Where Will People Live?
A major hang-up of opponents to Ponte Vista seems to be the number of units and "density". I have to apologize in advance for this section. Some of my personal opinions are likely to slip through.
The R-1 gang is pretty obvious in their desires, 429 single-family detached homes. Other groups have come up with different numbers, I've dreamt up a plan which may, or may not be feasible because of civil engineering, traffic, an entire array of truly professional reasons which might not make it feasible. Mark Wells came up with some good ideas. But again all these suggestions and ideas have to go through the City Planning Department to be certain they comply with all the relevant rules, regulations, building codes, etc., etc.. After that the plan gets to run the second gauntlet of the Planning Commission. In short, this is not something which can be done quickly and quietly and swept under the rug.
I also have to explain what I meant when I said "housing equals jobs". Maybe I'm too simple-minded. But to me, there are at least 3 different ways a new project can help create local jobs. The first is the most obvious, local labor to build the place., Second, local labor to provide goods and services, and to provide things like health care to those who need it. The third is a little more difficult to conceptualize. The best way is for me to explain is kind of simplistic. But if a worker can live in San Pedro and get to his job at the docks, or to the electronic and aerospace firms we have growing in downtown, this means they can take a job here in San Pedro, increase our tax base, and not have to spend hours commuting out to Corona for something which they can qualify to buy. It is only common sense that a 90 minute commute to Corona will spew more pollutants into our air rather than 7 minutes driving down Western from Green Hill to Trudie.
I have done a ton of research about the types of housing available in San Pedro. It has been the subject of a couple other posts and I do not need to reiterate it here. The only thing I will reference is that the choices boil down to condos, or less-than-beautiful single family houses for rather large prices. Of course there are the nice single family homes, but the cost is way out of the range ($800,000+) for most first-time buyers, or those trading up for the first time. For those who keep stating (without any facts to back them up) "there is plenty of housing in San Pedro" I have to say - Please show me. And - is it of sufficient quantity to meet the demand for the number of people who would like to move to San Pedro? To put a more definable parameter on my question, please show me a pool of 1,700 housing units (the number I used in my proposal). But in reality the question is rhetorical since you cannot. There are not that many housing units available for sale. Period.
Despite these other obstacles, the biggest thing people have to get used to and accept is that you cannot just put up 429 single family homes and say our job is finished. Again, I will not reiterate my previous posts on this topic. I think I've made my thoughts fairly clearly known.
However, I do need to reiterate one fact. The Urban Land Institute recommended 3,000 new housing units for San Pedro. This was some years back. Given our growth rate, a number of total units going in which total higher than there number would not be unreasonable to accept.
SO THE MEAT OF THIS POST, Is that we need 3,000 (or more) new housing units in our community to be built. Where exactly are the other 1,700 families supposed to go? Hemet, and commute? Needles and commute? Corona and commute? Who cares, just not here?
Just because we do not build the homes does not make the demand for the housing go away. All that we will have done is create the "commute monster" making these people waste time, family time, fossil fuels, etc., etc., etc..
THERE IS A DEMAND FOR NEW HOUSING IN SAN PEDRO. IGNORING IT WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY. IT WILL JUST MAKE PEOPLE'S LIVES MORE DIFFICULT.
Ponte Vista is not the Vue. It is a different type of product. Nor is it the Palos Verdes Street Project, nor JCC Homes, nor Seaport Village. It has features and amenities which can make the community of San Pedro better. If you do not like the numbers, suggest something palatable. Don't just say "no, no, no". That is not negotiation.
We have been lucky and able to hold onto closer ties to our history for longer than many communities. Let's make certain that through constructive talks with Bisno Development, we can try to preserve as much as we can.
Tom Field
22 comments:
We NEED 3,000 (or more) new housing units? Who determines that? You? I don't think we NEED anything. As you posted, the Urban Land Institute "recommended" that number. I'm sorry, but we have to draw the line. Every human that wants to live in San Pedro just can't Tom. They will have to live elsewhere. Sprawl will happen until we control population growth...that is fact! Densing population in San Pedro will contribute to a whole host of environmental and health issues where I and my family live today!
