February 21, 2024 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

Letter To The Editor: Housing Generates Much Less Traffic Than Offices:

Dear Editor,

Good public policy demands the ability to be decisive when appropriate, but also the thoughtful willingness to pause, when needed, to learn from new information.

When we adopted Santa Monica’s new Land Use and Circulation Element three and a half years ago, the City Council attempted its best guess as to the ideal ratio of commercial versus residential square footage. 

Since then, both traffic concerns and housing needs have increased. LUCE assumptions certainly deserve to be reconsidered in light of the volumes of significant new information provided by the state-required Hines project Environmental Impact Report.

With the adoption of the LUCE, we assured our community “no net new PM trips.” 

We need to assess whether we are delivering on our promises. The Hines EIR showed that their project will generate 7000 new car trips, and will make mobility worse not only in the short term but as far out as 2030.

That’s one reason I made a motion for an alternative project, all housing above the first floor, rather than intensively traffic-generating office space. 

Housing generates much less traffic than offices, and the traffic flow from housing tends to be in different directions and at different times of day than office employee commuting. 

Housing at the Hines site would not be as likely to exacerbate the already existing snarl from Water Gardens and other unfortunate past planning decisions for office complexes in the immediate area.

There are other reasons why a much more, not slightly more, residential project would have been a better choice for our community.

Since the LUCE was adopted, the state of California has cut off our redevelopment revenue, which for many years had been our primary tool for creating affordable housing.

The Hines project provides too little housing, but worse, unacceptably too little housing at truly affordable prices.

The last-minute minor change on rent levels nibbled gently around the edges.

It was a love bite to the developer, not a substantive improvement that genuinely addressed our serious housing needs.

Where, I’d also ask, is the minimum open space called for in our Bergamot Area Plan?  Hines supporters hail a “new park,” but the one contiguous park-like space in the Hines project would barely qualify for the tiniest tier of Santa Monica parks, about the size of Chess Park. 

Mothers with strollers expecting a usable new playspace for our community’s children will be gravely disappointed. The touted “two acres of open space” at Hines includes traffic-filled streets and the narrow service corridors between buildings.

On open space, affordable housing, and other lasting community benefits, Planning Commission Chair Jennifer Kennedy pointed out that the Hines project fell significantly short of what’s required. 

I watched Kennedy, and others on the Planning Commission, try to negotiate improvements. It became clear the developer was unwilling to yield anything not demanded by the City Council, the ultimate decision-making body on a Development Agreement.

Hines threatened our city: Give us the development we want, or we will deliberately sabotage you with an undesirable reoccupancy of the existing outdated factory building.

The Council majority caved, accepting the project pretty much as submitted by Hines, despite the enumerated shortcomings. Is that being “flexible” with standards, or is it bending over backwards for the developer?

We are confronted with a massive and ungainly project the community simply will not accept, as shown by the grassroots gathering of signatures to overturn the Council majority decision via referendum.

We had the chance to define appropriate transit-oriented development in a place where traffic, housing, and open space were particularly important.

The Council majority abandoned “appropriate,” claiming fear that the developer would walk away from the deal. Such an walk-away hasn’t happened in decades in Santa Monica, but this Hines decision tells other developers that “my way or the highway” threats will succeed with this current Council majority.

Residents retain the power to counter that message and force renegotiation of a far better project.  In this case, with neighbors carrying petitions in the streets, change comes one signature at a time. 

Will yours be one of them?

Kevin McKeown

Santa Monica Council Member

in Opinion
Related Posts

S.M.a.r.t Column: Top Toady Town

February 18, 2024

February 18, 2024

Throughout history, from the ancient Romans and Assyrians to Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine, siege warfare has served as an...

S.M.a.r.t Column: The Sunset of Home Ownership

February 11, 2024

February 11, 2024

We are watching the sunset of our historical and cultural American dream of home ownership as we now are crossing...

SMa.r.t. Column: B(U)Y RIGHT

February 4, 2024

February 4, 2024

“By Right” state housing laws that give developers, in certain projects, the ability to ignore codes ‘by right.’ Well, that...

S.M.a.r.t  Column: Serf City

January 28, 2024

January 28, 2024

Homelessness is a problem in California, and nowhere is this more evident than in our fair city, where the unhoused...

S.M.a.r.t  Column: Bond Fatigue

January 22, 2024

January 22, 2024

Last week’s SMart article,  described two critical problems faced by our Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD): the declining...

S.M.a.r.t Column: Peace on Earth

December 27, 2023

December 27, 2023

We are all, by now, saturated with jingles, holiday cards, “ho ho ho’s,” countless commercial advertisements, and exhortations to feel...

S.M.a.r.t Column: On the Clock with Mayor Brock

December 17, 2023

December 17, 2023

I became Santa Monica’s Mayor on Tuesday, December 12, 2023, following a simple “switch of the chairs” transition with outgoing...

S.M.a.r.t Column: SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL 2024

December 10, 2023

December 10, 2023

Position:Seeking Santa Monica City Council Candidate(s) Introduction:Exciting opportunity for the right candidate(s) to work with like-minded Council members committed to...

S.M.a.r.t Column: ARB (NOT Ready to Build!)

December 3, 2023

December 3, 2023

Santa Monica City’s Architectural Review Board (ARB), established in 1974, acts “…to preserve existing areas of natural beauty, cultural importance...

SMa.r.t. Column: We are thankful for….

November 27, 2023

November 27, 2023

SMa.r.t. would like to wish you all a great Thanksgiving with friends and family and also to thank its readers...

S.M.a.r.t Column: Make the City New Again

November 19, 2023

November 19, 2023

When the COVID crisis struck, it cut the city’s income in half, demolishing many businesses and causing widespread layoffs and...

S.M.a.r.t Column: Four Futures

October 29, 2023

October 29, 2023

As well described by Paul Krugman, all cities have a core competency: things they do well or better regionally or...

SMa.r.t column: Beautiful Quartz Countertops Are Hurting Workers and Should Be Banned

October 9, 2023

October 9, 2023

Quartz countertops are super popular because they’re tough and can handle stains, scratches, and heat. But there’s a big problem:...

S.M.a.r.t Column: Architect’s Son Reflects On Civic Auditorium

October 2, 2023

October 2, 2023

Welton (David) Becket (1902-1969), pictured above, backed by a picture of our Civic Auditorium, was the designer of that famed...

S.M.a.r.t Column: Civic Center Debate

September 24, 2023

September 24, 2023

Civic Center Debate Last year, the City declared the Civic Center Auditorium surplus property after a decade of neglect and...