Board Con)nued
Kathy Irby
Commercial Bank of
California
Jeff Jarow
Par Commercial
Paula Larmore
Harding, Larmore,
Kutcher & Kozal LLP
Charlie LopezQuintana
ETC Hotels
Pam O’Connor
Consultant
Janet Rimicci
UCLA Health
Eddie Guerboian
Jeweler
Neil Carrey
ABorney
Jose Aalvarado
Cruise
Jeremy Rawitch
RAND
Fred Hulls
Quantgene
Heather GiH
AcHvision
Elnie VannaJm
Cedars Sinai
Addie VanGessel
Tavern on Main
Gina Gribow
EKA Public Affairs
Jessica Rincon
Le Merigot Hotel
Vee Gomez
Beach Yoga SoCal
Dave Rand
Rand, Pastor, Nelson,
LLP
Board Execu)ves
Chair
Younes Atallah
Regent Santa Monica
Beach
Past Chair
Greg Morena
The Albright
Treasurer
Len Lanzi
Stubbs Alderton &
Markiles, LLP
Vice-Chair
Michael Ricks
Providence Saint
John’s Health
Vice-Chair
Julia Ladd
Macerich/Santa
Monica Place
Vice-Chair
DusJn Peterson
Fairmont Miramar
Hotel & Bungalows
Vice-Chair
Jasson CrockeP
SNAP Inc.
Vice-Chair
Celia Fisher
Beach Moms
Vice-Chair
Dr. Kathryn Jeffery
Santa Monica College
Board Members
Craig Babington
Morley Builders
Andrew BarreP-Weiss
Good RX
Dom Bei
SM Firefighters
Rudy Flores
SM Police Officers
Jeffrey Fritz
Coldwell Banker
August 14, 2023
Santa Monica City Council
Santa Monica City Manager
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Dear City Council Members and City Manager David White:
We are wriJng on behalf of the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce to express our strong opposiJon to the proposed mandatory minimum wage increase for hotel workers to $30 per hour.
We know that such a significant wage hike will have severe and unintended consequences for both the hotel industry and the broader local Santa Monica economy.
To fully understand the consequences of such acJon, we request a comprehensive economic impact report. An economic report will assess and demonstrate the potenJal effect on hotel businesses, employment levels, and the overall economic landscape of our community (including restaurants and local businesses). An unbiased and data-driven evaluaJon of the impact would provide valuable insights to guide the decision-making process, ensuring that the interests of both workers and businesses are considered.
We acknowledge the importance of fair compensaJon for workers and recognize the value they bring to the hospitality industry and to our city. We know that our Santa Monica hotels carefully consider fair and appropriate wages for their highly-valued workers. However, we would like to emphasize that the Jming of this proposed wage increase is parJcularly ill-suited given the ongoing recovery efforts of hotel businesses from the devastaJng impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
AddiJonally, we offer our Chamber services as a trusted convener to host town halls to provide clear and compelling feedback directly from businesses on this issue. It is essenJal, before making any binding council decision, to hear the potenJally devastaJng consequences of such a large wage increase at such a vulnerable Jme in economic and community recovery.
In conclusion, we kindly urge you to reconsider the proposed mandatory hotel-worker minimum wage increase to $30 per hour. We request that the City conduct a comprehensive economic report and take a measured approach to wage adjustments to ensure a balanced and sustainable outcome.
Respeciully SubmiPed,
Judy Kruger Younes Atallah
President & CEO Chair of Board
Item 1
08/22/23
1 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
1 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Kelly Simon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 9:25 PM
To: Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline; Caroline Torosis Cc: Tricia Crane
Subject: Fwd: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council ‐ I live on 26th street not far from this proposed development I have lived in my single family home for 22 years & I frequently use Douglas Park. A four story 71 housing unit building would be big enough ‐ and a huge change for this corner. In my opinion an 8 story building on this corner is INSANE!! It’s just TOO Big! Please don’t allow this to happen to my neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best,
Kelly Simon
26th street resident & active voter
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
Subject: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
Date: August 14, 2023 at 8:47:39 PM PDT
To: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>, Jesse Zwick <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Lana Negrete <[email protected]>, Phil Brock <[email protected]>, Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Cc: David White <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Still posted on the site ‐ initial proposed plan for 2501 Wilshire with four stories and 71 housing units:
Item 1
08/22/23
2 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
2 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
2 Current proposal with eight stories (84 feet) and 170 housing units presented in the "community meeting":
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)?
