September 26, 2022
Re: Lincoln Center Project
Dear Santa Monica City Council:
Santa Monica Forward urges you to be mindful of your legal obligations and not meddle with a project subject to ministerial approval and protected by state law. Doing so will almost certainly invite enforcement action from HCD or Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office, as recently described in the New York Times article “California Fights Its NIMBYs.”
As you know, California’s Housing Accountability Act (HAA) limits Santa Monica’s ability to deny or reduce the density of badly needing housing in our city. Moreover, the legislature has significantly strengthened the HAA in recent years and has added hefty fines for cities that violate the law. Fines start at $10,000 per unit, or $50,000 per unit for bad faith denials. For Lincoln Center, the fine for a bad faith denial would cost the city at least $26 million dollars, plus legal fees for the prevailing party.
Lincoln Center appears to comply with our zoning ordinance and our general plan with no adverse impact on health or safety. Therefore, the project must be approved. We urge you to follow the law and allow city staff to process the application in a timely manner and without political interference. To do anything otherwise risks disaster for the city.
More broadly, Santa Monica Forward urges City Council to support all efforts to increase housing production. Santa Monica has a severe housing shortage which has made it exceedingly difficult for newcomers to move here, for our children to stay, and for our businesses to recruit and retain employees. Our housing shortage is a crisis situation and Santa Monicans deserve a City Council that takes the crisis seriously.
Sincerely,
Abby Arnold and Carl Hansen
Co-Chairs, Santa Monica Forward
CC: City Manager David White
City Attorney Doug Sloan
Community Development Director David Martin
Planning Manager Jing Yeo
Item 16.C
09/27/22
1 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 7:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems; councilmtgitems
Subject: 9/27/2022 16c
Attachments: Fdidy7jUYAAw01J.jpg
EXTERNAL
I see Phil is still looking for ways to torpedo the Gelson's project. I would recommend Phil and other councilmembers stop looking for ways to torpedo the project unless they're willing to personally cough up the over $26 million it would cost the city in Housing Accountability Act fines to kill the project. I would also recommend that Phil stop wasting city staff's time like this.
Item 16.C
09/27/22
2 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:29 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: PLEASE REJECT THE PROJECT ON THE GELSON’S SITE Attachments: SM-ltr_Gelsons2.pdf
From: Joanne Pittard <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2022 11:50 AM
To: David White <[email protected]>; Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; David Martin <[email protected]> Subject: PLEASE REJECT THE PROJECT ON THE GELSON’S SITE
EXTERNAL
To:
1 Planning Director at [email protected]
2 City Manager at [email protected]
3 City Council at [email protected]
STOP! Our lovely city is presently overcrowded with high density buildings. Just drive down Lincoln Blvd and look at the huge apartment complexes being built. Traffic is a nightmare on our local streets. Parking is very difficult.
I am a long‐term resident of Santa Monica, over 50 years, and have watched how our city council and planning committee members have continued to approve numerous building projects. This proposal helps no one except for the developers and those who get donationsfrom the developers.
I am very concerned about the city of Santa Monica and the appalling direction our city is heading. Having lived in Santa Monica since the 60's I sorely miss the quiet seaside charm that originally attracted me.
Please reject the project on the Gelson’s site that is seriously flawed for the following reasons:
The developer’s bonus density calculations are incorrect under the code for the reasons provided by SMCLC; The developer should not be permitted to waive our code requirement for 2‐bedroom units for affordable housing – we need such family‐sized housing in Santa Monica and this project would provide only 12 units if the waiver were allowed;
Our City planning department lacked transparency in its dealings with the public on this highly controversial project by stalling and making excuses to repeated questions as to the status of the application process; Our City planning staff allowed time to run out on the public’s comment deadline, denying an opportunity for outside substantive review of the relevant development standards to object to this project by residents and involved groups; and
City planning staff has not met their ethical obligations to the public as set out in the Ethical Planning Principles of the American Planning Association.
I urge the City Planning Director to cure these deficiencies by requiring the developer to revise its allowable density bonus and to comply with its affordable housing obligation before approving this project.
