Culver City Council: Do not eliminate R1/single-family zoning in Culver City.
733 Comments
K
Karen Amorelli
5 years ago
I oppose this rezoning! Protect our single family neighborhoods.
S
Steven Zimelman
5 years ago
Don’t be fooled by developers that want to come into single family neighborhoods and erect many units that will make them wealthy . Leaving these neighborhoods that were not zoned for multi family living. To be overrun with people and cars that the area was not zoned for.
J
Jodi Zimelman
5 years ago
We moved to Culver City for a reason, for the sense of family and community. By selling land to developers in our community to build condos in single family neighborhoods, you would be ruining everything that Culver City has been working towards for years.
We need to vote on these huge issues! We pay ALOT in taxes to live here and our voices need to be heard and our votes need to count for something this crucial!
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
This sounds like a rushed under-thought solution to a complex problem. I grew up here, only a handful of people (or less) I went to Culver High with can afford to own a home here. This seems more like a money grab for developers than a solution to our housing affordability issues. I’m 32 but owning a home here feels out of reach unfortunately.
S
Sarah Madigan
5 years ago
There are many issues to be considered in meeting the California requirements for housing across income levels. Thus, there are a variety of ways which should be considered to accomplish this goal. City residents should be included in the discussions concerning any effort to change R1 zoning.
C
connie capa
5 years ago
I
M
Mark Amparan
5 years ago
Among other considerations, R-1 is environmentally sound in keeping more of the earth uncovered.
S
Selma Calmes
5 years ago
Please don't allow densely crowded lots in our lovely city, a city that works.
M
Maria Sundeen
5 years ago
Keep R1
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
Since COVID further accelerated consumer shopping to online, there should be many retail locations that have lost retail tenants and could be converted to residential properties in So Cal. Mixed use properties with retails and residential units would create more residential units. For those mixed used project, the City should require a minimum of 20% affordable units.
A
Aaron Blaisdell
5 years ago
I oppose any change from R1/single family zoning in Culver City.
L
Louise Van Bibber
5 years ago
Allowing developers to build multi units will negatively impact the traffic and parking situation. Leave the R1 homes and build multi-use buildings (retail/residential) large structure on major streets like Overland and Sepulveda if there is a need
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
Please preserve single-family neighborhoods.
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
#The state mandate to increase housing density was based on outdated assumptions from population needs of a pre-COVID economy. The past year demonstrated that remote working is not only feasible but a preferred option for a skilled workforce. The idea that concentrated, high density cities are needed for a vibrant economy is a relic of the past.
Southern California is not agrarian nor a manufacturing economy which requires a large concentrated workforce. Many lessons were learned during COVID, and employers are re-evaluating where and how their employees can work and live in a sustainable and affordable manner.
We need to slow down this rush to change and systematically evaluate the emerging data and trends of employment, migration, and population needs to determine how to best address the new challenges of a post-COVID economy.
J
Joseph Bonn
5 years ago
Upzoning is NOT the answer to racial inequality or unaffordable housing. We do not have the infrastructure to support a population boom, specifically traffic and schools cannot handle the influx.
A
Alison Bonn
5 years ago
The change in zoning is ill-advised and will only serve to agitate the infrastructure problems the city is already facing while ruining a beloved neighborhood in the process.
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
Can’t we make R-1 R-2? And leave R-2 and R-4 alone? Or make it much easier to have ADU’s? Especially in R-2?
A
Amy Warner
5 years ago
We need to preserve our single family neighborhoods !
B
Brenda Ramsey
5 years ago
Boils down to greed. Do the Council Members for want this to happen live in CC?
I oppose this rezoning! Protect our single family neighborhoods.
Don’t be fooled by developers that want to come into single family neighborhoods and erect many units that will make them wealthy . Leaving these neighborhoods that were not zoned for multi family living. To be overrun with people and cars that the area was not zoned for.
We moved to Culver City for a reason, for the sense of family and community. By selling land to developers in our community to build condos in single family neighborhoods, you would be ruining everything that Culver City has been working towards for years. We need to vote on these huge issues! We pay ALOT in taxes to live here and our voices need to be heard and our votes need to count for something this crucial!
This sounds like a rushed under-thought solution to a complex problem. I grew up here, only a handful of people (or less) I went to Culver High with can afford to own a home here. This seems more like a money grab for developers than a solution to our housing affordability issues. I’m 32 but owning a home here feels out of reach unfortunately.
There are many issues to be considered in meeting the California requirements for housing across income levels. Thus, there are a variety of ways which should be considered to accomplish this goal. City residents should be included in the discussions concerning any effort to change R1 zoning.
I
Among other considerations, R-1 is environmentally sound in keeping more of the earth uncovered.
Please don't allow densely crowded lots in our lovely city, a city that works.
Keep R1
Since COVID further accelerated consumer shopping to online, there should be many retail locations that have lost retail tenants and could be converted to residential properties in So Cal. Mixed use properties with retails and residential units would create more residential units. For those mixed used project, the City should require a minimum of 20% affordable units.
I oppose any change from R1/single family zoning in Culver City.
Allowing developers to build multi units will negatively impact the traffic and parking situation. Leave the R1 homes and build multi-use buildings (retail/residential) large structure on major streets like Overland and Sepulveda if there is a need
Please preserve single-family neighborhoods.
#The state mandate to increase housing density was based on outdated assumptions from population needs of a pre-COVID economy. The past year demonstrated that remote working is not only feasible but a preferred option for a skilled workforce. The idea that concentrated, high density cities are needed for a vibrant economy is a relic of the past. Southern California is not agrarian nor a manufacturing economy which requires a large concentrated workforce. Many lessons were learned during COVID, and employers are re-evaluating where and how their employees can work and live in a sustainable and affordable manner. We need to slow down this rush to change and systematically evaluate the emerging data and trends of employment, migration, and population needs to determine how to best address the new challenges of a post-COVID economy.
Upzoning is NOT the answer to racial inequality or unaffordable housing. We do not have the infrastructure to support a population boom, specifically traffic and schools cannot handle the influx.
The change in zoning is ill-advised and will only serve to agitate the infrastructure problems the city is already facing while ruining a beloved neighborhood in the process.
Can’t we make R-1 R-2? And leave R-2 and R-4 alone? Or make it much easier to have ADU’s? Especially in R-2?
We need to preserve our single family neighborhoods !
Boils down to greed. Do the Council Members for want this to happen live in CC?
Please preserve single-family neighborhoods