We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project.
Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our neighborhood?
Item 1
08/22/23
3 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
3 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
3 Families already have trouble finding parking to bring children to play at Douglas Park.
This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped before our city is built out beyond recognition.
Tricia Crane and the Board of Northeast Neighbors
Item 1
08/22/23
4 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
4 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 8:24 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
EXTERNAL
Still posted on the site ‐ initial proposed plan for 2501 Wilshire with four stories and 71 housing units:
Current proposal with eight stories (84 feet) and 170 housing units presented in the "community meeting":
Item 1
08/22/23
5 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
5 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
2 Dear City Council, City Manager, City Staff,
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)? We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our neighborhood? Families already have trouble finding parking to bring children to play at Douglas Park.
This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped before our city is built out beyond recognition.
Tricia Crane
Chair, Northeast Neighbors
Item 1
08/22/23
6 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
6 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Melanie Landsberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 1:57 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: Fwd: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)? We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our neighborhood? Which members of City Council voted for this?
Families already have trouble finding parking to bring children to play at Douglas Park.
This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped before our city is built out beyond recognition.
Thank you.
Melanie Landsberg
610 23rd Street
Item 1
08/22/23
7 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
7 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Karen Kushi <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 12:14 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
EXTERNAL
Still posted on the site ‐ initial proposed plan for 2501 Wilshire with four stories and 71 housing units:
Current proposal with eight stories (84 feet) and 170
housing units presented in the "community meeting":
Item 1
08/22/23
8 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
8 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
2 Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)?
We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our
neighborhood? Which members of City Council voted for
this?
Families already have trouble finding parking to bring
children to play at Douglas Park.
This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped
before our city is built out beyond recognition.
WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS and need more
explanation. This reminds me of the huge ficus trees
that was planted on our small stretch of California
Ave. Great idea at the time - shade, oxygen, greenery!
TERRIBLE long term decision - No sunlight, roots that
Item 1
08/22/23
9 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
9 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
3 have gotten into our plumbing and ruined the sidewalks and streetlights that are covered, leaving dangerous
conditions at night and now they are all dying and plan to be removed ዏዐዑዒዓዔዕዖ Please don’t continue to make short term decisions without thinking of long term goals and
aesthetics! Please support your constituents this time! Best,
Karen Kushi
Item 1
08/22/23
10 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
10 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: HEIDI JO COREY <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 12:02 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Cc: Heidi Jo Corey
Subject: 2501 Wilshire Project
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
Please explain this massive change for the 2501 Wilshire Project. In December 2021 this project was presented as 4 stories and 70 units.
The community and neighbors are requesting transparency and understanding how this got voted in and turned into 8 stories and 170 units?
Please explain how this was able to double without any of the neighbors and community knowing about this until now?
Did Santa Monica City Council approve this? Were you aware of what you were approving and the impact this would have on our community and the ability for people to enjoy a Douglas Park? This project is completely outrageous and unacceptable. Eight stories is way too high for Wilshire Blvd! Or any Boulevard in Santa Monica.
As a 25 year, resident of Santa Monica and living across the street from Douglas Park. I need to understand what decisions are being made and how this can be fixed.
I am requesting that the city Council re‐look at and understand what exactly was approved? Please, meet with us and explain how this project double and what can be done to fix this now? Thank you,
ᕼEIᗪI ᒍO ᑕOᖇEY
Item 1
08/22/23
11 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
11 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Chloe Brooks-Lao <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 8:08 AM
To: Planning
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline Subject: 2501 Wilshire
EXTERNAL
I’m a home owner living at 2415 Washington Avenue and wriƟng to object to the proposed change to add an addiƟonal 4 stories and 104 more residenƟal units addiƟon to the pending project at 2501 Wilshire. The addiƟon calls for 0 addiƟonal parking spaces and would bring the total residenƟal units to 187.
