Where the City and Prof. Champion Have Gravely Erred

If done properly, this will be very good for our entire community.

Also, I support the idea of using a master planner for the whole process, even though the planner himself may not develop all phases of the Project.

Finally, I think there’s a great deal that can be said in favor of Prof. Bob Champion in the role of the master planner. I think it unlikely we’ll find someone better qualified.

It’s also clear to me that the city and Prof. Champion have bungled the introduction of the South Sepulveda Project to our community.

Why They Are Angry

In particular, the city’s persistent and total failure to mitigate (not just study mitigation) severe traffic problems in the Sunkist Park area has left many, if not most, residents there angry and not inclined to favorably consider anything the city proposes.

Part of the intense anger displayed in the South Sepulveda Project meetings arises from the fact that we, the people, do not believe the city listens.

The Triggering Device

If not corrected, I think the South Sepulveda Project traffic increases may be the burning match that starts a four-alarm political fire in Culver City.

My conclusion is that the city should address old business before moving on to new business.

Next, there’s the question of the South Sepulveda Project economics.

City Council member Carol Gross has stated, without contradiction, on several occasions that the city is facing a budget crunch.

Here Are the Options

The choices seem unpleasant: raise taxes (fees, etc.), or reduce services provided.

But, according to Ms. Gross, a major new development might solve our problem by increasing revenues.

Prof. Champion has roughly estimated the tax base for his current vision of the South Sepulveda Project to be about $650 million.

The Difference

He estimates the annual tax revenue to be about 1 percent of this, or $6.5 million, about $5 million more than that raised today from the South Sepulveda area.

He estimates the city will keep about 60 percent of the new tax revenues, or $3.6 million/year.

Tuesday night, he suggested how the city might spend this windfall, such as widening Sepulveda Boulevard or helping businesses displaced by the Project get back on their feet.

A Wonderful Feeling

This sounds wonderful…it makes many in city government feel like a rich kid in a candy store.

However, I’m reminded of the old Air Force saying, “If you want it bad, you’ll get it bad.”

Besides significant traffic mitigation needed, the Project will incur other additional city expenses, including those for schools, police and fire, water and power, parks and recreation, trash pickup and sanitation, and ambulance service for the rich geriatric Project inhabitants.

A Little Patience

When asked for such cost estimates, the city says, “Wait for the Environmental Impact Report.”

Unfortunately, the EIR is scheduled to be available years hence, not nearly soon enough to be useful as a guide to our decision making process.

Easily Deduced

And, oh yes, these additional expenses are not likely to be a big mystery.

I think Prof. Champion could provide rough planning estimates for them today.

He teaches urban planning at USC, and he’s convinced me he knows his subject.

Where Are Their Ears?

I’ve spoken to this topic in two of the three CAC/community meetings as has CAC member Marianne Kim, and we’ve been totally ignored.

I leave it to the reader to guess why we’re getting the mushroom treatment.