting, Labor, and Housing Market Effects of Mass Transportation: Welfare and Identification |journal=Review of Economics and Statistics |volume=105 |issue=5 |pages=1073–1091 |doi=10.1162/rest_a_01100 |issn=0034-6535 |url=https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/frbp/assets/working-papers/2018/wp18-14r.pdf}}
Aim
Prop. U aimed to slow the development of high rises in the city. While the downtown business core was exempt from Prop. U, the proposition established density levels for other areas of the city.{{Cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-03-29-re-982-story.html|title=Prop. U: Debate Goes on : Proponents See Boon; Opponent Cites Harm : Growth Limit Would Lead to a Better City|date=March 29, 1987|website=Los Angeles Times}} Prop. U also specifically reduced the allowable size of new buildings on 70-85 percent of the commercial and industrial areas of Los Angeles by one-half.{{Cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-07-05-me-2345-story.html|title=Yaroslavsky Bets Future on Slow-Growth Movement|date=July 5, 1987|website=Los Angeles Times}}
Supporters and critics
Prop. U was supported by local political groups, such as Not Yet New York, as well as community activists such as Gerald Silver.{{Cite web|url=http://www.laweekly.com/2004-11-18/news/rebel-with-a-plan/|title="Rebel With a Plan"|work=LA Weekly}}{{cite news |last=Quinn |first=James |date=1987-11-22 |title=Homeowner Leader Proves Formidable as Enemy of Growth |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-11-22-me-23703-story.html |work=Los Angeles Times |access-date=2025-01-06}} Although Prop. U had no organized opposition, critics included developers and members of the city council, who argued that the measure would cost jobs.{{Cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-11-06-me-16641-story.html|title=The State Election: Growth-Control Victory Hailed as 'Dawn of New Era'|date=November 6, 1986|website=Los Angeles Times}} In an opinion piece for the Los Angeles Times, one critic called the measure too broad.{{Cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-10-29-me-7719-story.html|title=No on Proposition U|date=October 29, 1986|website=Los Angeles Times}}
Passage
Legacy
Prop. U is still considered a core rule by which builders in the Los Angeles area have to abide when constructing new office buildings,{{Cite web|url=http://www.laweekly.com/2008-02-28/news/bitter-homes-gardens/full/|title="City Hall's "Density Hawks" Are Changing L.A.'s DNA"|work=LA Weekly}} but limits for residential construction have been eased by the passage of Measure JJJ, which encourages density and affordable housing near transit hubs.
A 2023 study found that the passage of Proposition U just before the opening of the Los Angeles Metro Rail substantially undercut the viability of Metro Rail by restricting dense residential housing near transit stations.
See also
{{portal|1980s|Architecture|Greater Los Angeles|Politics}}
- Measure S, failed 2017 initiative proposing similar limits on development in the city