Hey, by the way, where are these aerospace and electronics jobs you talk of in San Pedro?
It appears to me that their are many parents in San Pedro who want their children to be able to buy brand new housing as they start out in life. How many of those same parents bought brand new homes when they were first starting out?
With all the projects going on in San Pedro, when do we say enough is enough?
If San Pedro really needs 3,000 more housing units and somebody want to build 1700 units, where are we going to try and put the other 1,300 units?
Urban Village may have an 18-story building and another smaller building, but that only accounts for 251 of the 1400 units the breeze set forth in their article.
To get to the 1300 more count, we would need to see 5+ more developments the size of Urban Village built. Where is the land for that? Must we continue to tear down older homes to provide mega-buildings near downtown?
Anonymous 10:29am
I have to straddle the fence on your questions.
On one side you are correct and I agree that population control is the key. Unfortunately that part of the equation is out of our hands.
However, population growth has accelerated since the ULI study and the housing IS needed. In my view I am afraid we are going to be dealing with BOTH sprawl and densification (is that a word?) until we get a handle on the population. I would prefer to not increase our population either. If I had my way, people would live within 5 miles of where they worked.
Doesn't Northrop have their offices down by the Vue? I call those aerospace jobs. They are white-collar, but aerospace nontheless. If you feel only factories should be counted, then we have a different definition. With all the pollution coming from the Port, I would think we would want to foster more white collar jobs. Wouldn't you agree?
Tom
Anonymous 11:33am
By last count, there are already approximately 1,400 housing units approved and either waiting to start construction, or already underway. Before Ponte Vista is even put into the mix.
This gets us to a little over the 3,000 units "recommended" by the Urban Land Institute (I stand corrected in my choice of words in my post). It also uses up the last large vacant parcels of land. Anything more is going to have to go where existing housing, or commercial buildings already stand.
But I do have to agree with you that it is rather disconcerting that people feel entitled that their first house has to be brand spanking new. Lord knows I did not start that way. I don't know what happened to the idea of starting with what you can afford and trading up as your family grows. That's the way I did it.
But, in the final analysis, Bisno owns the property, he can build what he likes within the guidelines set down by the Planning Department. Our best hope is to get some input into the Specific Plan which will designate pretty tightly what he will be able to do.
The other point which I have brought up previously is that he is only going to build as many units as his marketing people tell him he can sell. Given the public attitude you (and I) have seen that could be a lot of units.
This is where the Planning Department comes in to make certain the project fits into the community. This is where we have to let them know we don't want 5,000 units there. On the other hand, if Bisno proposes a reasonable number of units which he demonstrates that he can mitigate the adverse effects of, they will have to wrk with him on it.
It is really incumbent upon us, the members of the community, to let them know what we want to see as mitigation measures.
It might be a bitter pill for people to swallow, but the truth of the matter is that R-1 does not make the highest and best use of the land. Just saying "no" is like standing on the beach and commanding the tide to stop coming in. But what we CAN do is put up some breakwaters and some channels and at least let the water flow in a manner that benefits the most people.
However, the other end of the spectrum, 2,300 units, is just too much also. I have never supported that proposal.
Tom
By-the-way, here's a link I pulled off Curbed LA that gives an idea of what type of outrageous prices are out there right now.
http://lalife.com/address/316_W_16th_St_Los_Angeles_CA_90731/prices
Also this thread from Curbed LA gives a interesting discussion of the situation:
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2007/05/on_the_market_s_2.php
Anonymous 11:33 AM commenting back.
I know we can't hold the tide back, but we can and should prepare the best way we can to stop a flood or tidal wave from devouring San Pedro, don't you think?
When should the will of the members of the community come in with respect to what should be built the their own community? It really doesn't matter who signed the greater number of petitions, but it does matter when the community becomes more informed about a development, particularly in the Ponte Vista case, that the more folks who know more about it, the more they are determined to stop Mr. Bisno's plans or have them severly limited.
