Survey Primer.The City has posted a Land Use Survey. Read our primer below to help you understand how you're answering the questions
|
- The survey is Here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CulverLU-Alts
- The accompanying explainer document is Here: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d950bfaae137b5f0cbd75f5/t/608b49fb87cc6a5138362cd9/1619741207259/CCGPU_LUAltsWorkshop_2021_0429.pdf?fbclid=IwAR13e9ozCw_tORUkrzIZ8uv2xABIHk6cWURdOJkNZmiMIEZxHuWybTeYW8Y
- Read our primer (below)
- Visit the site
- Read the presentation
- Watch the videos
- Take the survey!
Okay, so what does this mean to me?
Land use describes how people use land, from parks to housing to retail and more. The land use alternatives are different options to achieve the community's vision for Culver City in 2045; they are based on technical studies and community input collected between September 2019 and March 2021.
ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW: How our neighborhoods will look moving forward.
The state of California has told our city that we need to build over 3,000 new homes to meet the projected demand. Since we're updating the city's General Plan (General Plan Update or GPU), consultants have been hired to see how we might do this.
- The State of California requires cities to come up with plans to meet housing needs across income levels by October 2021.
- Current RHNA (“Regional Housing Needs Allocation”) requirements state that Culver City must create a plan that allows for the addition of 3,341 new housing units, including 1,108 very low-income, 604 low-income, 560 moderate-income, and 1,069 above-moderate income units by 2029.
- Affordability levels are mandated by law and cannot just be combined into a general block of 3,300 (market rate) units.
They are asking us to weigh in on questions such as do we want R1 neighborhood zoning to change? Well, technically they're not asking this. But if you answer the survey a certain way, they will make assumptions based on your answers. This is crucial, because some councilmembers want to get rid of single-family homes neighborhoods. If you choose “Alternative 2” or “Alternative 3”, you are saying that you want residential zoning to change (ie; “upzoning”).
Land use alternatives summary and what they mean regarding residential concerns:
Alternative 1: Concentrated Growth
This means that there will still be growth, but the residential areas will probably stay in the same zoning (R1, R2, R3, R4). There would also be Concentrate growth in non-residential areas.
· Single-unit and low -density residential areas don’t see additional growth other than ADUs.
· Commercial corridors maximize mixed -use development potential
· Opportunity sites accommodate significant density
Alternative 2: Dispersed Infill
This means that residential area zoning could change. This is where zoning as we know it would start to change. R1 areas could be eliminated, for example, meaning that R1s could be changed to R2/R3/R4. Parcels could be divided. Same could happen to R2 zoning, which could change to R3 or R4. Some people call this “upzoning.” Unclear if there would be a cap on dispersed infill.
· Distribute growth across the city
· Single-unit and low-density residential areas see incremental growth
· Commercial corridors have moderate mixed -use development potential
· Opportunity sites accommodate medium to high density
Alternative 3: Dispersed Densification
This is the most aggressive change. Height limits could change, there could be more densification throughout.
· Single-unit and low -density residential areas see incremental densification
· Commercial corridors increase mixed -use development potential
· Opportunity sites accommodate high density
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What R1, R2, R3 and R4 Mean
R1 (Residential, Single-Family or Two-Unit Low Density) District. The R1 zoning district identifies areas of the city characterized by single-family homes on smaller parcels, together with other low density residential development in specific neighborhoods.
R2 (Residential, Low Density) District. The R2 zoning district identifies areas of the City characterized by low density development. The standards of the R2 zoning district are intended to maintain residential neighborhood character, and to ensure that new development is compatible with the existing character.
R3 (Residential, Multi-Family Medium-Density) District. The R3 zoning district provides for the development of a wide range of multi-family dwelling units, including apartments and condominiums.
R4 zoning district is intended for areas appropriate for multiple-family residential units. This use is typically located near medium-high density and/or near commercial/office professional uses or arterial streets and highways.
This means that there will still be growth, but the residential areas will probably stay in the same zoning (R1, R2, R3, R4). There would also be Concentrate growth in non-residential areas.
· Single-unit and low -density residential areas don’t see additional growth other than ADUs.
· Commercial corridors maximize mixed -use development potential
· Opportunity sites accommodate significant density
Alternative 2: Dispersed Infill
This means that residential area zoning could change. This is where zoning as we know it would start to change. R1 areas could be eliminated, for example, meaning that R1s could be changed to R2/R3/R4. Parcels could be divided. Same could happen to R2 zoning, which could change to R3 or R4. Some people call this “upzoning.” Unclear if there would be a cap on dispersed infill.
