Council approves Echo Park building lease for community program despite parking objections, 12-1

The Los Angeles City Council voted 12 to 1 to approve item 29, a request tied to a proposed Echo Park community/youth center, moving the matter forthwith to the mayor. The approval followed a lengthy public hearing in which business owners, church representatives and neighborhood groups pressed the council to protect parking that they say is vital to local commerce.

Property owner Richard Gray and several business representatives told the council the parking lot behind Sunset Boulevard is essential. Gray said the lot and its alley access provide circulation and parking that help customers reach the business district; he said potential tenants have declined to lease because of the proposed closure. Jeff Brighouse, who previously served on a citizens advisory committee for the Echo Park–Silver Lake community plan, said taking the parking lot without full study was “completely without substantial justification.”

Business owner Leonard Lim and others said the three historic off‑street lots serving the district are the “lifeblood” of local retail. Lim said the lot at issue contains about 80 spaces and that the group seeking use of part of the lot holds a use permit that requires 33 parking spaces; he said the plan under discussion would preserve roughly nine spaces on that lot while removing other access. Echo Park Chamber President Bonnie Scanlon and the Echo Park Improvement Association warned that eliminating roughly 30 percent of public parking in the block would undercut ongoing economic revitalization and cited recent private investments by local businesses to secure parking.

David Wood, property manager for the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, said the church uses the lots for large events and Sunday services and expressed interest in partnering on a longer‑term parking solution. Several speakers, including Peter Fitzpatrick, said they were not properly notified of the hearing until shortly before it occurred.

Councilmember Goldberg (Miss Goldberg) said the specific council action before members concerned a long‑term lease for a building on Lemoyne and “does not affect, by the way, the parking at all, that's not even before us.” She also warned that $900,000 in Proposition K park funding is time‑sensitive and could be lost if elements of the project are not completed by June 30; she said staff is exploring state funding to create subterranean parking beneath the surface lot.

Department of Transportation (DOT) studies, as summarized by staff during the hearing, indicated that when the four adjacent parking lots are considered together they were not consistently full on weekdays or weekends, but councilmembers and speakers disagreed about whether those counts predict future demand for a revitalized district.

After hearing objections and support, the council approved the item: roll call produced “12 ayes, 1 no.” The item was ordered forthwith, per Miss Goldberg's request; the council also recorded that the lease before them did not in itself change parking access. The public hearing record will remain part of the file and the council asked staff to continue to explore parking mitigation measures.

Why it matters: The decision advances a community facility project and the use of Proposition K funds while leaving unresolved disputes over on‑site public parking and long‑term parking solutions for a dense, mixed‑use neighborhood.