SR-810811-10B/6 -L-3
~~ ~ ~ ~~~~
Santa Monica, California, August 11, 1981
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Recommendations of Citizens Task Force on Development
in Commercial and Industrial Zones on parameters .for
.Development of Three Sites.
Introduction
This report for~•aards to the City Council the recommendations of
the Citizens Taslc Force on Development in Commercial and Indus-
trial Zones regarding parameters for development of the sites
at 2501 Colorado Boulevard (proposed for development by P7elton
Becket Associates and Becket Investment Corporation, and referred
to as the '°'r7elton Becket site"); at 2600-Colorado Boulevard
(proposed for development by Greenwood & Company and referred
to as the "Greenwood site ), and along Main Street.
Background
On May 26, 1981, the City Council, by resolution, established
a Citizens Task Force on Development in Commercial and Industrial
Zones. On June 23, twelve local residents and businesspeople
were appointed to serve on the Task Force by the Council which
directed that three subcommittees be formed to wark with the
oraners and developers of the project sites in order to establish
appropriate par_araeters for development. The full Task Force
was requested to recommend to the City Council a land use and
development plan for each site.
The subcommittees for the '+?elton Becket site and the Greenc•~ood
site were combined by the Task Force because of the proximity
~® s
auc ~ 1 tsar,
Mayor and '.City Council -2- August 11, 1981
of the development sites and the similarity of potential impacts.
This subcommittee met three times each with the representatives
of these two developers to discuss their mutual concerns and the
options for development of the two sites.
During the course of the subcommittee's work, ti4elton-Becket's
partner elected not to continue with the project as originally
proposed and the project site has been reduced to include only
the southerly'-half of the Welton Becket site; that portion
fronting on Colorado Avenue. This reduction in tine site area
is reflected in the Task Force's recommendations.
Notices of a public hearing were distributed door-to-door by
staff to residents within 400 feet of these project sites and ;.
a public hearing was held on July 29, 1981, at which residents
from the immediate neighborhood; employees from Systems Develop-
ment Corporation, a potential occupant of the proposed Becket
project; and other interested residents voiced their concerns
and offered suggestions.
The D1ain Street subcommittee, recognizing the efforts of the
Main Street Planning Group in creating the recently completed
main Street D4aster Plan, requested that the Planning Group
consider the additional concerns of the Citizens Task Force.
Some members of the Main Street Planning Group discussed these
concerns aad prepared recommendations which crere presented to the
full Citizens Task Force at a public izearing i`7eld on July 30, 1981.
Mayor and City Council -3-
August 11, 1981
RECOMMENDATIONS OF CITIZENS TASK FORCE
On the basis of the foregoing meetings and discussions, the
Citizens Task Force on Development in Commercial and Industrial
Zones adopted the following recommendations for parameters for
development of the project sites at its July 30, 1981 meeting.
Welton Becket Site
1) 400,000 sq.ft, of office space in 4 floors on the western
two-thirds of the project site. A fifth floor might be allowed,
but any increase in floor area would require an increase in the
amount of housing to be provided, as set forth below.
2) 40 units of housing affordable to low and moderate income.
families (as defined by HUD) to be developed off-site at the
developer's expense. This is the equivalent of one unit per
10,000 sq.ft. floor area. The housing requirement will'be
increased by one. unit for each 5,000 sq.ft. developed over the
400,000 sq.ft. threshold set above. The mechanism for any
subsidies remains unestablished,',but would not be at .the City°s
expense. To the extent legally possible, employees meeting the
income criteria who are already residents of Santa Monica would
be given the first opportunity to occupy these units. Priority
would then be given to other Santa Monica residents with
appropriate incomes before the units were made available to
persons not presently residents of the City,
Mayor. and City Council -4-
August 11, 1981
3) A park to be developed on the eastern one-third of the site
and deeded to the City.
4) A day care center to be constructed in the park and either
deeded to the City or leased at a favorable rate. Preference
would be given to project employees and community. residents. The
developer would not be responsible for operation of the center.
5) 1504 sq.ft. additional space reserved for community use as
needs are determined by the community.
6) A Social Service/Cultural Arts Fee equal to I.5% of the cost
of land and buildings in the project_
7) Joh-training and Affirmative Action Programs which. should
extend to tenants of the project as well as during construction,
8} Traffic Management and circulation plan which might include
flex-time, reduced parking rates for van pools and other carpool
systems,. making parking available to the public on weekends if a
City transit program is established which would make this area
feasible to ease beach parking overload, bus tokens for employees.
9) Construction of the project should conform to measures in the
proposed Energy Code,
Mayor and City Council -5-
August 11, 1981
The following items were suggested by Welton Becket Associates
and the Task Force feels they should also be considered:
A) Gifted Student Program: On a yearly basis, three selected
students, by agreement with Santa Monica City College, will be
provided the opportunity of a paid summer job at WBA. Special
emphasis will be placed upon preparing the students for a
college career in architecture.
B) Scholarship Grant: Two $5,000 scholarships will be made
available through the auspices of Santa Monica City College on
an annual basis for the School of Architecture. These scholar-
ships will be awarded by agreement with-the Santa Monica
College authorities, to the outstanding graduating students for
use in furthering their education in architecture.
~) Adult Continuing Educations Welton Becket Associates will
provide personnel to teach and the facility (i.e. public meeting
room) to accommodate architectural or urban planning classes.
This will be offered to Santa Monica City College in an attempt
to establish a continuing education program for the adult
community.