Item 16.C
09/27/22
3 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
2 Joanne D Pittard MS, RN
Santa Monica Resident
See attached pdf file.
cc:
Planning Director at [email protected]
City Manager at [email protected]
City Council at [email protected]
Item 16.C
09/27/22
4 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: STOP repression of resident input re Gelson project From: Ose Dalldorf <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2022 3:27 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; David White <[email protected]>; David Martin <[email protected]>
Subject: STOP repression of resident input re Gelson project
EXTERNAL
To the governing bodies in Santa Monica
It is abhorrent to me to hear about the repressive practices of our planning director and it's department to exclude the rightful input from the residents of Santa Monica.
It is in line with the same practices of the developer who disregarded the many thoughtful and constructive ideas of the residents who attended the public meeting with them....an unusually high attendance and interest of residents.
It also represents very serious, known violations of existing laws of the SM City Planning Director ....(.which don't need repetition as they have been already presented to you many times over.)
This cannot be tolerated and there should be appropriate consequences for the planning director. I hope the Santa Monica City Council will step up and take action in their duty to represent the residents of Santa Monica. ** This project needs to be dramatically reduced !!
** Necessary and valued neighborhood small stores need to be saved ( increase available space for stores in the project.......make the rent for them affordable ). ** Unbelievable traffic impact/mitigation plans for this already busy intersection need to be in place.
** WATER use impact should not be allowed to be simply bought by the developer and to be applied somewhere else. WE ARE IN A SEVERE DROUGHT ! IT WILL TURN INTO ASTRONOMICAL PRICE INCREASES FOR THE EVERY DAY RESIDENTS. just from this project.
I appreciate your attention ,
Thank you,
Item 16.C
09/27/22
5 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
2 O. D.
Item 16.C
09/27/22
6 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Reject the density bonus of Gelson Project at Lincoln and Ocean Park Blvds.
From: Ellen Hannan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2022 4:13 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Reject the density bonus of Gelson Project at Lincoln and Ocean Park Blvds.
EXTERNAL
No one is above the law. Including this site which is double counting the density bonus. Fairness in housing applies to all landowners whether a single family lot or a huge development. This site should include housing for families since it is within walking distance to local schools. Older students of high school age need to have bedrooms. We are in short supply of 2 and 3 bedroom affordable housing in the City.
Deny this project as it is proposed.
Ellen Hannan
1218 9th St #6
Santa Moncia
09/22/2022
Item 16.C
09/27/22
7 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Gelson's/Lincoln Center Project
From: Thunder Levin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2022 11:16 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Gelson's/Lincoln Center Project
EXTERNAL
The “Lincoln Center Project” on the site of the current Gelson’s supermarket must be drastically downsized from its current plan. As now proposed it is drastically out of scale with the neighborhood, will increase traffic to utterly unmanageable proportions, use more water than is available, strain city services to breaking, fails to meet net‐zero energy requirements, provides far too small a percentage of affordable housing, is ugly and overwhelming, and trades the current over‐priced supermarket for one that will be too small to meet the neighborhood’s needs, at a time when the Vons at Lincoln & Broadway will also be closed for redevelopment.
You work for the residents of Santa Monica, NOT the developers and not the insane people in the state legislature. You must do your job FOR SANTA MONICANS! That means either entirely blocking, or at least radically downsizing, this development. To be clear, it doesn’t matter if you have to violate state law to do so. The state mandate of 9000 new homes has never been reasonable or practical and you are REQUIRED to fight it and if that fight fails, to simply ignore it and use local control over local issues.
NOW GO DO YOUR JOBS!
(And while you’re at it, PLEASE, for the love of god, get the high speed e‐bikes off the beach bike path already! Someone’s going to get killed!)
Respectfully, and with best regards,
Thunder Levin
Thunder Levin
2407 Fourth St. #7
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310‐392‐8331
310‐999‐1831 cell
[email protected]
Item 16.C
09/27/22
8 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
5 Virus-free.www.avast.com
Item 16.C
09/27/22
9 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: REJECT GELSON'S SITE PROJECT
From: Rosa Hogle <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2022 2:52 PM
To: David White <[email protected]>
Cc: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: REJECT GELSON'S SITE PROJECT
EXTERNAL
Mr. David White, City Manager:
Our family has lived at 1217 Pearl Street since 1956. We are totally opposed to the massive Gelson's development on Lincoln and Ocean Park Blvd.
