Larchmont’s beloved market faces uncertain future amid backroom land deal
MARKET is a popular community hub.
On any given Sunday and Wednesday, the surface parking lot at 209 N. Larchmont Blvd. transforms into a bustling community hub. The Larchmont Farmers Market, a fixture since at least 2001, draws families, neighbors, and visitors to its stalls of fresh produce, local crafts, and lively conversation. For decades, this unassuming lot—known officially as Municipal Lot No. 694—has been more than just a place to park; it’s been the beating heart of Larchmont Village, a rare patch of public space in a city where such places are increasingly scarce.
Beyond the market, Lot 694 is also regularly used for special seasonal events and charitable activities, serving as Larchmont’s de facto town square and gathering place for the community.
But now, the future of this cherished gathering spot hangs in the balance. A proposed land deal between the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) and Larchmont Properties, Ltd. has ignited a wave of concern and suspicion among residents, business owners, and market vendors. At the center of the controversy: a complex, decades-old tangle of property rights, a subterranean parking garage, and what some are calling a “backroom deal” that could reshape the very character of Larchmont Boulevard.
History of Lot 694
A TYPICAL SUNDAY at the Farmers Market, Lot 694.
The story of Lot 694 is, in many ways, the story of Larchmont itself. Since the turn of the century, the lot has hosted the farmers market, serving as a rare open space for community events, neighborhood celebrations, and the everyday rituals that knit a community together. “It’s not just a parking lot,” says one longtime resident. “It’s where we see our neighbors, support local farmers, and keep the small-town feel alive in the middle of Los Angeles.”
The lot’s central location has also been vital for local businesses, providing much-needed parking for shoppers and helping sustain the economic vitality of the area. Over the years, Lot 694 has become a symbol of what makes Larchmont unique: a walkable, welcoming village in a city better known for its sprawl.
The deal: swap & high stakes
The current controversy centers on a proposed agreement that would see LADOT enter into a long-term ground lease with Larchmont Properties, Ltd. to build private commercial uses on Lot 694. In exchange, the city claims that it would gain clear ownership of Subterranean Lot No. 732, a four-level underground parking facility across the street. The roots of this arrangement stretch back to 1986, when the city and Larchmont Properties entered into a “Parking Lease and Option to Purchase Agreement” for Lot 732—a deal that, for as yet undisclosed reasons, may have never fully resolved, leaving the city’s ownership now in limbo for decades.
Now, with the original lease expired and the ownership question currently unsettled, city officials and Larchmont Properties have quietly negotiated a swap: the city gets the underground garage, and Larchmont Properties gets the right to develop the surface lot across the street that has long served as the community’s front porch.
“A backroom deal”
News of the proposed deal has landed like a thunderclap in Larchmont. Many residents say they were blindsided by the agenda item, which appeared with little outreach and scant opportunity for community input. “This feels like a backroom deal,” says a local business owner. “We’re talking about the future of our neighborhood, and most people didn’t even know this was happening.”
Why the secrecy? Were there threatened lawsuits? Would any potential claims be time-barred? Why is this coming to a head now, and with little to none community input?
The concerns go beyond process. The Larchmont Farmers Market, which relies on Lot 694 for its operations every Sunday and Wednesday, could be forced to relocate—possibly to a much smaller site or even out of the neighborhood altogether. City officials have floated the idea of moving the market to a 17-space surface area adjacent to the former RiteAid, potentially closing part of the boulevard to traffic. But many worry that such a move would disrupt the market’s accessibility and diminish its role as a community anchor.
The potential loss of parking also looms large. Local businesses and residences fear that development on the lot will lead to parking overflow on already parking-starved Larchmont, making it harder for customers to visit, and threatening the economic health and residential character of the larger area. “We need more parking, not less,” says one shop owner. “If you take away the lot, you take away the lifeblood of Larchmont.”
Public vs. private
Proponents of the deal argue that it will resolve a long-standing legal and financial headache for the city, finally bringing the valuable subterranean garage into public ownership and generating new revenue through the ground lease for Lot 694. The LADOT board report notes that the deal is expected to have “no impact on the General Fund” and could add a “multi-million dollar asset” to the city’s Special Parking Revenue Fund.
But critics question whether these benefits justify the loss of a vital community space. “This isn’t just about money,” says a resident. “It’s about what kind of neighborhood we want to be. Do we want more retail, or do we want to preserve the places that bring us together?”
The debate echoes similar controversies across Los Angeles, where public land has often been leased or sold for private development, sometimes at the expense of affordable housing, open space, or community needs. In each case, the central question remains: Who gets to decide the future of public land, and for whose benefit?
The imperative for public purpose, transparency, and community voice
As the LADOT Board prepares to consider the agreement, calls for transparency and public engagement are growing louder. Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez has not taken a position on the lease deal, but his office has emphasized the importance of the Farmers Market in any plan: “The Larchmont Farmers Market must be considered a key part of the conversation. And, avoiding a legal battle is key,” his office said.
In a letter to the Board, Soto-Martinez urged commissioners to postpone any decision to ensure the community’s voice is heard: “Lot 694 is something more than a City parking lot. It is also Larchmont Village’s town square… The Larchmont community as a whole needs time to understand the implications of this decision, and as their elected official, I welcome their input to ensure I make the best possible recommendations in response to this report. They deserve to attend your meeting and speak directly to you before you make any decisions.”
Residents are being encouraged to send comments to city officials and to attend upcoming meetings. For many, the fight for Lot 694 is about more than a parking lot—it’s about preserving the soul of Larchmont Village and ensuring that public land serves the public good.
What’s Next?
The fate of Lot 694—and the future of the Larchmont Farmers Market—now rests with city officials and the outcome of a process that, many hope, will become more open and inclusive in the weeks ahead. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the community’s voice will be crucial in determining whether this corner of Larchmont remains a place for everyone, or becomes just another retail address.
By Jon Vein
Category: News