D) Retail Space: Of the approximately 15,000 square feet of
planned retail space within the Project, one-third of the area
or approximately 5,000 square feet will be offered to the public
at a favorable rental rate for those particular retail uses which
the area residents believe to be necessary retail uses.
Mayor and City Council -6-
August 11, 1981
Welton Becket Associates has been advised of these recommendations
from the Citizens Task Force.
Greenwood Site
1) A maximum of 290,000 sq.ft. of office condominiums. with a
maximum five stories.
2) The eastern one acre of the site to be devoted to affordable
housing which would consist of a minimum of 30 units(distributed,
if feasible, among all low and moderate income categories, but at
a minimum, 50% should meet low income standards and 50%, moderate
income standards, as defined by HUD). Developer to have access to
any federal or state subsidies available to-the City. To the extent
legally possible; employees and owners meeting income criteria who
are already residents of Santa Monica should be given priority to
occupy these units. Units would then be made available to other
Santa Monica residents with appropriate incomes before non-residents
are considered.
3) Space for a day care center to be leased to the City at an
agreed-upon favorable rate. Preference should be given to
employees and residents in use of this facility. Greenwood would
not be responsible for operation of the facility.
4) 1500 sq.ft. space for community needs;
5) A fee of 1.5% of cost of land and improvements to be paid to
the City for arts. and social services.
Mayor and City Council -7- August 11, 1981
6) Appropriate Job Training and Affirmative Action Programs to
be determined by Greenwood and the City Council which would
encourage businesses owned by minorities and women, as well as
programs implemented during the construction phase,
7) An alternative traffic management and circulation plan
which might include "flex-time", reduced parking rates for
carpooling, requirements that parking spaces sold with office
condominiums remain open to the public on weekends on a space
available basis if a City transit program is developed which
would make this area feasible to ease beach parking overloads;
and bus tokens for employees..
8) Construction of the project should conform to measures in
the proposed City Energy Code.
Greenwood and Co. has been advised of the recommendations of the
Citizens Task Force and has taken them under wnsideration.
Main Street
At its July 30, 1981 meeting, the Task Force decided by an
unanimous motion that the complexity of issues in the Main Street
area require further study and the Task Force is unable to make a
recommendation at this time. Their recommendation will be
forwarded to the City Council as soon as possible, but no later
than October 1, 1981.
Mayor and City Council -8- August 11, 1981
Alternatives
The City Council may accept the recommendations of the Citizens
Task Force, alter them, or reject them.
Recommendation
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council accept the
recommendations of the Citizens Task Force on bevelopment in
Commercial and Industrial Zones as the parameters within which
agreements are negotiated for development of these sites.
Prepared by: Patricia Reilly
Christopher Rudd
TO P4EMBERS OF THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL:
I AMA SAN^lA biONICA RESIDENT WHO SUPPORTS THE i1TEL~id BECKET DEVELOP-
MENT ON THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF THEIR PROPERTY (THE OFFICE BUILDING),
EXACTLY AS THEY PROPOSE IT. I Abi OPPOSED TO THE RECOI~iMENDATIONS OF
THE TASK FORCE FOR THIS DEVELOPP'tENT*AS SUBMITTED IN THE TASK FORCE
NiEMO TO THE CITY COUNCIL, DATED 8/11/81.
NR?'7E ADDRESS
D~G3. , ~ /~ti .~ /.y.csrJ
'Y-~~--
~ ~ ~ `~ ~ceh r7~
~ ~~~ ~`- ~ ~-~GmL
-- _
t'~ /. ~..K' fr 4...
~ ~
.r
_ r
~c~ U~ Cd ~~J.,
~ ` ) f f~ i~ v
~
n ~ ~
~ r~~~i~yi,C-C,d .
C
`!
/_' r
v
^
c'T ,. J ~
..~tvC.~C%
,.
r , f ~ ~j ~.
l
~
~ , j ,, r-
3 - -~-`
, ~,~_
j ~
(
u
~ ~ ~ ,_ ~ .,~..,~~, ~, _~:
.
,,,
` ~i _
,f` c, ~C"+'Z,, fro~tf~lar ~~. ~'t~:-~-,Lt,.~ UI~~E~/L ~~.
/ °: i ~G .1
~ ~
~ - ~ 4 ~~~T~~r~~ ~a~~
i _...
.. . J
t
_ ~
TO MEMBERS OF THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL:
I AMA SANTA MONICA RESIDENT WHO SUPPORTS THE WELipON BECKET DEVELOP-
MENT ON THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF THEIR PROPERTY (THE OFFICE BUILDING),
EXACTLY. AS THEY PROPOSE IT. I ArS OPPOSED TO THE RECOI'LMENDATIONS OF
THE TASK FORCE FOR THIS DEVELOPN~NT*AS SUBMITTED IN THE TASK FORCE
MEMO TO THE CITY COUNCIL, DATED 8/11/81.
SE
IQ
A? ADDRESS
t
/
' ~'~~,1
l/ a~~tirV~ /G tf s- ~ 3 n--f 5~ ~ ~" ~' ~ ~ 7~3 '
!6~ ..
,
, c
~ ,
~..~~ ~ 4
~-~
1
Q ~ t-crz-
~ 1/y-q ~2 S~ - S~ b~tC o y-o3
/~I • ~1 ~~-~~-~.. ~ 900`3
.E
Gc
f~
~ ~ •
.
~
~ &z c~
"` , ~ ~~~~L~ ~~~Gy
~ `~ "~
~ ~
~ ~o
~,~ a s i
~ ~
~~
~
~
Sl ~.