· Distribute growth across the city
· Single-unit and low-density residential areas see incremental growth
· Commercial corridors have moderate mixed -use development potential
· Opportunity sites accommodate medium to high density
Alternative 3: Dispersed Densification
This is the most aggressive change. Height limits could change, there could be more densification throughout.
· Single-unit and low -density residential areas see incremental densification
· Commercial corridors increase mixed -use development potential
· Opportunity sites accommodate high density
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What R1, R2, R3 and R4 Mean
R1 (Residential, Single-Family or Two-Unit Low Density) District. The R1 zoning district identifies areas of the city characterized by single-family homes on smaller parcels, together with other low density residential development in specific neighborhoods.
R2 (Residential, Low Density) District. The R2 zoning district identifies areas of the City characterized by low density development. The standards of the R2 zoning district are intended to maintain residential neighborhood character, and to ensure that new development is compatible with the existing character.
R3 (Residential, Multi-Family Medium-Density) District. The R3 zoning district provides for the development of a wide range of multi-family dwelling units, including apartments and condominiums.
R4 zoning district is intended for areas appropriate for multiple-family residential units. This use is typically located near medium-high density and/or near commercial/office professional uses or arterial streets and highways.
Survey Questions
Here are the questions they will be asking: (we skipped 1-10 which are demographic questions)
Citywide
To support development of the land use alternatives and General Plan policies, the project team seeks to understand views about citywide priorities.
10. Rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements.
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
· When planning for new buildings, scale is an important consideration.
· Small developments across the city are preferable to very large developments in a few places.
· Incremental infill is a good strategy to accommodate new housing in Culver City.
Residential Neighborhoods
Currently, per state law, the City code allows up to three units on a single-family parcel: one single-family unit, one accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and one junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU).
Alternative 1 illustrates the option to retain current policies, allowing up to three units per parcel in existing low-density residential areas, such as single family (R1) and two-family (R2) areas. Alternatives 2 and 3 illustrate the potential for additional housing types in these areas. Alternative 2 illustrates allowing incremental infill, e.g., duplex, triplex, and quadplex units (up to four units per parcel) in single unit residential areas. Alternative 3 illustrates allowing incremental densification in single unit residential areas, e.g., up to six units per parcel.
11. Would you support incremental infill (up to four units) in existing single-unit residential areas (Alternative 2)
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
12. Would you support incremental densification (up to six units) in existing single-unit residential areas (Alternative 3)?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
13. Would you consider requiring residential projects to provide affordable housing that helps implement the Vision and Guiding Principles to achieve their maximum density?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
* 14. What two (2) potential benefits of incremental infill are of most interest to you?
· Increased variety in home styles and types
· More affordable housing options
· Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from travel
· New homes bring new families and vibrancy to neighborhoods
· More households means access to amenities for more people
· Poorly maintained homes are replaced or updated
· None of the above
* 15. What two (2) potential aspects of incremental infill are of the most concern to you?
· New houses are bigger or taller than nearby houses
· New houses with modern designs do not fit the character of nearby houses
· Existing viable homes are being demolished
· Additional homes are reducing available on-street parking and increasing traffic
· Green spaces and tree canopy are being lost
· Houses are too close to each other
· None of the above
Throughout the engagement process, small neighborhood markets, like Jackson Market, came up as an opportunity to create neighborhood-supporting retail, reduce vehicle travel, and create community gathering places.
16. Would you support allowing those types of uses in residential neighborhoods along main streets?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Commercial Corridors17. Would you support intensifying the city’s commercial corridors to support new housing and jobs adjacent to multimodal transportation, like transit?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Along commercial corridors like Sepulveda and Washington Boulevards, the City requires new residential projects to contain commercial space for retail or service activities.
18. Would you support removing commercial requirements for residential projects along the city’s commercial corridors to improve the feasibility of developing residential?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Along commercial corridors like Sepulveda and Washington Boulevards, the City requires new residential projects to contain commercial space for retail or service activities.
18. Would you support removing commercial requirements for residential projects along the city’s commercial corridors to improve the feasibility of developing residential?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Culver City has few large parcels, including the Costco site on Washington, the Culver Center site on Venice, the Target site on Jefferson, and Westfield Mall site on Sepulveda. In the past, these types of sites were prioritized for jobs and economic growth.