If I own a property in an all R1 neighborhood, should I be able to build any size house on the lot I own?
Do we trust the Planning Department? Should we trust the Planning Department? As so many folks have said about San Pedro, we are at the end of the city that get to take all the stuff and are pretty much ignored at City Hall. Why should the Planning Department be any different?
So let me see if I understand, If there are 1400 new residences going up in San Pedro, are you thinking there are 1400 more jobs coming into the area?
If 1700 or 2300 additional units are constructed at Ponte Vista, does that mean there will be 1700 or more jobe coming into San Pedro on top of the 1400 jobs?
I am confused. The County of Los Angeles estimates there are .86 jobs per resident in San Pedro already. That means that more folks have to travel outside of San Pedro to go to work than can find jobs here.
Where are all the new jobs going to come from?
Also in another comment somewhere, you stated there are white collar jobs at Northrup Grumman, here in San Pedro. How many of those folks might be able to afford a new R1 home at Ponte Vista. I suspect not very many, but some might want to do that.
Anonymous 11:33am
I agree that people have a right to make their opinions heard when they feel they are in danger of being flooded out.
If you own a piece of property it does not mean you can put anything on it you want. There are building codes, health & safety codes, fire codes, the list is almost endless. And of course there is the zoning. Now people who read what I just wrote are going to say "Aha! Gotcha! Bisno bought R1 so he should keep R1." But that is not how the process works. A property owner can apply for any type of change he wants. In Bisno's case he could even apply to put a 20-storey building like the Vue. Whether that change gets approved depends on if the Planning Department can make the project fit with the surrounding community.
Just because the highest and best use of a piece of land was R1 when the City put the zoning designation on it, does not mean it is the highest and best use now. Zoning designations are not forever. If they were, Trump National would still be flowerbeds for seasonal farmers and most of San Pedro would still be dairy farms. Things change.
What the public needs to get educated about is that a Specific Plan is actually more restrictive than R1 zoning. Kara McLeod explained it very well on Mark Wells' blog. "...If what you want is a checkerboard of fenced off private property with people totally dependent on their cars, then, by all means, support R-1 zoning and over 500 houses. If instead, you want a road to Mary Star, some parks, some light retail, some recreational space and a DASH stop, you need a Specific Plan. R-1 will not get you the things that make for a livable community. Why does everyone assume that the Central resolution supports maximum density/ It does nothing of the kind. A Specific Plan is more restrictive than R-1.R-1 will still allow exceptions and density bonuses..."
As to your final point, I believe the Planning Department is much different than City Hall. As I have said before the politicos mess things up with their meddling. I trust Betsy Weisman over Gordon Teuber any day. The Planning Department has a very well-defined mission. After the Specific Plan is in place, building inspectors, fire inspectors, health & safety inspectors also have a very well-defined job. If something starts going up that is not included in the Specific Plan, it would come to a screeching halt very quickly. Come on! In this environment, won't you admit that whatever and whenever the project finally breaks ground, they are going to be under a microscope.
Tom
Mr. Wells,
Please don't play the ingenue. I've heard you speak, I've read your blog. I know better than to think you are confused by what I said.
At one CAC meeting David Olivo used the .86 jobs per resident and then corrected himself. I apologize I don't have the correct number at my fingertips, but I will find it. In any event, the point I was trying to make is along the lines of a proposal you yourself put forward. But let me go through it again.
I think jobs will originate with construction. San Pedro is a union town. You remember, right? So we get local labor for the project. After it is built, there is going to be a need for a service sector to provide for the people who live there. Hopefully, we can persuade Bisno to add a larger Senior Housing component. These will require health care services. If you get the assisted-care facility you suggested, that is not just changing bed-pans. Those jobs require quite a bit of technical education. Then, of course, there will be local labor to provide goods and services. Lastly, with a large pool of housing close by, people who are commuting from Corona might consider living in San Pedro instead. Don't you think that will help stimulate the local economy?