,~.~. a }
_ _ f s ~~--
-,
2
ti
T
~
/ / ~/
i 2 ! ~- ° ~' ~~ ~3 Sa u/T~ ~t~(oh. t ~, et a ~ ° i
< ' ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ltl lJ
//,~
?
,~
/"`
-
~- `~~p~
~G ~d jL~r : e~ e 11~u,~ if l ~ • ~- ~~OFa-~
.
/
,
-
~~~
1 /~
Jam' -~ `~11. N a ~ ~ ~j
; _
~ F'!
~ u t~Li~t W~L~.*~ ~x ~~Vc~ :S>4h'~A~ninty 900
(o~„t .
NJc` as~o3
9
/oz~ 0
a~e~r ~
±
,2S~f1 ~ L ~t ~ t1t f! ~E - ~ o°t! ~' !G ~'U~j
~-z ~ 3 ~ 90 ~ oz
s ~ d SSG ~ '';
n ~
~
I
- ~~3~ I1 ~~~~~-~-? ova ~~ ~d f`c~ 1
+
,
,
O I~iET~4BERS OF THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL:
I AMA SANTA MONICA RESIDENT -dli0 SUPPORTS THE WELDON BECKET DEVELOP-
MENT ON THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF THEIR PROPERTY '(THE OFFICE BUILDING),
EXACTLY AS THEY PROPOSE IT. I AM OPPOSED TO THE RECOI~iMENDATIONS OF
THE TASK FORCE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT*AS SUBMITTED IN THE TASK FORCE
MEMO TO THE CITY COUNCIL, DATED 8/I1/$l.
~A~~ ,` ADDRESS
_ : r i !!~~ ~~
C
B ( ~
~~~, ~~ ~~ /ifil/,fly
i
~- O? ~ '~==-~ ~ C
~~ ~1~~
~~~ ~o~
9~3 fa-
Cam- S ~5-I i. s
~3 , S~-lv~t1- urc~i~~
i
TO MEI~iBERS OF THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL:
I AMA SANTA MONICA RESIDENT WHO SUPPORTS TEE WEL~OI4 BECKET DEVELOP-
r,Rn~m OA? THE SO[?THE~,y H_T~LF OF THEIR PROPERTY (THE OFFICE BUILDING} ,
PVTISmt .i ~~ .~. _ _
O MEMBERS OF THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL:
I AMA SANTA MONICA RESIDENT WHO SUPPORTS THE wELPON SECRET DEVELOP-
.,.s,.qm OTM mgF SOnmugRLY HALF OF THEIR PROPERTY (THE OFFICE BUILDING),
EXACTLY AS THEY PROPOSE IT. I. AM OPPOSED TO THE BEGONE^SENDATYONS'OF "
THE TASK FORCE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT*AS SUBMITTED IN THE TASK FORCE
D1EM0 TO THE CITY COUNCIL, .DATED 8/11/81.
,7 Z k4F
ADDRESS
/'
\~_
~ r
c
F
7
~.~
. T o
*I?dC:~UDZNG RECO.•II~~T.dDATIONS 2, 3, 4, S, 6, 7 P\D
ti
ti
DATE: August 3, 1981
T0; Mayor Yannatta Goldway
FRORI: City Clerk.
SUBJECT: Attendance on Planning .Task Forces
Attached is information regarding attendance on Planning. Task
Forces, as requested by you at the July 28th council meeting:
RESIDENTIAL PLANNING TASK FORCE:
Kenyon tVebster, Planning Depart>ent staff support member,
reports that attendance is ;good, but that the Task Farce
requests an appointment fo fill the vacancy caused by
resignation of Robext Spencer Barnett. Councilmember
Reed has added that appointment to the agenda of August
4th,
NESGHBORHOOD PARTICIPATION/PERMIT PROCESS TASK FORCE:
Dennis Quilliam, Planning Department staff support member,
reports that attendance is good. Councilmember Zane .also.
reported good attendance at the July 2$th Council meeting
when the subject was discussed.
INDUSTRIAL /COMMERCIAL .TASK FORCE:
Patricia Reilly, Planning Department staff support member,
has transmitted a report on .attendance (attached) which
indicates that Ceorge Bergstrom has missed 6 out of 10
meetings and Bob Kleffel has missed 4 out of 10.
Dlayor Goldway, you commented at the July 28th meeting that you
would review the matter of attendance on tha Task Force meetings
and agendze it if necessary.
Attachment
~~ "
~t<i`IZ~NS 1 Ate- FORGE ON C~`~MMr~Gt/al_ ~ Ih,l~,~~ai VIAL
1J, Vrt_Ol-t~~ ~~~~ ; --
77~~ J
HOME
Russell Barnard `1- I-~-i -{-~-r-I -4- ~~!~-f--~ -f- -j-I -t-~ ~ -
=-
315 Montana Ave. #403
Santa Monica, CA 90402
George Bergstrom
712 N. Bundy Dr.
Los Angeles, CA
John Blumthal
2444 Oak St. #D
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Denise Duncan
827 - 15th St. #2
Santa Monica, CA 90403
John Gabree
2806 - 6th St.
Santa P9anica, CA 90405
Donald Girard
3040 Linda Lane
Santa Monica, CA 90405
C.J. Jones
2660 - 4th St.
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Gary Neville
1401 Ocean Front 41a7k
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Mary Newcombe
504 Pier Ave.
Santa.h'onica, CA 90405
Susan 07ivier
819 Ncwith Pl.
Venice, CA 90291
Noel k;eiss
1243 Yale St. ~f14
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Maurice Zeitlin
359 -.20th St.
