| NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS RE: CONSIDERATION OF FINAL ADOPTION OF CITYWIDE 2045 GENERAL PLAN, ZONING CODE UPDATE AND CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AUGUST 14TH AT 7PM: Planning Commission Meeting AUGUST 26TH AT 7PM: City Council Meeting ****Your participation at these meetings is crucial because the General Plan/Zoning Update include “LAND USE” designation which will likely result in MOST of the 3341 units that Culver City is required by the state to build to be packed in Fox Hills!!! The city needs to change this land use so that the required housing is equitably distributed throughout the city. With the density designation at 100 units/acre on the south side of Slauson, three developers have already proposed 1706 units with likely more being proposed. For info on General Plan: www.pictureculvercity.com SPEAK UP/HOLD UP SIGNS OR JUST COME AND SHOW SUPPORT ****Signs cannot be bigger than 18x 24 per city regulations. – We are only afforded 1-2 minutes per speaker and we want to make sure that our issues are addressed by the speakers. -If you intend to speak go to: www.culvercity.org and under “CITY HALL” see Meetings/Agendas for instructions to speak in person or virtually –Validated parking available under City Hall. Entrance off Duquesne Street Security Procedures for City Council Meetings Beginning August 12, 2024 To ensure public safety during City Council meetings, beginning Monday, August 12th, 2024, all persons entering the Mike Balkman Council Chambers during a City Council meeting must pass through a security screening, including a metal detector and bag inspection. Please plan your arrival time to the meeting accordingly. Firearms, knives, weapons (such as pepper spray, tasers, batons, etc.), and signs larger than 18 x 24 inches are prohibited from City Council Chambers and no one with any of these items will be permitted to enter. Suggested Ideas to focus on for the public comments at the August 14th and August 26th meetings (some of the items were covered at the August 3rd meeting) They are as follows: · Blatant Inequitable distribution of the state required 3,341 units due to the 100 units per acre density designation on the south side of Slauson, which predictablyhas resulted in thus far, 1706 units proposed all within the area of Hannum, Buckingham, Bristol and Uplander. Poised to see more proposals. · We accept that we will have some new development as housing is needed, but we reject having the bulk of the new housing in Fox Hills! We are the densest residential area in Culver City with 2800 units in 26 complexes. We are not NIMBYS!!! · Undue burden on our community with issues that will result in lack of adequate infrastructure and ensuing negative impact on quality of life for the Fox Hills community. (e.g. increased air pollution, increased traffic and lack of adequate parking and an increase in at least 2000 additional cars to the area) · The Safer Fox Hills Plan by the Traffic Department will be nullified as one of its purposes was to decrease speeding and cut through traffic. Because of these developments, there will be at least 2000 more cars added to our area, which defeats the purpose of this plan. · Purpose of Culver City’s Zoning Code passage which states” The provisions are intended to ensure that all development produces an environment of stable and desirable character that is harmonious with existing and future development…. protects the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties…..” THIS STATED PURPOSE IS NOT REFLECTED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FOX HILLS · The Community Development Department will tell us that they are going to have a detailed plan for Fox Hills to address issues related to this increased density that these new developments will produce. In reality, the city is creating a problem which they say they will address, instead of preventing the problem to begin with. · The city’s response to our concerns regarding the decrease in the current ocean breezes we have to keep our units cool is that the new developments will not obstruct the air flow. Common sense says that these new structures, which will be 6-7 stories high, WILL obstruct air flow to our complexes. · The response to our concern that the 100 units/acre designation on the south side of Slauson is minimized by the city’s explanation that there are other areas in Culver City where there is a 100 units/acre designation. Although true, those areas are much smaller compared to the area in Fox Hills, where we have already 1706 units proposed. The city also states that there are residential units on the north side of Slauson as well. Although true, it is a very small amount compared to all the other residential units on the south side of Slauson. It is another statement that tries to minimize our concerns. · Being a “Threshold Priority Neighborhood” means that we are borderline in meeting the metrics that can make us more susceptible to environmental pollutants. With the related pollutant burden that will be the result of these land use decisions, we can quickly become an actual “Priority Neighborhood.” The Environmental Justice Element in the General Plan outlines only in a non specific and general way how to address the added pollutants. · Efficient land use can be realized in Fox Hills without packing us and future residents in like we are sardines. The impression is that this plan for Fox Hills was an expedient way for Culver City to meet the state required 3,341 units by 2029 instead of creating a practical plan to equitably distribute this requirement. In addition, there are actually several areas in the city where it would be much more appropriate to place 100 units/acre such as on the north side of Slauson and parts of Jefferson Blvd. The reason that the Advance Planning Manager gave for why the north side of Slauson was not selected for 100 units/acre was that developers like larger parcels. Clearly this plan was developer driven and not community driven. · The city has a long history of “missed opportunities” to place housing to include affordable housing which they failed to do and now they want to place the burden on Fox Hills. · Since the General Plan has not been adopted as yet and the deadline for submission is October 15th, the density designation for the south side of Slauson could be decreased. Developers knew that the General Plan had not been adopted when they put their applications in, so their projects would have to change to reflect any change in the Land Use Element ( example: reduction of density to 50 units/acre in Fox Hills) Thank you, Fox Hills Neighborhood Association [email protected] www.fhnacc.org “Like” us on Facebook! | Our quality of life will be negatively impacted in Fox Hills with overdevelopment!! Figure 2,000 more CARS, at least. More *TRAFFIC, *POLLUTION * NOISE AND WORSE PARKING PROBLEMS THAN WE HAVE NOW. Goodbye ocean breezes ( WILL BE BLOCKED BY THESE BUILDINGS) – Goodbye tall trees and plants City Council has been ignoring our concerns and every level of governance has known for years about our traffic/parking issues. We fought big development in 2017 and we can do it again!!! Our pushback then is likely the reason why the city did not directly reach out to the Fox Community |