Somehow your questions always wind up discussing minutiae instead of the larger picture. Right now, until we have hard numbers on how many units, how many bedrooms, etc., isn't it better to focus on what we want to see Ponte Vista do to fit in with the rest of the community? Isn't this what the Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council Resolution did? It focused on general concepts and not hard numbers. It is too early in the game for that.
Mr. Wells, you keep peppering me with questions, but don't seem to be able to answer the simple ones I pose to you. Please show me where in San Pedro is there a pool of 1,000 diverse housing units in the $350,000 to $600,000 range? Please compare the other 86 Neighborhood Councils in Los Angeles to the Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council which you tried to rip to shreds for not having what isn't required by the Brown Act anyway. Instead of ducking the questions, how about some answers?
Tom
Thanks Tom, I thought that was a great comment.
I am now wondering about what Bob Bisno wrote about in the May newsletter and I really truly need your help in understanding this because I don't know where to look for the following information Bob is writing about in this quote:
"As part of our environmental review process, we provided a detailed breakdown of the number, size, and type and estimated price range for the projects 2,300 units."
Please Tom, if you can, tell us where we can find that information. I know we haven't seen that breakdown on the two blogs and I don't seem to be able to find it in the DEIR.
Does this information, in your opinion exist in the DEIR, or is it somewhere where interested individuals can look at it on their own.
I think it is strange that we are reading about this breakdown when it has never been brought up to the members of the CAC in any of their meetings.
Your recent posts have been thoughtful and enlightening and I hope they continue with intelligent comments that are not attacking you, or your position.
You know who this is, and thanks for these last posts.
I read that in the newsletter also. I also have not been able to find it in the DEIR. Believe me, if I knew where that information was I'd be burning up the keyboard posting it because we are all stalled until we know those numbers.
The last I heard of it was when Bob Bisno announced it at a CAC meeting, then Mark Wells asked Elise Swanson when the information would be released. The answer was words to the effect of "when the time was appropriate". I'm as much in the dark as you.
Tom
I don't know any longshoreman who would want to live in a gated community like Ponte Vista. They would be happier in the SFR built in 1910. There are very few jobs in San Pedro with an income to support living at Ponte Vista. I think most people living at Ponte Vista will be commuting pretty far to work.
Anonymous 9:33pm
Well I have to admit the comment someone made earlier about my wanting a dream (living within 5 miles of your job) is probably pretty "out there". But come on, at least give an old hippie some props for trying! hahahahahahaha!
Most like the place will be a vast majority of DINKs (Double Income No Kids). Which actually won't be half bad for traffic. They leave in the morning to drive to downtown, or Westwood, or Century City, wherever there jobs are, then we don't have to see them again until they come home late in the evening.
How would you guys feel about that? That is also where the lower student generation numbers comefrom. These people are too busy building their careers and "doing lunch" to make a family.
Tom
Tom, Mark here and you are absolutely correct!
I think I asked Elise when the pricing stucture would be released and she said what you wrote. I think the newsletter is the publishing of what I asked for. I don't think I asked for the number, and type breakdown because I thought I already had it from the side-bar meeting Bob and I had.
If Bob's writing is something to the affect that the numbers and types he was considering back in early January, combined by the pricing of the various type IS the breakdown he mentions in the article, I think all of us would and should be surprized.
Because you are also correct that what Bob told me should probably not be taken as fact, it is still a wonderment about where the "real" breakdown can be found.
Another mystery to be looked at, I suppose.
MW
P.S. I hope you don't mind me commenting on your blog. I have found this latest discussion wonderfull and I think the kind of discussion we both want on our blogs. If we could only keep the attackers away.
Well Tom, I guess I jumped the gun again and I apologize. I didn't read farther us the comments before I posted the prior comment. Shame on me for that one.
There may not be 1000 units available in San Pedro. I don't know because I have been doing other activities in life and I haven't taken the time you wish me to take, looking up available housing.
I don't feel we should sell all of our community short by demanding much more housing in the area.
Space will run out for both residential and commercial development. If there are not enough new businesses in the community, why would we need the added housing? But I hope dont censor me when I try to answer your questions.