Santa Monica, CA 90402.
~reg b~ov~U~in~~
®~ .~
f
`~'~~~_
fi~~i+
.~- i ~."
.wzc~ io ... __ .
__ /D
U ____
.'
~ ~
f _ __
i i ~ i
~ 1 _. __
i ! -
1 i ~ ! y
~ i ? ~ I _ _
I ~ ~ ,
~ i i
~ i
~ ~ ~. ~ I
` 1 w
i
-i- ? -~- -~- ~.~ i t ~D -1-'D .~.. ~ ,
r
i.
i
-- ~. i
0 ~- + .t d + ca c~ ~~-`~ ~- i
A D ~°'
ADDENDUM TO ITEM ZO-B j®.-
Santa Monica, California, August 11, 1982~~~ , `-198}
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Recommendations of Citizens Task Force on Development
in Commercial and Industrial Zones.
Introduction
This memo transmits information regarding the voting record of
members of the Citizens Task Force on Development in Commercial
and Industrial Zones on recommended development parameters, for
the 3 sites {2501 Colorado, 2600 Colorado and Main Street}
proposed for development.
Background
At its August 5, 1981 meeting the. members of the Citizens Task
Force on Development in Com~:ercial and Industrial Zones requested
staff to forward to the City Council the voting record on the
recommended parameters for development of the sites which the
group had considered. That voting record is shown below.
Recommendation on Welton Becket Site
Yes: Barnard, Blumthal, Broughton, Gabree, Girard, Jones,
Neville, Newcombe, Olivier, Yannatta Goldway, Zeitlin
No: Weiss
Abstain: Rleffel
Absent: Bergstrom
~ '~` O
!®-.~
AUf 2 1 1981'
Mayor and City Council -2-- August lI, 1981
(ADDENDUM} TO ITEM l0B)
Recommendation on Greenoiood Site
Yes: Barnard, Broughton, Gabree, Girard, Jones, Neville,
Newcombe, Olivier9 Yannatta Goldway, Zeitlin
No: Kleffel, Weiss
Abstain: Blumthal
Absent: Bergstrom
Recommendation re: Main Street
Yes: Barnard, Broughton, Gabree, Girard, Jones, Kleffel,Blumthal,
Neville, Newcombe, Olivier, Yannatta Goldway, Weiss, Zeitlin
No: None
Absent: Bergstrom
Prepared by: Patricia Reilly
PR:nh
U,4~-octs rTE,ys
AUG ~ 1 9:981 ~~ °,p
1;06 Princeton: Zc Arizona, Santa I.",onica, Ca., 90401+ August 11, 1;81
City_Council, Cit of Santa Tdoscow, 1685 T4ain Street, S. LI. Ca., 90401
Copies for --'ayor Ruth Yarnatta Goldvray Shearer etc., Councilperscrs --Zane,
--Press, --Conn, the reforming --Edwards, the reformed --Jer_r.ings(~and your
three or four good comments lately on inclusionary zoning and the impact of
regulations on the property owner at large , and most especially and respectfully
the st stable xncilperson on or near our side and point of view -- Chris Reed.
~==City clerk_Arn M. Shore (I have limited funding. Please make "affordable"
copies for Planning Director --James Lur.sford,, Planning Commissioners --Katz,
--Sullivan, --Kleffel, --'[otchkiss, --?<`cKee, --Cloke, --Shearer Staff members
--Kenyon "ebster of the CAC (if still ap^licable~~ Commercial Tack rr^orce --
Chem C. J. Jones ..- all members Permit and P;eighborhocd Planning Tas'.~ Force
Chrm -- 3ichard Abbe - all members ,.Architectural Review -- Chrm Steuhen .^rew -
all members, Residential Task Force - Chrm Crris Reed - all members especially
Gerald Goldman Acting City I:Ianwger --John Jallili or successor, City Attorney
--P,ober ivlyers, Rent Board Chairperson -- Neil Stone, Cow;nissiorers --Davis,
--Finkel,-- Lambert, --Allen, Adm, -- Howell Tumlin. There are some new
administrative staff and others ir, our growing 'd'morracy - as expensive as it
•r<ill be - that probably should be covered by these commur,icaticrs. The Task is
overc;helmirg to the average citizen. Lo rd help us in our plight:
Gentlepersons:
Some of the items on the azenda for the Cit_y_Council_ this evening,_~ug._.11,
and t`re views expressed by the Ccur;cil on similar items in the past cause me
to feel the need of at least e5:pressirg ar. opinion. I don't have the time
to attend personally. I dcr't have the time to put all my thcughts ?own. on
paper; I doubt that you would re~.d them anyway. But, at least I car, e; press
some disagreement with the why I aaticipate you gill vote o,rd put my opir.mon
on the record. Perhaps I can erceurage so,~~e o£ my friends, neighbors, and
associated property oieners to do like3rise.
Ttem 10 B Tre rest~inti ^r t"e `"eltcr Becket ~?5~^1 rolor-do~, Gr en r•^a~_
Project {2600 Colorado) and tilrin Streit T'lar.nir.€ Area (?j are incecuse ble and
unce.lled for. They violate every concept of "uniform zor _ng er.d ;;1anr i~ g"
as I have al•rays understood the lsv+. This__fQrm-o~Extprticn"_:nust be._breught
~} n a hal { .