It is appalling that the Planning Department constantly overrides the wishes of the vast majority of Santa Monica Residents on these massive developments.
Why can't the Council and City Manager control the Planning Department? There should be a total reorganization (firing) of the Planning Director and key Subordinates for consistently disregarding the wishes of Santa Monica citizens.
Drastically downsize or complete rejection of this project.
William and Rosa Hogle
1217 Pearl St.
Santa Monica, Ca.
Item 16.C
09/27/22
10 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Request to reject the project on the Gelson’s site! From: Inge Mueller <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2022 11:15 AM
To: David Martin <[email protected]>
Cc: David White <[email protected]>; Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Request to reject the project on the Gelson’s site!
EXTERNAL
Dear Planning Director Martin,
The City of Santa Monica and its surrounding neighborhoods deserve better than this monstrosity, a testament to corporate greed rather than true solutions to our housing crisis.
Please reject the project on the Gelson’s site for the following reasons:
1. The developer’s bonus density calculations are incorrect under the code for the reasons provided by SMCLC;
2. The developer should not be permitted to waive our code requirement for 2-bedroom units for affordable housing – we need such family-sized housing in Santa Monica and this project would provide only 12 units if the waiver were allowed;
3. Our City planning department lacked transparency in its dealings with the public on this highly controversial project by stalling and making excuses to repeated questions as to the status of the application process;
4. Our City planning staff allowed time to run out on the public’s comment deadline, denying an opportunity for outside substantive review of the relevant development standards to object to this project by residents and involved groups; and
5. City planning staff have not met their ethical obligations to the public as set out in the Ethical Planning Principles of the American Planning Association.
I urge the City Planning Director to cure these deficiencies by requiring the developer to revise its allowable density bonus and to comply with its affordable housing obligation before approving this project.
Thank you!
Inge Mueller
Item 16.C
09/27/22
11 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Lincoln Project Opposition
From: Jake Glick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2022 3:18 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Lincoln Project Opposition
EXTERNAL
Hello,
After reflecting on my e‐mail over the weekend, I would like to sincerely apologize for my tone, assumptions and unwarranted attacks.
After reading a recent article about the Lincoln Project, I let passion get the best of me. I am not well versed enough in politics, development or anything else pertaining to the city; therefore, my accusations of corruption and greed were uncalled for ‐ especially from a City Council Board that I voted for.
Please accept my lapse of judgement ‐ I know you probably get quite a few of these attack's because it's easier to be mean over the internet. This is a lesson learned for me ‐ I was raised better than to hurl remarks that are indefensible.
I still oppose the Lincoln Project on the grounds of congestion and losing the aesthetics of the Sunset Park neighborhood; but I voted for the people who also feel this way ‐ and it's your job to do what's in the best interest of the residents, so I will let you do that while also letting you know that I "firmly disagree with the project as proposed." Again ‐ I apologize for the completely unnecessary letter, all I needed to do was state my position without the editorial.
Sincerely,
Jake Glick
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:38 PM Jake Glick <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
This letter is to voice my opposition to the "Lincoln Project".
I was born and raised in Sunset Park ‐ and will never* leave. I grew up on 11th and Ashland, I bought my first condo on 11th and Ocean Park (over looking the Gelsons ‐ thankfully I sold in 2019!). I bought my first house on Navy Street. I am Sunset Park, through and through.
Developing this project would devastate the local neighborhood. I've seen it first hand; I stopped going to "mid‐city" as the tall,drab apartments made for dark, windy streets and of course there's no parking (because "no one needs to Item 16.C
09/27/22
12 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
9 drive"). The congestion, lack of natural light and density have cut me off from some of my beloved places (Bay Cities, in particular).
Starting the trend of building a monstrosity in Sunset Park will only proliferate the traffic, lack of parking and humans living on top of one another, leading to the anger, road rage and NIMBY‐ism we see today.