19. If these types of sites were to redevelop, what should the City prioritize on the sites?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Industrial Areas
Culver City maintains approximately 8% of its land area for industrial uses maily adjacent to Ivy Station and along Ballona Creek. Many of these properties zoned industrial provide space for an ecosystem of small businesses.
20. What should the City consider for the industrially zoned areas adjacent to Ivy Station?
· Maintain entire area as industrial and small businesses uses
· Allow limited areas to transition over time to housing, economic growth, or a blend
· Allow the entire area to transition to housing
· Allow the entire area to transition to a blend of housing and economic growth
· Allow the entire area to transition to economic growth
· I don’t know
21. What should the City consider for the industrially zoned areas along Ballona Creek?
· Maintain entire area as industrial and small businesses uses
· Allow limited areas to transition over time to housing, or economic growth, or a blend
· Allow the entire area to transition to housing
· Allow the entire area to transition to economic growth
· Allow the entire area to transition to a blend of housing and economic growth
· I don’t know
22. What should the City consider for the industrially zoned areas in the Hayden Tract?
· Maintain entire area as industrial and small businesses uses
· Allow limited areas to transition over time to housing, or economic growth, or a blend
· Allow the entire area to transition to housing
· Allow the entire area to transition to economic growth Allow the entire area to transition to a blend of housing and economic growth
· I don’t know
Inglewood Oil Field
23. The Inglewood Oil Field may be decommissioned over the General Plan horizon by the year 2045. If this happens and the land is environmentally remediated to be safe for human use, what would you like to see on this site? Residential uses are not included below as an option as the level of remediation that would be required makes it unlikely. Check all that apply
· Open space
· Programmed park space, such as sports fields or playgrounds
· Civic and recreational buildings
· Infrastructure to harness renewable energy, such as solar and wind energy
· Other (please specify)
Building Heights
In 1990, Culver City residents voted to pass Measure I limiting building heights to 56 feet. Although some residential projects may exceed this height limit for affordable housing per the California State Density Bonus, the height limit is a potential constraint to housing growth in the city. Changing the limit would require a ballot measure and voter approval. The General Plan Update could include an action item for the City to put a ballot measure forward for the voters to consider removing or changing the height limit as part of its Implementation Plan.
24. Are you aware that the City has a 56 foot height limit?
· Yes
· No
25. Would you support allowing building heights above 56 feet?
· Yes
· No
· Maybe, under some circumstances
· I Don’t Know
26. Under what circumstances would you consider changing the height limit? Check all that apply
· Citywide
· In higher density areas of the city
· On specific parcels, in specific locations (such as near transit)
· If the project provides affordable housing above City requirements
· If the project provides onsite open space
· Other (please specify)
27. What other information would you need to provide informed input regarding the land use alternatives?
Leave comment
Please leave a comment and tell City Council how you feel!
Citywide
To support development of the land use alternatives and General Plan policies, the project team seeks to understand views about citywide priorities.
10. Rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements.
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
· When planning for new buildings, scale is an important consideration.
· Small developments across the city are preferable to very large developments in a few places.
· Incremental infill is a good strategy to accommodate new housing in Culver City.
Residential Neighborhoods
Currently, per state law, the City code allows up to three units on a single-family parcel: one single-family unit, one accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and one junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU).
Alternative 1 illustrates the option to retain current policies, allowing up to three units per parcel in existing low-density residential areas, such as single family (R1) and two-family (R2) areas. Alternatives 2 and 3 illustrate the potential for additional housing types in these areas. Alternative 2 illustrates allowing incremental infill, e.g., duplex, triplex, and quadplex units (up to four units per parcel) in single unit residential areas. Alternative 3 illustrates allowing incremental densification in single unit residential areas, e.g., up to six units per parcel.
11. Would you support incremental infill (up to four units) in existing single-unit residential areas (Alternative 2)
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
12. Would you support incremental densification (up to six units) in existing single-unit residential areas (Alternative 3)?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
13. Would you consider requiring residential projects to provide affordable housing that helps implement the Vision and Guiding Principles to achieve their maximum density?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
* 14. What two (2) potential benefits of incremental infill are of most interest to you?
· Increased variety in home styles and types
· More affordable housing options
· Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from travel
· New homes bring new families and vibrancy to neighborhoods
· More households means access to amenities for more people
· Poorly maintained homes are replaced or updated
· None of the above
* 15. What two (2) potential aspects of incremental infill are of the most concern to you?