~P_Q~ _ah es these groups of "cnrnor~te" developers eGn_ s_ub.^i t_ to some o£
these demands, as they already have, ar.d survive. After all, they are deriving
a principle part of their support from government and ~,overr.ment agencies, I
believe. Thus goverment "Tax itonies", in a sense, canoe used to offset the
cost of providing law-below-cost housing units, ccntributicrs to the social arts,
child care facilities, public parks, assembly rooms and lord. knows v:h.t else.
for the license to build their other planned projects for their o~.vr, benefit and
for the benefit of the community. I wonder vrhat normal business in the
private seo}~tir could support these concessicr.s and survive. Someone must
pay for it all - the ultimate consumer or whatever. Certainly ro knowledgeable
business man will submit to these conditions without some tremendocs fain
from the project as it may cr may rot be completed.
The sad Hart is that consumation of ti:is, or.similar, project of large
and significant c:nsequences will be used to marshall "your" forces against
each ar:d,~very Gma11 proper y owner ;r t1-is community who nay, or ,Tay rot,
be otherwise entitled to development ri€hts on his or her own rrouerty,
Even to sell his or her property, these facters,_ust be t41ce.__into_oo:siderati~r
zrd ultimately may be extreoted from the sales price of any urderimproved
parcel before, duri.rg, or after sale. ~ J/I~Q'®'s~ ~~r~'
__---__ V~lrti fi(~ CJ
r-/ - AUG 1 1 1981
,These restrictions, a: d similar. restricticrs ___°_M~ose' _~ sugEis.ticrs__fWom
"your" task forces in their current recommendaticr_s, all s_ould be rejected
by the City Council, This, of course, is too much to expect ~>with or,e
or possibly t~rro exceptions, the resistance of Councilperson Reed and the
r~eoert statements of Courcilperson Jermings relativF to property.rghts_.and
gooc' City_ Planning. I certainly cannot accept the versions espoused by
our ArTayor, Ruth Yarnatte Goldway Shearer (etc.) as usually supported b;;r the
votes of Gane, Corn, Press, arn9 Edwards, The sm~11 prop=rty_owner rrth_
so.:e development rights connected thereto ,gertairly deserves more corarderati;n
than given to him by the:aater gamed ccuncilmembers as noted above, That i`
parcel (usuall;,~) for a long period of time and in no sense cf the ,cord is
a speculator out for every last cent of profit. (as despised in the majority
view of the Council and. their a:opointees.) Dorethe3ess, that single property
o:~;ner of cr.e or t^ro parcels certainly deserves the right to develop ecually
with his neighborir:g property owhers it a gi~re n zone - or be given adequate
and fair compers ation for the loss of those rights urchased, held, and paid
for in good faith, ?,4ost of the Task Force i;ecommerdations, proposals
for a 2tev; "ousirg Element, ar:d the attitudes of our current City Co:;nci1 ar^'.
their appointees contradict this right to fdir and equal treatment as I read,
listen, and try to attend or bear with their deliberations,
_ - _ __ __
Perhaps ( and I don't have much hope ) in your elision aG bro dcast or r
FCRw 89,9 F1~S tics eye in g, ^u s 8/11/81 axd pcsrible as ~ rtinued ied 8/12j81 ~/
ar.d a. bro adc~.st or veld on ubse!_uent Tue.,d~ys a d redr.e d._ys e ,~ n..cr ~l
more concerns erpre: Fd for the ~~'ividual prooerty_c_rer of lo_E tanai~~ ~~'~~~
-•:ho de ~ rues Cust as ,uch sider~.tio= as any ter rt or tenant orients ~ / ~~'
voter ir. this co::murity. Incider;tally, I just reciev d the routine ~
notice of Rent Control Fees and the 5,5;~ increase 11o~~~able this year ~S~'\~u
~ which doee rot, and should not, ap_~ly to ar cz~r;er occupied unit cf three
units or less. I have my exemption letter issued by the interium boe.ra
'~ bpd should not be bothered, ith having to ~esaend to tt:is ov_ersi~ht~ or ~:ix ~.ap
$n the records of City Nall P+?ore time and energy with overburdening red t-.ne, /
AryTay, as we listen (and rot all cf us have the time to nersor:ally attend
these lengthy sessions) I pledge a ~;ord of support for the Becket Project
on Colorado between. 26th and CloverField, i~'hy shoulc they be subjecte: to
these special per_alties ar.c restrictions for developing land that has remained
vaccnt - and used as a, pAblic dump - for all t'rese years, Others have developed
their land ir, prior years to the ':igher and more dense dtardards you no v;
condemn and ~sithout penalty, rollback, or retrenchment. They are "gr_:ndfathered"
in their stage of development unless demolition takes place :.r.d replace er;t
becomes necessary, This is not right.
Any regulation deemed necessary for future City Planning ir. a Uniform and
Fairly applied manner should and must be ap lie5 to all in so-e form, The fully
%9evelopea as ;cell as those ^~ho have rot exercised their rights and remained
urderimproved or, as is rarely the rase in Santa I:Iosa~~r these days, vac art ar:d
unimorove',
Item 5 B, A replacement appcir.tment For the Residential ^l ask Force,
I'm_still available, i,"y application eras tarred into City Eall for the initial
Task Force. I didn't hear any favorable response. I see a lot of faces or.
that Task Force that certainly do not represent my vievrs or the views of those
who feel as I do. I would certainly strive to uut into glace so e of the vie;•rs
and. concerns I have expressed-above for tine preservation of zoning and building
rights as they have been established up until their partial dismemberm-~r_t early
in 1975 or 19']4 and prior with the enactment of ;'d~nel~i_g ur;it taxes" and "open
space reouiremehts" of that era A11 of that certainly predates our so called
t)
housing shortarre
sen~ wrd propert
more .recogniticr.
a brief visit to
Goldman . Go
but, `please take
and the troublee of our City at the pressnt tire. As a native
y ovrr.er far the .r<.jor part cf my adult life I feel that I deserve
than an insult, such as I recieved the last ti:-_e I entered for
match this Task Force in acticn last week (please note. Gerald
ahead and appoint your faverits, for ycur :purposes, as you'will
note of my comments above.
