Conformity-
Much of the value in preserving vernacular architecture lies not only in each individual building and the history of its architects, but also in the living history of neighborhood coherency that promotes the well-being of its residents.
The 5900 block of Buffalo Avenue (north of Califa Street – south of Oxnard Street) was definitely developed with that theme in mind.
There are 10 residential properties on the block, consisting of 2 small single-family homes (directly across the street from the proposed monument) and eight multi-family dwellings. The multi-family dwellings consist of two triplexes (proposed monument), two 4-unit buildings, two 5-unit buildings, a 15-unit building, and a 44-unit building.
They were built between 1949 and 1964, with the exception of the 15-unit building that was constructed in 1972, which was built by Michael Mellenthin, William Mellenthin’s son (adjacent to the proposed monument).
A five-story modern building situated in the center of this block (directly across the street from 2 single family homes) would significantly disrupt the character of the neighborhood and appear incongruent with the surrounding architecture.
There are 85 units on this block. The proposed new development would be adding 104 units. That is more than double the number of units, an increase of 131 percent.
The proposed development also does not include any parking, which would exacerbate the existing parking shortage on the street.
The loss of the William Mellenthin Birdhouse Apartments would disrupt the architectural coherency of the entire neighborhood, not to mention the community at large. The design and layout of these apartments foster community and shares the architectural aesthetic of the neighborhood.
Historic Cultural Monuments-
The San Fernando Valley urgently needs to preserve its historic resources, yet it seems to have been grossly neglected.
The city of Los Angeles is 503 square miles, the San Fernando Valley is 260 square miles, making up more than half of the city.
Although the city of Los Angeles has 1,304 designated Historic Cultural Monuments, there are only 99 located in the San Fernando Valley, making up just 7.6% of the total.
Council District 2, where the proposed designation is located is one of the most underserved districts with only 10 monuments, a mere 0.8% of the total HCMs. Out of the 15 Council Districts, only one has less than Council District 2. Council District 4 has the most HCMs with 250, followed by CD-1 with 232.
The last designation monument in Council District 2 was the Studio City Golf and Tennis Club in September 2021. The majority of that has been razed to make way for Harvard-Westlake’s huge private sports facility as the HCM was limited to the clubhouse and light poles. It was also reallocated to CD-4 with the last Council redistricting along with 8 other monuments.
Andrew Salimian (Director of Advocacy) Los Angeles Conservancy stated, “We don’t have enough resources in the valley, I’ll just say that, and this is probably one of the best examples of what makes the valley great.”
The designation of the William Mellenthin Birdhouse Apartments not only represents an opportunity to recognize one of L.A.’s master builders who is well known and loved in the San Fernando Valley, it will preserve his last remaining One-Story Courtyard Apartment.
Is the proposed development on Buffalo Avenue actually Affordable Housing?
Is “Affordable Housing” really affordable? Maybe the question should be, Why should low-income tenants pay more for “affordable housing” than the average rental housing in the same area?
We all know there is a need for more affordable housing in Los Angeles. Although it appears some developers are taking advantage of the building incentives and exploiting the “loopholes” to increases their profits and that actually make these units more expensive to the low-income renters. The proposed 104 unit “affordable housing” project at 5920-30 Buffalo Avenue in Valley Glen is a prime example of this.
The Los Angeles Housing Department determines the rent limits for affordable housing units, but they do not stipulate any size parameters or standards. Only the amount that can be charged based on Studio, One-Bedroom, Two-Bedroom, etc. and the tenant’s income level.
The proposed building will have 82 low-income units and 21 moderate-income units. The building will be comprised of 66 one-bedroom and 38 studio units, with 80% for low-income tenants. This all sounds great, until you look at the planned size of the units and compare it to the local rental market.
Per the Developer’s proposed plans, their studio units are 225 square feet and the one-bedrooms are 286 square feet. These are what are referred to as “micro-units”. As a reference, the average one-car garage is 240 square feet.
Per the Los Angeles Housing Department’s 2024 Income and Rent Limit – Land Use Schedule VI, the owner can charge a low-income renter $975/month for a Studio unit and $1,114/month for a One-bedroom unit. This equates to $4.33 per square foot for the Studio units and $3.90 per square foot for the One-bedroom units.
Based on a Comparative Market Analysist of available apartments for rent within a half mile radius of the proposed development, the average apartment in the area leases for $2.49 per square foot.
| Address | Bd+Bth | Size SF | Parking | Price | Price/SF |
| 6210 Woodman Ave | 1+1 | 765 | Yes | $1,878 | $2.45 |
| 13713 Oxnard (newer) | 1+1 | 850 | Yes | $2,379 | $2.80 |
| 5904 Woodman Ave | 1+1 | 950 | Yes | $1,795 | $2.31 |
| 13931 Bessemer St | 1+1 | 750 | Yes | $1,850 | $2.47 |
| 5820 Hazeltine Ave | 1+1 | 850 | Yes | $2,060 | $2.42 |
| Average | 1+1 | 833 | Yes | $1,992 | $2.49 |
| Based on Low-Income | |||||
| Proposed Buffalo | 1+1 | 286 | No | $1,114 | $3.90 |
| Proposed Buffalo | Studio | 225 | No | $975 | $4.33 |
| *Source: Apartments.com on 03/03/2025 | |||||
Why should low-income renters pay 56.6% more for “affordable” housing? For an apartment smaller than the average one-car garage?
On the other hand, this works out great for developers looking to maximize profits.
The allure of micro-units for investors is the idea of adding more units per square foot. The higher rent per square foot equals higher returns for investors. An investor’s return is higher with micro-units than with a traditional multifamily complex.
Source: Matthews Real Estate Investment Services, a commercial real estate investment services and technology firm.
These “affordable housing” incentives are just the newest way for real estate investors to profit off the eviction of long-time residents and bypass environmental protections. It seems as if they created it themselves. Being able to destroy thousands of naturally affordable units in the city with existing California State Tenant Protections is truly mind-boggling.
With these new policies that allow most affordable housing to be built taller, denser, and without parking, private developers have been rushing to construct new apartments. Many are developing affordable housing for the first time (as is the Buffalo Ave owner). All are looking to turn a profit.
The proposed development on Buffalo Avenue would be demolishing rent-stabilized units, already existing TRULY affordable housing in Valley Glen.