· New houses are bigger or taller than nearby houses
· New houses with modern designs do not fit the character of nearby houses
· Existing viable homes are being demolished
· Additional homes are reducing available on-street parking and increasing traffic
· Green spaces and tree canopy are being lost
· Houses are too close to each other
· None of the above
Throughout the engagement process, small neighborhood markets, like Jackson Market, came up as an opportunity to create neighborhood-supporting retail, reduce vehicle travel, and create community gathering places.
16. Would you support allowing those types of uses in residential neighborhoods along main streets?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Commercial Corridors17. Would you support intensifying the city’s commercial corridors to support new housing and jobs adjacent to multimodal transportation, like transit?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Along commercial corridors like Sepulveda and Washington Boulevards, the City requires new residential projects to contain commercial space for retail or service activities.
18. Would you support removing commercial requirements for residential projects along the city’s commercial corridors to improve the feasibility of developing residential?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Along commercial corridors like Sepulveda and Washington Boulevards, the City requires new residential projects to contain commercial space for retail or service activities.
18. Would you support removing commercial requirements for residential projects along the city’s commercial corridors to improve the feasibility of developing residential?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Culver City has few large parcels, including the Costco site on Washington, the Culver Center site on Venice, the Target site on Jefferson, and Westfield Mall site on Sepulveda. In the past, these types of sites were prioritized for jobs and economic growth.
19. If these types of sites were to redevelop, what should the City prioritize on the sites?
Choose strongly support, support, neutral, oppose, strongly oppose
Industrial Areas
Culver City maintains approximately 8% of its land area for industrial uses maily adjacent to Ivy Station and along Ballona Creek. Many of these properties zoned industrial provide space for an ecosystem of small businesses.
20. What should the City consider for the industrially zoned areas adjacent to Ivy Station?
· Maintain entire area as industrial and small businesses uses
· Allow limited areas to transition over time to housing, economic growth, or a blend
· Allow the entire area to transition to housing
· Allow the entire area to transition to a blend of housing and economic growth
· Allow the entire area to transition to economic growth
· I don’t know
21. What should the City consider for the industrially zoned areas along Ballona Creek?
· Maintain entire area as industrial and small businesses uses
· Allow limited areas to transition over time to housing, or economic growth, or a blend
· Allow the entire area to transition to housing
· Allow the entire area to transition to economic growth
· Allow the entire area to transition to a blend of housing and economic growth
· I don’t know
22. What should the City consider for the industrially zoned areas in the Hayden Tract?
· Maintain entire area as industrial and small businesses uses
· Allow limited areas to transition over time to housing, or economic growth, or a blend
· Allow the entire area to transition to housing
· Allow the entire area to transition to economic growth Allow the entire area to transition to a blend of housing and economic growth
· I don’t know
Inglewood Oil Field
23. The Inglewood Oil Field may be decommissioned over the General Plan horizon by the year 2045. If this happens and the land is environmentally remediated to be safe for human use, what would you like to see on this site? Residential uses are not included below as an option as the level of remediation that would be required makes it unlikely. Check all that apply
· Open space
· Programmed park space, such as sports fields or playgrounds
· Civic and recreational buildings
· Infrastructure to harness renewable energy, such as solar and wind energy
· Other (please specify)
Building Heights
In 1990, Culver City residents voted to pass Measure I limiting building heights to 56 feet. Although some residential projects may exceed this height limit for affordable housing per the California State Density Bonus, the height limit is a potential constraint to housing growth in the city. Changing the limit would require a ballot measure and voter approval. The General Plan Update could include an action item for the City to put a ballot measure forward for the voters to consider removing or changing the height limit as part of its Implementation Plan.
24. Are you aware that the City has a 56 foot height limit?
· Yes
· No
25. Would you support allowing building heights above 56 feet?
· Yes
· No
· Maybe, under some circumstances
· I Don’t Know
26. Under what circumstances would you consider changing the height limit? Check all that apply
· Citywide
· In higher density areas of the city
· On specific parcels, in specific locations (such as near transit)
· If the project provides affordable housing above City requirements
· If the project provides onsite open space
· Other (please specify)
27. What other information would you need to provide informed input regarding the land use alternatives?
Leave comment
Please leave a comment and tell City Council how you feel!