Items 5A, 5C, 5F, 5?,'I on_ Rec:~cliri~ and curbside pick up of ne-~•rspzper etc.
After per£ormir.g this service for free this last year or so with the recycling
of dome 20 ton of r.e:rspar~er or; the back of my bicycle ~;ith a small trailer
attached - I suppose you, Ruth Yannatta GolPway Shearer and your "tribe" mill
brand me a "criminal" in ycur opinion fcr having dcne so and ban me forever
from this small stipend to supplement my "low income" as a ""pocr property owner""
with only three units and a lot of bare land expose:' to ,,-our intimidating
reatricticns. You'v go+ me all ways.. Zf I c-ntinue, I can see that crolohaul
~con't pay a reascr.able price for the pa_aer and- cans I collect as described,
They don't have toc, The City Neill co it ~';ith "Block Grants Funding" ar.d kith
the help cf their supporters or the Ines prho vote for this form of City Gcv't.
I'm forced --many of us are forced out of business - so to speak. There are
quite a few of us vrho "sca.venger" for this; hard earned stiper:d. And, you are
about to take it array fr:m us - have already °ade sore arrests I understand,
Items 9A, B, C, and D, Perhaps you have a more positive suggestion
for positi•rely exnressir.g my available ~r.ert'v in a pro~uctive f-sh`on
other than riding -~y bicycle and trailer through alleys ar.a streets
to pick up cars and papers for recycling. If so, L would. like to her of
your ~4esticng. I r:ould li};e to improve my etatus as a "s in~le. ~,rrite
male of ser.~or years ~~ith nc family ties and, in my opinion, a re enable
--_._
e?ucation ar' the thirst for more rgho has been stiffelea b_y goverr.~~ent
___ _
pad tp~e and restrictions.beyond belief". I think is about tine I
had my turn too. '- _----- --
~tem 12 B ar,d several items ~o~ewhe.t relates}, it my e;~ir-ion, Items 7B
through 7r^, items 60 and possibly 6C are extensio^s of "over-regulation"
that pervades nearly every operation of 6ity F}all these days - and has
for some time row, Pent Control Operations certaiz.ly could be improved
ar,d simplified for 'more respect from all artiee ecrcerned. It could be
giver. a, time li?it an^ done a^ray ;ith entirely - if rre had tae sill to
provide for our own self interest. That wool^n't be politically attractive
to the flock of four and their appointees, of course, Vested right claims,
Architectural _°.eview, etc, etc, are all time ecr.eumirg and ad? to the cost cf
each building project, :o wor;der it costs so much to produce a.ry housing,
Ite;n A a public hearing or, assessment cf costs to repair d~ma~ec,siae•aeJks
drivevtayy._a~ ourbs~._ '-?ow many times has this item been on the agenda and
DATE:. August 11, 1981
FROM: City Clerk
SUBJECT: Attached letter from C. R. Davenport regarding
various items on the Council Agenda of August 11, 1981
T0: Jim Lunsford, Director of Planning
Attached are 15 copies of the subject letter -- one copy
for your file, one for each planning Commissioner, and
one for each Architectural Review Board Member. Mr.
Davenport requests hisletter be distributed to those
persons.
T0: Kenyon Webster, CAC Liaison
Attached is a copy of Mr, Davenport's letter for your
use and/or file. He requests that it be copied for the
CAC's if applicable, 1' have not made copies for the
Task Forces.
T0: Rent Control Department
Attached are fi copies of 1~Ir. Davenport`s. letter. One
is for your staff and 5 for members of the Rent Control
Board, as requested by Mr. Davenport,
Copies have been provided to the City Council, City Manager
and City Attorney,
~z. ,
Attachment
1306 Princeton & Arizona, Santa I.onica, Ca., 90404 August 11, 1981
City Council City of Sant- °rroscow 1685 1;Iain Street, S. ?.i. Ca., 904-03
Copies for --.'ayor Ruth Yar;hatta Gold?;ay Shearer etc., Councilpersons --Zane,
--Press, --Conn, the reforming --Edwards, the reformed --Jernings~and your
three or four good comments lately on inclusionary zoning and the impact of
regulations on th~ property owner at large), and most especially and respectfully
the most stable councilperson on or near our side and point of view -_ Chris Reed.
