Some Residents Critical of City’s Wide-Ranging Redevelopment Plans : Neighborhoods: Those who want to be excluded fear lower real estate values and congestion.

LONG BEACH —  A city plan to jump-start neighborhood economies damaged in last spring’s riots has raised the ire of some residents who say too much is happening too fast.

City officials want to encompass nearly half of the city in a redevelopment project area under special “fast track” rules approved by the state Legislature shortly after the disturbances. Under the law, redevelopment agency officials may speed up the process by delaying such standard procedures as studying the effects of redevelopment on the environment and on neighborhoods.

But some residents compared the project to a runaway train and asked to be excluded from the area.

On Sunday, about 25 people met with Councilman Alan S. Lowenthal to discuss their concerns.

“I feel like this plan is really a train heading straight for me, and I can’t get out of the way,” said Catherine Anderson-Larosa, president of Beach Citizens for Long Beach.

The proposed redevelopment area would include piecemeal chunks of the city, but generally would follow a path from Ocean Boulevard north to 36th Street along Atlantic and Pacific avenues. The project also would extend along the business corridors on Anaheim Street and Pacific Coast Highway as far east as Redondo Avenue. In the north part of town, the boundaries would follow Willow Street west to the city line.

Residents complained that the redevelopment would lower real estate values and create more congestion in coastal areas. They also voiced fears that their neighborhoods would be labeled “urban blight” and the Redevelopment Agency would condemn houses to allow business expansion.

And concern that plans were moving too fast was repeated by nearly everyone at Lowenthal’s meeting.

“You seem to be trying to sell us something,” resident Betsy Bredau said. “And it’s very hard for working people to find the time to fight City Hall.”

While residents worried their neighborhoods would be swept up in a frenzy of urban planning, city staffers tried to calm fears.

Julie Takahashi, a city planning aide, told the residents that the Redevelopment Agency had no intention of using powers of eminent domain to condemn housing. Most who attended the meeting were still skeptical, however.

“If the residents don’t want it, we’re certainly not going to force it on them,” said Redevelopment Agency Director Susan Shick, adding that property values usually rise in redevelopment areas.

Although the redevelopment project has not yet been approved, the City Council is expected to consider on Tuesday lopping 30 blocks off the proposed area in response to citizens’ concerns.

If the council approves, the area bordered by 10th and 3rd streets and Cherry and Walnut avenues would be deleted from the project.

At least one resident of Lowenthal’s 2nd District requested that her area remain in the redevelopment project area.

“I cannot foresee any event or situation contributing to the improvement of Long Beach other than the Redevelopment Project; it is the ‘only game in town’!” wrote businesswoman Carole Metour, who lives on Gaviota Avenue, in a letter to council members.

Another area, bordered by 3rd Street, Orange Avenue, Ocean Boulevard and Bonito Avenue, also will be considered for exclusion, Shick said.

Representatives of the neighborhood group in that area, the Alamitos Beach Neighborhood Assn., said they did not want to participate in the redevelopment.