I have been following the City Council meetings, in person or on television, for a number of years.
Reflecting back on these meetings, I found something interesting. For about six years Councilman Gary Silbiger has been requesting the Council agendize the formation of neighborhood councils.
And for six years he has been unable to get enough support to have the item agendized.
But during this same period the Council and Planning Commission have been approving developments that have created neighborhood groups that oppose the proposed development.
Take South Sepulveda
The Champion project last year resulted in the formation of the Culver Alliance. And while this group is somewhat dormant now, they still email members with activity in the city.
The Sunkist Park Neighborhood Watch has taken steps to be more vigilant on development in their area. Development on the East Side has also resulted in the formation of a neighborhood group. This group has been attending Council meetings on a regular basis and is following a current project in their area.
The project at 9900 Culver Boulevard resulted in the formation of the Gateway Neighborhood Assn. The GNA is a very active group that recently held a series of workshops dealing with community development.
They are now working toward uniting these individual groups into a single group based on common interests.
What Vice Mayor Silbiger has been trying to agendize is actually being accomplished by the actions of the Council.
On Council’s Monday Agenda
And now there is another project that is being considered by the City Council. It is the 4300 Irving Pl. project.
It is a four-story mixed use (?) project.
Last time I heard there were 24 condominiums with a couple of small offices on the ground floor.
(See Letters to the Editor in Thursday’s edition.)
It is adjacent to a residential neighborhood. And again a project has resulted in the formation of a neighborhood group, the Downtown Neighborhood Assn. (DNA).
The DNA has appealed the Planning Commission’s approval of the project.
The appeal will be heard at next Monday’s City Council meeting. I expect that many people from the other neighborhood groups will attend the meeting to offer support to the DNA.
And what two things do the projects that created these neighborhood councils appear to have in common?
First, the projects are within the existing city building codes.
And second, they are all adjacent to residential neighborhoods, usually single-family homes.
In each case, the neighbors adjacent to these projects felt that the proposed projects were out of character with their neighborhood. This constant battle between residents and developers is not good for the image of the city.
Developers evaluate a piece of property and determine a fair price based on what the city codes will allow them to build. If and when they are forced to reduce the scope of the project, they will feel they have been cheated by the city.
When the residents see the size of a proposed project, they will fight because it will change the character of their neighborhood. They will blame city staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council for allowing such a project in their neighborhood.
The result is two groups that are important to the city, residents and developers, having a bad impression of the operation of the city.
To prevent this from happening in the future, the city needs to re-evaluate the building codes related to commercial developments adjacent to residential properties. The current 60 degree angulation method for determining the height of buildings adjacent to residential properties allows buildings that are too tall.
The city needs to take action on this item. If they fail to act, these new neighborhood groups will take the action and the City may not like the results.
Tom Supple may be contacted at
tomjsup@ca.rr.com
