Home Letters If City Meant Its Word, Why Was a Downtown Parking...

If City Meant Its Word, Why Was a Downtown Parking Lot Sold to a Developer?

151
0
SHARE


It was very interesting last Monday to watch the City Council discuss the temporary rental of 120 public parking spaces near Vets’ Park for $60 per parking spot. The rental is meant to prevent construction workers at the Sony lot from parking in the surrounding neighborhood.

­
They say they want to prevent employees from parking in the neighborhood. So why did Culver City sell off a Downtown parking lot that will permanently affect the Downtown neighborhood?

At the 4043 Irving Pl. parking lot, the developer, in a very smart move, has not secured his property. The developers own traffic study last May shows 34 vehicles drive onto the lot during the peak a.m. traffic hour. The city calls the current condition “transient parking.” Doing so, they don’t have to truly study or count the total number of vehicles using the lot on a daily basis.

In the morning, the Downtown workers have claimed their free parking space in the lot. Later, the evening employees and patrons take over the 4043 Irving Pl. lot and neighborhood streets. Often the 63-space lot is full. The night ends with people wandering into the neighborhood trying to find their cars.

Culver City offers Downtown employees parking spots in one of their parking structures for $60 per month.

But why pay for something you can get for free. When the 4043 Irving lot is developed into 26 residential condos and 3 offices, where are the employees and patrons of Downtown going to park for free? With no parking restrictions one block into the neighborhood, they can legally park all day for free and do so. The neighborhood is now a free parking lot.

The city has not spent one dime to address the steady flow of traffic parking in our neighborhood. Culver City’s $50,000 to $90,000 RFP (Request for Proposal) to study how parking is used and managed in Downtown does not include the residential neighborhood!

The City Council refuses to make the developer close the lot temporarily to find out the immediate impact of the closure to the neighborhood.

How can you possibly mitigate what you ignore? That is like ignoring the elephant in the room?

City Council will hear an appeal of the massive one block deep (from Irving to Lafayette), 26 condo/3-office development of 4043 Irving Pl. on Monday at 7 p.m. in City Council Chambers.

Mr. Anderson, a member of the Downtown Neighborhood Assn., may be contacted at caryanderson@ca.rr.com