About the Central Fiasco, I think I got it wrong in the first place. I thought when Elise got up and read the resolution that what she was reading was an actual endorsement of the Ponte Vista project, by Central. Myself and probably a whole lot of folks in that room were wrong in thinking that Central endorsed Ponte Vista. For that I apologize to you, sir and everyone else.
I later learned of an Email sent by Sue Castillo to Elise Swanson indicating that the resolution by Central WAS NOT and endorsement of the Ponte Vista project.
In writings to a board member of Central, and using other sources, I have come to learn that some members of Central's board were not pleased with Ms. Swanson's reading of the resolution into the minutes. I personally think she had the right to do it, as I have the right to read the Email sent to Ms. Swanson by Ms. Castillo, also into the record to clearly state that Central does not endorse the Ponte Vista development at this time.
Now about the availability of housing in the area.
There are at least 23 units at Miralest Canyon Estates for sale. There are an additional 3 units at the same condominium development for rent. I know they are not big numbers, but they are numbers.
There is a wonderful 4-bedroom house on Trudie Drive that has been for sale for several months now. When I drive around on weekends it seems to me that there are more Open House signs around then there has been is quite a long time.
Another answer is that the market is going down. More homes seem to be for sale as more folks get into financial trouble and have to get out of their ARMs and other high cost mortgages. There may not be a thousand, but the numbers look like they are increasing every month.
I don't know why anyone is striving for more housing to be built now when the market is in the slump it is in. Perhaps it may be because of the lead time necessary to get developments built. I guess another answer is that I need to look at the housing demand forecast for the next 5 years or so, to see if the need for "3000" more units in San Pedro really holds up in this economy.
Tom, like I wrote before, I will try my best to provide you with the information you request. It is only Friday and it may take me a while to look up all 87 N.C.s
MW
Mark,
I'm cool with that. At least you're going to take a look. It's like when a couple of people asked me about real estate values in different areas. I'm going to have to look it up nad it will tak me a while.
Please don't get distressed because I asked you to answer questions. I'm a bit off today anyway. I hate holiday weeks. All it does is cram 5 days of work into 4. I get a little cranky! HA! There I said it! Sorry, but as cranky as I am, that's as much of an apology you're going to get out om me this week. Where's my Metamucil!
Tom
why do you seem to attack everyone who doesnt agree with your vision of utopia. you continue to say no real judgments can be made about anything because we still dont have any numbers from bisno. this projects value is pushing the greater part of a billion dollars. there is a LOT of money involved. why doesn't he reveal this new plan now so it can be looked at by the surrounding community AND potential buyers. Frankly, i am losing intrest in buying a unit any more because of the lack of any real information. And if this is built in 5 phases it will be hard to compete for one of the 500 units divided by the type of unit which i want and/or can afford. whereever syou sit on this issue, this is bad business.
I meant as they come avaliable on the market. I.E., about 500 units divided by 5 building phases, spreead out over 5 years. One omre thing, why do you keep using a commute from corona as a hypothetical? i dont think many , if any, people are doing that.
regarding the 7 minute complainer:
wont this number double because of this and all the other projects.?
I mean without something tangible, i would have to consider trying to live somewhere else, if i can afford one of these units of unknow pricing and traffic and shopping woes i keep hearing about.
for the record tom, my personal commute is no less than 100 minutes each way. not just those 7 mentioned.
# 4 - San Pedro needs affordable multi-family dwelling units for RPV's future hotel workers. The redevelopment of the old Marineland property generates a need for lots of new low-wage earners. Where can these people afford to live? Think, man.
Anonymous 11:34pm
I think you've got the project mixed up. I don't know where you got the 500 units. I won't use 2,300 units since I never thought it was a good number, but rather let's stick with what I have proposed so far, that is 1,700.
The building whill be phased in over 5 years with about an equal number coming up for sale each year. That would mean 340 new units coming on line each year.
AS for the question of why I use Corona as an example for a commute, if you spend any time on the 91 freeway you'll see exactly what I mean. And when you get out near Corona, they've got tons of new developments out there. But if you want a job, you've got to come back into the city.
Tom Field
Post a Comment