June 24, 2024 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

S.M.a.r.t. Looks Ahead

It’s that time of the year again, when people and organizations look ahead and make resolutions to try to do better than they did last year. S.M.a.r.t., Santa Monica architects for a Responsible Tomorrow, is no different. We too look for ways to do better next year. Naturally our annual resolutions, like many people’s, tend to be somewhat repetitive year to year because of the long-term nature of the changes we are proposing and the immense inertia of the systems we confront. For example seven years ago we wrote several articles advocating the adaptive reuse of commercial buildings for residential uses and now the City is finally considering implementing this obvious solution as it updates our zoning code.  

Godzilla Is Coming to Town

However, this year is different for three reasons. First the City faces challenges as it settles the multiple  PAL (Police Activities League) legal issues. Regardless on how these legal issues play out, the City will invariably have fewer fiscal resources available. Second, this is the year that Sacramento actually starts coercing the City to permit a 20% population increase over the next eight years with a  new Housing Element. This catastrophe will result in dozens of over sized (some up to 15 story) projects crushing, Godzilla like, our seaside City. Finally there are looming unknown externalities (processes outside our direct influence). The two biggest potential externalities to watch  are the severity of the projected recession and the severity of the long tail of the Covid crisis. They may be mild or grind on relentlessly but both have the potential to severely  harm the residents of our tourist dependent City.  

So while our goals and intentions for a better City have not changed at all, our collective ability to make progress will be diminished in 2023 because of the three reasons mentioned above. In addition all the changes we are proposing take some form of initial investment whether of funds, of political will or of public awareness all during a time of decreased financing and political elasticity.

Planning for Our Grand Children

One thing our City needs is a long-range master plan. A master plan is not a zoning code although it will have zoning elements in it. It is a comprehensive interactive document that addresses the big questions of our City’s long term health and success. For example how will the City, which thrives on beach visitors and tourists, survive when sea level rise has eliminated our beaches? What is the regional role of the City of Santa Monica and how is that role changing? How soon before our local aquifers are tapped out, by the excessive growth demanded by Sacramento? Should we consider alternate water sources such as desalinization with its many downsides? What is the optimal size of our population given our realistic water, power, and food resources? What happens when the significant metrics such as  income inequality, housing ownership, crime, number of children, lifespan, household formation, homelessness,  etc. deviate substantially from the current status or when they don’t? What is the on going financial basis of our municipal and school governments? How does our City’s mobility mix (pedestrians, scooters, bikes, cars, busses, light rail etc.) alter in response to urban changes? This list is just a suggestion for a master plan, but you can add your own concerns a master plan should address.

These questions and concerns like them would be organized and prioritized in a master plan that could be altered and adjusted as the real life situation evolves and as more emerging trends become understood. The alternative is to careen from one perceived crisis to another with piecemeal answers inexorably colliding with clearly evident predictions. The time frame for such a master plan should be 25-50 years out (2050-2075). If you think its  foolish to think that far ahead, consider that our City’s bones were laid in 1875. Today we still live with that street grid developed developed almost 150 years ago. So we should not be afraid to really think ahead. 

A master plan for a City of our size should cost $3-$5M and take some two years to prepare. Its an important investment. We need act on now as our urban choices get increasingly constrained by all the grinding urban forces we know all too well.  

Creating a Real Zoning Code

Over the last three years, while Covid choked our City, the City Council, as well as the Planning Department, Planning,Housing and Landmark Commissions have all been paralyzed and neutered by Sacramento. The State has taken over all local zoning control with a series of laws whose main purpose is to promote the profits of developers and land owners. These laws fail to address the issues of sustainability and prevent us from making the changes necessary for our City’s long-term survival.  By Sacramento prioritizing development, their laws doom the City to unnecessary  suffering in a globally warming world. For this reason we need to reorient the zoning rules back from a development fetish to a survival strategy. There are three areas where we could act on today. 

First our City needs a tree ordinance to foster tree preservation and the planting of new trees. Both are essential for moderating global warming.The master plan would help us determine the optimum type and number of trees (they take up space, water, and maintenance costs) both for our City’s area and our changing  population. Because of their long growth time, trees need to be prioritized today to have a chance of reduced urban temperatures tomorrow. 

Second we need an ordinance to protect the solar photo voltaic infrastructure  of adjacent buildings from getting shaded by new construction. We need all the power generation we can get from roof-top solar collectors,  to meet  the exponentially increasing  demand of electric devices and cars particularly as gasoline and natural gas supplies fade.  While the State wants to be carbon-neutral by 2045, our master plan could independently map out our likely power demands against the likely different available renewable energy sources (wind, solar, nuclear, hydro,  geothermal, tidal etc). In this manner, our City can be carbon-neutral before 2045. But for now we simply need to increase our renewable power supply asymptotically and the humble roof top solar collector is our best currently available alternative.  Our zoning code should encourage massive solar photovoltaic adoption.

Finally we need to establish a battery storage ordinance to capture all this new solar power and carry it forward into the afternoon and night when winds die down and the sun is not shining. Even buildings without solar access can meet their energy obligations by installing storage battery capacity for their “neighbors” thereby helping create a net zero City (a city that produces all the energy it needs locally).  By installing large scale batteries on roof tops, in garages and other non habitable spaces we can balance demand and supply fluctuations both to meet our  net zero goals and create a resilient City that can withstand the inevitable disruptions of brownouts, heat waves, earthquakes, fires,  and storm’s impacts.   