Be reasonable, stop with the greed, stop with the self‐idolization that people crave to put their "stamp" on something. You serve the city, you serve the residents ‐ not developer interests, not a vocal minority. *If a project of this magnitude goes through, I will absolutely move‐on from the place I've lovingly called home ‐ because it will no longer be a community that would be accessible (traffic), safe or represent the incredible culture i grew up in.
I know change is inevitable, and I am all for change. I am all for accomodation and inclusivity, but this goes far beyond that. This is a project to make "everyone" money except the longtime residents who have to endure the consequences. At the end of the day, accommodating 53 lucky low income families is a joke out of 500+ units ‐ truly reflect on whether you think this will actually help make Santa Monica more accessible. A perfect example of low income housing is right down the street on Ashland and Lincoln (no, not the new structure with a paltry 7 low income units), the place next to McDonald's is ENTIRELY for low‐income. The scale fits the neighborhood so well people don't even notice it.
Please, I urge you to stop thinking about the greed for fame, fight the urge of corruption, and do what's right for the city.
Sincerely,
Jake Glick
(proud alumni of Mount Olive Preschool, Will Rogers Elementary, John Adams Middle School and SAMOHI Class of 2002)
Item 16.C
09/27/22
13 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
10 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:29 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Gelson's Project
From: Marilyn Elias <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2022 12:50 PM
To: David Martin <[email protected]>
Cc: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; David White <[email protected]> Subject: Gelson's Project
EXTERNAL
Dear Mr. Martin:
I write as a long‐time resident of the Sunset Park area of Santa Monica to strongly object to how the Gelson’s site application process has been handled. There were very serious legal and ethical violations during this process that warrant rejection of the project at this time.
Given the desperate need for family housing in our city, the developer should not be allowed an exemption of the code requirement for 2‐bedroom units for affordable housing. Providing just 12 family‐sized units for such a massive project is appalling. This waiver should not be given.
Also, I am deeply concerned about our Planning Department’s failure to be open and accessible to the public during the consideration process. The Department works for us— this is still a democracy— yet failed to respond to repeated questions from the public about the status of the application process, delaying and making excuses for the failure to be forthcoming. This is not a dictatorship. There was zero transparency here. The City Planning staff meanwhile kept the clock running until time ran out on the comment deadline afforded to the public. This shut out the possibility of an independent review of development standards, along with potential objections to this massive project by residents of our city and knowledgeable planning groups. We are not stupid; we realize when we’ve been coopted in ways that don’t speak well for the integrity of the people who are supposed to be transparent with us.
Finally, I have fact‐based reasons to conclude that the developer’s bonus density calculations are not correct under code.
For all of the above reasons, I strongly urge you to address these serious problems by requiring the developer to redo the math on its allowable density bonus and also to comply with our well‐founded affordable housing requirement before approving the project.
Sincerely,
Marilyn Elias
Item 16.C
09/27/22
14 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Gelson project NO!!!!!!!!!
From: cathykarolc <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:48 AM
To: David Martin <[email protected]>
Cc: David White <[email protected]>
Subject: Gelson project NO!!!!!!!!!
EXTERNAL
The Planning Department did not inform the developer of two issues that SMCLC believes are vital. It did not object to how the project’s density bonus was calculated nor deal with the developer’s improper waiver of substantial family affordable housing under our city codes. also
Meanwhile, the City secretly dropped its objections to the revised Application and retroactively “deemed” it complete. Thereafter, the Planning Department withheld this crucial information from the public for over a month, letting the 60-day comment period run out. this is NO FAIR and terrible
Cathy Karol-Crowther
2700 Nielson Way apt 231
Santa Monica CA 90405
Item 16.C
09/27/22
15 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Gelson's site at Lincoln and Ocean Park
From: Alice Mitchell <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:29 AM
To: David White <[email protected]>; Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; David Martin <[email protected]>
Subject: Gelson's site at Lincoln and Ocean Park
EXTERNAL
I am for the construction of affordable housing, but the project does not accommodate family units of 2 bedrooms which would be useful to tSM eachers and city workers and their families. Please revise the plan and downsize the overall scale of the project.
Thank you,
Alice Mitchell
resident
‐‐
Alice Mitchell
[email protected]
Item 16.C
09/27/22
16 of 16 Item 16.C
09/27/22