Some specific reasons are:
1) PopulaƟon density ‐ present day, the area is currently densely populated and is already pending another 6 story project at 2600 Wilshire (caddy corner to the 2501 project). This would further stress the area 2) Parking ‐ the addiƟonal 4 stories again adds over a 100 residenƟal units and not a single parking spot for these new units (per the developer on the 8/9 zoom call). The neighborhood is also home to Douglas park, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods and Erewon drawins even more people to the area which already stresses the street parking. 3) AestheƟc ‐ an 8 story apartment build adjacent to single family homes is out of line with the current landscape and would be an eye sore
Thank you,
Chloe Brooks‐Lao
Northeast Santa Monica Resident
Sent from my iPhone
Item 1
08/22/23
12 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
12 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: D'Orsogna, Maria-Rita R <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 5:34 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: Re: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
EXTERNAL
Dear all,
I second every word of this email.
You are elected to work for the residents, not for the developers.
Why are you allowing all this?
What are we going to do about: traffic, parking, water consumption, open space? And no, nobody will take the train because it is full of homeless people and quite often a scary ride. By approving or even closing an eye or two on these monsters you are destroying this city.
Maria
From: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 8:54 PM
To: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
Subject: City Council must revisit decision that allowed this Extreme Development next to Douglas Park
To: <[email protected]>, Jesse Zwick <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Lana Negrete <[email protected]>, Phil Brock <[email protected]>, Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Cc: David White <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Still posted on the site ‐ initial proposed plan for 2501 Wilshire with four stories and 71 housing units:
Item 1
08/22/23
13 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
13 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
3 Current proposal with eight stories (84 feet) and 170 housing units presented in the "community meeting":
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)? We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our neighborhood? Families already have trouble finding parking to bring children to play at Douglas Park.
Item 1
08/22/23
14 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
14 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
4 This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped before our city is built out beyond recognition.
Tricia Crane and the Board of Northeast Neighbors
Item 1
08/22/23
15 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
15 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Diana Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 2:51 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: compromise re 2501 Wilshire Project
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
As a nearby homeowner, I have an interest in any development at 2501 Wilshire. I actually welcome some development, as it seems to me that all of the corners at the intersection of 26th and Wilshire are long overdue for some (especially the southern corners). With the housing crisis the way it is, there is no excuse for devoting so much land to a single story strip mall and a surface parking lot. With that said, the northwest corner of 26th and Wilshire is already the busiest of the four corners by far, and while it could be activated further, I don't believe an 8 story building with a supermarket is the way to go.
Two years ago, I had no issue with the proposed four story development. I thought that my neighbors' concerns about the potential impact on traffic and parking could easily be alleviated in the following ways:
first, by making stronger connections between the area and the Expo Line (the 43 bus runs so infrequently as to be inconsequential except for the most desperate and the crosswalk signal at 26th & Olympic is optimized for cars, not pedestrians going to and from the train, and there is literally no legal place to connect between cars/rideshare and the Bergamot expo line station except the parking lot that is only accessible from Michigan) second, by raising the prices for preferential street parking permits so that car‐owning residents of the new development would have little incentive to get them instead of buying a dedicated spot in their building garage third, by prioritizing the already‐planned improvements to Wilshire, adding the concrete curb extensions sooner rather than later.
It is my understanding that the newly announced project includes a grocery store. I am mystified by this, as the corner is a short walk from four grocery stores: Erewhon, Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, and Bristol Farms.
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)? I ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this AHPP / Density Bonus project.
I want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development? Which members of City Council voted for this? Thank you,
Diana Williams
Item 1
08/22/23
16 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
16 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: JAMIE ANN VAN NOTE <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 8:39 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: 2501 wilshire
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
I am writing you as a 20 year home owner and avid voter to express my concern regarding your approval of the below plan.
Still posted on the site ‐ is the initial proposed plan for 2501 Wilshire with four stories and 71 housing units:
And the Current proposal with eight stories (84 feet) and 170 housing units presented in the "community meeting":
Item 1
08/22/23
17 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
17 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
7 Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)?
We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our neighborhood?
Which members of City Council voted for this?
Families already have trouble finding parking to bring children to play at Douglas Park.