Time to Choose

Naturally these simple zoning improvements (trees, solar collectors and batteries)  will conflict in some areas with Sacramento’s excessive construction demands. But at a certain point our City should have a public discussion about the real trade-offs: do we want 18,000 new residents as Sacramento is forcing us to absorb or do we want  a sustainable, resilient City? Do we want a bigger more vulnerable City or a City capable of surviving and thriving in a hostile future environment? Until we have an informed public discussion about these real trade offs, we will always be bullied by Sacramento’s manufactured crisis du jour which somehow always seems to involve up zoning the City regardless of what question you ask. That increased density, without the buffering of new mandates such as trees, solar collectors and batteries among other things only increases our vulnerability and the inevitable suffering when the State’s ecological decline becomes irreversible. 

We need to start this debate by an informed citizenry of what they will choose for their City. S.M.a.r.t. has always tried to increase the citizen’s independent knowledge of the real forces and options our City faces, in spite of the barrage of misinformation, spin, virtue signaling, wishful thinking, and false alternatives we are bombarded with every day. 

And this is where you come in. You can increase the level of public discourse by distributing S.M.a.r.t.’s articles to all your friends thereby stimulating and elevating the public discourse in 2023. We anticipate a great new year in 2023 when the citizens take back their City from Sacramento’s demands and shape it to meet their real needs. 

We want to wish a Happy New year to all our loyal readers and all the new ones we hope will join us.

By Mario Fonda-Bonardi

for S.M.a.r.t. Santa Monica Architects for a Responsible Tomorrow 

Thane Roberts, Architect, Robert H. Taylor AIA, Ron Goldman FAIA, Architect, Dan Jansenson, Architect & Building and Fire-Life Safety Commission, Samuel Tolkin Architect & Planning Commissioner, Mario Fonda-Bonardi AIA & Planning Commissioner, Marc Verville M.B.A, CPA (Inactive), Michael Jolly, AIR-CRE.

For previous articles see www.santamonicaarch.wordpress.com/writing

in Opinion
Related Posts

SM.a.r.t Column: The Up Zoning Scam (Part 2)

June 23, 2024

June 23, 2024

Last week’s SMart article  (https://smmirror.com/2024/06/sm-a-r-t-column-the-up-zoning-scam-part-1/)  discussed the ambitious 8895 units (including 6168 affordable units) that Santa Monica is required to...

SM.a.r.t Column: The Up Zoning Scam (Part 1)

June 16, 2024

June 16, 2024

Over the last few years, the State of California has mandated a massive upzoning of cities to create capacity for...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Shape Up – On Steroids

June 9, 2024

June 9, 2024

Nine years ago, SMa.r.t wrote a series of articles addressing the adaptive re-use of existing structures. We titled one “Shape...

SM.a.r.t Column: The Challenge of Running a City When City Staff Have Different Priorities

June 2, 2024

June 2, 2024

Living in a city has its perks, but it can be a real headache when the folks running the show...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A Path to Affordable Ownership in Santa Monica

May 27, 2024

May 27, 2024

[Note: our guest author today is Andres Drobny, a former Professor of Economics at the University of London, the former...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A Path Forward for Santa Monica: Part II

May 19, 2024

May 19, 2024

As referenced in Part I of this article, the state’s use of faulty statistics and forceful legislation has left a...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A Path Forward for Santa Monica: Part I

May 12, 2024

May 12, 2024

To quickly summarize, California grapples with an ongoing housing crisis spurred by state implementation of over 100 policies and mandates...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Where Will Our Huddled Masses Sleep? Navigating California’s Affordable Housing Mandates

May 5, 2024

May 5, 2024

Just as Lady Liberty beckons the “huddled masses” of immigrants to America, cities like Santa Monica have an ethical obligation...

SM.a.r.t Column: SMCLC SPEAKS

April 28, 2024

April 28, 2024

SMart (Santa Monica Architects for a Responsible Tomorrow) periodically invites guest columnists who have made a significant contribution to the...

SM.a.r.t Column: Building Modern Boxes Lacks Identity

April 21, 2024

April 21, 2024

In the relentless pursuit of modernity, cities worldwide have witnessed the rise of so-called architectural marvels in the form of...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Santa Monica Needs Responsible Urban and Architectural Design

April 14, 2024

April 14, 2024

[SMa.r.t. note: Eight years ago, our highly esteemed and recently-passed colleague Ron Goldman documented his thoughts on the need for...

SM.a.r.t. Column: BLINK NOW!

April 7, 2024

April 7, 2024

Nine years ago, I wrote a column for SMa.r.t. titled SANTA MONICA: BEACH TOWN OR ‘DINGBAT’ CITY? (https://smdp.com/2015/05/09/santa-monica-beach-town-dingbat-city/)Here is the...

SM.a.r.t Column: ARB Courage (Part 2 of 2)

March 31, 2024

March 31, 2024

Last week we discussed the numerous flaws of the Gelson’s project as a perfect example of what not to do...

ARB Courage (Part 1 of 2)

March 24, 2024

March 24, 2024

On March 4, 2024, your ARB (Architectural Review Board) ruled in favor of the 521-unit Gelson’s Project at Ocean Park...

SM.a.r.t Column: Can California ARBs Balance Affordable Housing with Community Character in the Face of New Housing Laws?

March 17, 2024

March 17, 2024

By suggestion, I attended the March 4th ARB (Architectural Review Board) meeting that addressed the Gelson Lincoln Boulevard Project.  After...