--City clerk Arn M. Shore (I have limited funding, Please make "affordable"
copies fo : Plar_ning Iirector --James Lurs£ord, Flaming Commissioners --Katz,
--Su11i'van, --Kleffel, --Rotchkiss, --h'cKee, --Cloke, --Sheerer/ Staff members
--Keryor, ;''ebster of the CAC (if still apnlieable)~ Commercial Task Force --
Chrm C. J ones .~ all members Permit and ,Ceighborhocd Pla.rning Task Force
Chrm Richard AbIDe - all members , Architectural Review -- Chrm Steuhen Fresr -
all members, Residential Task Force - Chrm Chris Reed - all ,-,embers especially
Gerald Goldman Acting City ]:Iane.ger --John Jallili or successor, City Attorney
--P.ober Pdyers, F.ent Board Chairperson -- Neil Stare, Commissioners --Levis,
--rr^inkel,-- Lambert, --Allen, Adm. -- Howell Tumlin. There are some new
administrative staff and others ir. our growing 'd'mocracy - as ex:~eneive as it
-rill be - that probably shoulc be covered by these communications. The Task is
overwhelming to the average citizen. Lo rd help us ir. our plight:
Ger,tlepersons:
Some of_the items on_the agenda for_the City_ Council_this_evening, kug.__11,
and tie views expressed by the Council on similar items in the past cause me
to feel the need of at least e~:pressing an opinion. I don't have the time
to attend personally. I don't have the time 'o put all my thou€hts aowr. on
paper. I doubt that you would re_:d them anyway. But, at least I car. e::nress
some disagreement ~~,~it2_ the ~-ay I aaticiuate ;,rou will vote a.na put ny op_roon
on the record. Ferhaps I can er.ecurage some of my friends, neighbors, and
associated property awr:ers to do like rise.
Item lU R The rester tins ^n t'e '"eltor Packet ~25~~1 ^olor~r~oZ, Creen~^c or?
Project (2600 Colorado) are? iSein Street Planning hrea (?) are ir.cecuseuble and
uncalled for. They violate every concept of "uniform zar'ng ar.d ~;lanri~g"
as I have al•,:ays understood the l~vr. This_S_orm "Ertor_~ion"_ must__be_ _breught
~}. n a h a.l f. _
~erh6,es these grours of !'oosrorate" developers car, sub:^.t to some of
these demands, as they already have, and survive. After all, they are deriving
a.prirciple part cf their support from government and ~::overr.ment agencies, I
believe. Thus government "Tax idonies", in a sense, can :,e used to offset the
cost of provi^irg low-below-cost housing units, ccntributicr.s to the social arts,
child care facilities, public p~.rks, assembly rooms and lord knows v;h:t else
for the license to build. their other planned projects for their o~,'rr benefit and
for the benefit of the community. I wonder arhat normal business is the
private sec#br could support these concessions and survive. Someone must
pay for it all - the ultimate consumer or whatever. Certainly ro knowledgeable
business man will submit to these ecnditicns without some tremendocs Bain
from the project as it may or may r.ot be eempleted.
The sad wart is that consumation of ti:is, or similar, project of large
and significant ecnsequences will be used to marehall "your" forces against
each ar;d everymall prc~erty o•vrer it t'ris community who •^ay, or ,m.,ay rot,
be otherwi_ce entitled to develormert rights on his or her own p~ouerty.
Even to sell his or her property, these factors must b.e t__t-k er..__int.o..corsideraticn
and ultimately may be extraeted from the sales price of any urderimproved
parcel before, during, or after sale.
r--~ -
These restricticns, a,d similar restricticra_iM•ose.- b ~uU~~:sticns from
-- p--- -~ - °`----- -
"yeur" task forces in their current recomr~er.daticrs, all should be re.iectec~
by the City Council. This, of course, is toe ~nuc'r. to expect with or.e
or possibly two exceptions, the resister~ce of Councilperson Reed. ar.c the
r~ecert ~tatEments of Courcilperson Jennings relat_iv~ to -property rghts._arc?
_. _
~oo~ Cityy' Planning. I certainly cannot accept the versions espouse? by
cur ivl2.yor, Ruth Yar,natta Goldway Shearer (etc.) as usually supported b;;i the
votes of Zane, Corn, Press, and Ed•rrards. The s:n211 pre~er~ owner crth
so:,:e development rights connected thereto ~ertaisly deserves more ccrsdEr~tcn
than. given to him by the2ater named ecuncilmembers as noted above, That i`
parcel (usually) for a long period of time and in no sErse cf -the word is
a speculator cut for every last cent of profit. (as despised in the majority
view of the Council and their appointees.) ior.etheless, that single pro _;erty
ormer of cne or two parcels certainly deserves the right to develop equally
•,cith his neighboring property ovrners is a given zcne - or be given adequate
ahd fair comperss.tior. for the loss of these rights ;;•nrchased, heli, any paid
for in good faith, ?vlost of the Task Force Recommendations, proposals
for a ties Aousirg Element, and the attitudel of our current City Co_:rcil and
their appointees contradict this righi to fair and equal treatment as I read,
lister., and ry to attend or bear with their deliberations,
Perhsps ( are I don't have much hcpe ) >n ycur GeGsion aG bro dcast o~~r
F !'Ri1 &°. ° FR1 t'xis e~ e ing, ^u~ 5~11~A1 and pcs i le as ~~ r.tinued 'ie' 812 j 81 ~
an:' as broadcast or veld on ub~e ,cent Tue„dcys arc' /edr_e.d._ys e r~ h__r •~
s
~Fd f
th
di
id
l
t
f
t
?