This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped before our city is built out beyond recognition. I will look forward to a reply from each of you. All the
best, Jamie Van Note
Item 1
08/22/23
18 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
18 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Carol Dickinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 10:49 PM
To: Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; David White; Susan Cline; councilmtgitems
Subject: N0 to 2501 Wilshire Project
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council, City Manager and City Staff,
The 2501 Wilshire Project is a behemoth comprised of 170 units that will ruin the character of our neighborhood. As a longƟme resident of 25th Street, I am shocked that such a monstrosity could be plunked down into our exisƟng neighborhood of one and two‐story buildings. It will not only destroy the enjoyment of our homes, but will also impact the many children and adults who visit Douglas Park on a daily basis. The traffic, congesƟon, parking problems and loss of sunlight will be devastaƟng.
This is not progress. This is pure greed of an uncaring developer who has no regard for our community. Please stop this assault and support the current residents.
Sincerely,
Carol Dickinson
1030 25th Street
Santa Monica
Item 1
08/22/23
19 of 19 Item 1
08/22/23
Item 1
08/22/23
19 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Justin Murphy <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 10:09 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; David White; Susan Cline
Subject: NO to 2501 Wilshire Project
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Staff,
Given that the City has incorporated the State density bonus into the Zoning Ordinance, what is the rationale for allowing it to also be tied to the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP)?
We ask that the City Council revisit their approval of the entitlement process for this and all AHPP / Density Bonus projects.
We want our City Council to explain their decision that allowed for this massive project. Why did Staff propose and Council approve this level of development in our neighborhood? Which members of City Council voted for this?
Families already have trouble finding parking to bring children to play at Douglas Park.
This project is too big, too tall and must be stopped before our city is built out beyond recognition.
Justin Murphy
Santa Monica resident living one block from the proposed unnecessary monstrosity.
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented download of this picture from the Internet.
Virus-free.www.avg.com
Item 1
08/22/23
20 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 10:42 AM
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Representative Ted Lieu; [email protected]
Subject: Strong Opposition to Proposed Development Project at 2501 Wilshire Blvd Dear Members of the Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the proposed development project at 2501 Wilshire Blvd. This ill-conceived project, with its eight-story height and inclusion of retail shops on the ground floor, poses a grave threat to the harmony and character of our neighborhood. I implore you to consider the concerns of the community and reject this ill-fated proposal.
Firstly, the inclusion of an eight-story structure in a predominantly low-rise area is utterly inappropriate and out of touch with the existing urban fabric. This project threatens to overshadow the surrounding homes and disrupt the aesthetic appeal that defines our neighborhood.
The addition of more retail shops is equally misguided. Our neighborhood does not require more retail establishments, especially when considering the saturation of such businesses in the vicinity. This would only exacerbate the issue of excessive commercial development and potentially lead to vacant storefronts, detracting from the appeal of our community.
The proposed supermarket within the development is yet another superfluous element. We currently have four supermarkets within walking distance of the site, rendering the addition redundant and unnecessary. Instead of addressing a genuine need, this aspect of the project further contributes to the project's lack of practicality.
Furthermore, the potential traffic and congestion resulting from this project cannot be underestimated.
The already strained traffic situation in the area would be worsened by the increased influx of visitors to the retail spaces and supermarket. This poses risks to pedestrian safety, road congestion, and the overall quality of life for residents.
It is of utmost importance to note that at the recent virtual meeting between the developers and the local residents, approximately 100 participants were present on the Zoom call. Astonishingly, not a single individual expressed support for this project. This unanimous disapproval speaks volumes about the unsuitability of the proposed development. As elected representatives, your duty is to prioritize the voices of the citizens who elected you and who entrust you to safeguard the welfare of our community.
It is absolutely essential that you consider the opinions of your constituents and respect their wishes.
If the overwhelming sentiment of the people who placed you in office is in opposition to this project, it is your responsibility to heed their concerns and stand against the developers who seem intent on disregarding the welfare of our community.
I implore you to reject the proposed development at 2501 Wilshire Blvd in light of its ill-conceived nature, its adverse impact on traffic and congestion, and the overwhelming opposition expressed by Item 1
08/22/23
21 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23
3 the residents of our neighborhood. The future of our community depends on your willingness to listen to the very people who entrusted you with their votes.
Sincerely,
Gary Landi
A 26th St resident
Item 1
08/22/23
22 of 22 Item 1
08/22/23