a
more ccr~cerx_
expre
or
e v,
~re_uer
v
ua
y_c_rer_o
lo_1_s
.n
ir~ J ~~
ho deserves ,lust as uch c sideretiot as dry tern, t or ter art Oriente i ;~ ~'
~
voter ir. this ommurity. Incidentally, I just recieved the routine ;~N ~,
~
r-otice of Rent Control Fees and the 5,5~ increase allo•,zable this year
'~~'
which does not, a.nd shculd r.ot, ap?ly to an cwr:er occupied unit cf three '~,'
units or less. I have my exerintion letter issued by the interium board
~,nd should rot be botherec ith hav;r.~
'.,o ~esncnd to this oversights or ..ix up
_
j,n the records of Cit~Eall~ bIore time and energy c:ith overburdening red tope,
~
AnyTay, as we listen (and *ot all cf us have the tine to personally attend
these lengthy sessions) I pledge a cord of support for the Becket Project
or, Colorado between 26th and CloverField. s'7hy shoulc they be subjecte3 to
these special per:alties and restrictions for developing laps that has remained
vacant - and used as a pGlblic dump - for all t'rese years, Others have developed
their land in-prior years to-the higher and more dense dtardards you r.ow
ccndemn and without cenalty, rollback, or retrenchment. They are "grar_dfatherea"
in t:aeir stage of development unless de!nolition ta'.ces place :~r. replace-exa
becomes necessary. This is rot right.
Any regulation deemed r.ecesea.ry for future Citv Plannir.~ ir. a Uniform and
Fairly a.polied manner should and must be ap ie^ to all in sore form, The fully
developed as -riell as these '?ho have rot exercised their rights and romaine?
urderimnroved or, as is rarely the case in Santa ;?esccc, these days, vacant ar:d
unim~rove~' ,
Item S.B. A replacement aapcir.tment for the Res idertial Task Force,.
L'm still available, ':.'y applic•:_ticn •:;as tuned-into City 'call for the initial
Task Force. I didn't hear dry favorable reseonse. I see a lot of faces or.
that Task Force that certainly do not represent my vievrs or the vie RS of those
who feel as I co. I would certainly strive to put into place sore cf the vie;-
and concords I have expressed above for the presercaticn of zoning and building
rights as they have been established up until their partial dismembe-rm=r.t early
ir. 1°]5 or 197G and prior with the enactment of ;'d•rrelli_:~ unit taxes" and "open~
soace requirements" of that era All of that certainly predates our so called
--- -_ _ __
i;ousing sho.;aere
scn~ end propert
:..^.o re recogriticr:
a brief visit to
Go dman~, Go
but, please take
and the troubles of our City at the present tire. As a native
y o~;rer for the major part cf my adult life I feel that I deserve
than an insult, such as I recieved the last ti-e I er,tere.d for
match this Task Force in action last meek (please note Gerald
ahead and appoint your favorits, for your purposes, as -you ,ill
rote of my comn.ents above,
Items 5A, 5G, 5F, 5?~4 en Recyclin~ and curbside pick u~of newspaper etc.
After performing this service for free this last yezr ar so with the recyclin g
of dome 20 ton of r.e;rspacer or the back of_my bi_c_rcl_e ;vith a small trailer
attached - I suppose you, Ruth Yanr.atta Golc'way Shearer ar,P: your "tribe" sill
tram me a,"criminal" in your opinion for having Pcr,e so ar•d ban me forever
from this small stipend to supplement my "low income" as a ""poor property ovmer""
~sith only three units and a lot of bare land exposeri tq your intimidating
restrictions. 'lou'v go' me all ways, If I continue, I can see t'rat Ec::olohaul
^n 't pay a reescr:able price for the pa_:~er a.nd cans I collect as described,
They don't have too. The City will ^'o it ~~~ith "Block Grants r^unding'! and with
the help cf their supporters or the ones vrho vote for this form of City Gcv't,
I'm forced - many of us are forced out of business - so to speak. There are
quite a few of us vrho "scavenger" for this hard earned stiper:d. Snd, you are
about to take it avray fr;m us - have already ;"ado so.^e arrests I unaerst~rd,
Items 9A, B, C, and B, Perhaps you have a more positive suggestion
for positively expressing my aveileble gr.errs in a productive f~s'~`on
other than riding =:y bicycle and trailer through alleys ar.d streets
to pick up cars a*d papers for recycli^g, If so, I would like to he:r cf
your „~u;rnesti mg. I :could like to improve ry status as a "sir_~le. vrhite
male of senior years with no famil;,r ties and, in my opinion, reas.nable
____._--
e^ucation and_the thinr=t for more who has been stiffeled b_y go~errment
--- - ----
~ed tape and_re_~_tricticns_beyond belief", I think is about time I
had my turn too. ~ ------
item 1% B and several items ~cnevrh~t relater., ir. my opinion, Items 7B
through ~:, items 60 and possibly 6C are extensions of "over-regulation"
that pervades nearly ev:~ry operation. cf 6ity Fall these days - ana has'
fcr some time now, Rent Control Operations ceriainly could. be improved
z.rd simplified for 'more respect from all .:~rties c~rcerr_ed. It could be
given a. time limit and do=. e as:a.y pith enti°ely - if vre ha,d tee v.-i11 to
provide fcr cur cwr. self interest. Thzt ^roul^r.'t be politically z.ttractive
to the block of four and their ap-~ointees, of course, Vested right claims,
Architectural _°,evie;v, etc, etc, a.re all time cer.sumirg and ad? to the ro;t cf
each building project. ~:o ~sor:der it costs so much to °ro~uce ar;r housing,
.Item A a public hearing or. assessment cf costs to repair d,~amaged,sid=-r lks
crisavtay_~ zn?__~uxbss_ '-To :v ^ai:y times has this item been on the agen~•a and
~xhy must a property owner vrho has no ecntrol over these arias - other t?•:an to
keep. them cleaned up after the debris and drnn~,;nac ~~s+ ~,,. ~H ,.._ ___ _,_,