I offer below, photos of two projects that validate my point:
This first one should be recognizable to all of you as the condominiums that were originally built as apartments on Park Western Drive, near Western Avenue. If you look closely at Park Western Drive, you will notice quite a few vehicles parked along the street, in the middle of the day. This illustrates how many folks either can't or won't use the parking facilities on the lowest level of the project's buildings.
This is Scottsdale Estates in Carson, near Sepulveda. These were built as condominiums, but I would not suggest that any "outsider" go into the project after dark or if they have any reservation about being in a gang area. I know residents at this site. One person I know owns her unit, but is forced to live in its attached garage and rent out the main unit to help make ends meet.
There is absolutely no way Bob or anyone else can guarantee that non-age restricted condominiums, duplexes, or any other type of housing, with more than one family sharing a common wall, can keep the places from being leased or rented out.
I wish there could be a way to build some type of Senior Housing section at Ponte Vista, but I will chuck that dream in 1/10 of a heart beat if it looks like any non-age restricted common wall units of any size or type is considered by the CAC, the Planning Department, or any reasonable person, anywhere.
Whether you support keeping the entire site with its current zoning or not, there simply can be ZERO units approved of in a non-age restricted area of Ponte Vista, that isn't single-family, detached residences.
I take a lot of heat from all sides for my stance and many folks can't understand why I continue my very heavy support of the R1 group, but I don't give a hoot. My stance is my stance and even Mr. Mardesich couldn't get me to move on my proposal, although he did one hell of a great job with his comments at the supporters' meeting.
I will go to bat for any group or organization that states they do not want any non-age restricted units other than single-family, detached housing at Ponte Vista. I still will claim my wish, though.
Here is a challenge for supporters of Bob's current plans. Find me a large condominium development, over 10-years old, that DOES NOT have ANY renters or leased out units. Here is your only hint, try, just try to find any in Century City. That may be your best spot to look. Look on Galaxy Way or Emperian.
Even Condo buyers can spell "speculation".
3 comments:
Why not restrict the complete PonteVista grounds as a "Senior Only" community? How much damage would it do to make it all a Senior only complex and if PonteVista were to keep their Seniors busy with activities on their grounds, how much more traffic could they create? Think about it. It is really the only solution to keep everyone reasonably happy.
Howdy Anonymous 9:41 PM,
I'd like to put your suggestion thru the "4Rs Test"
Is it Reasonable? I think it is.
Is it Responsible? Sure, in my opinion.
Is it Realistic.I can live with it, so yes,that's three ayes.
Is it Respectful. Yes, to every senior who would want to live in a community like that.
You win! I don't know if we would need to talk about having 2,300 Senior Housing units, but perhaps something more than 575, could be negotiated.
At 55-years of age for at least one resident in each unit, there would be probably more traffic generated than a development where the youngest buyer has to be at least 62-years of age, but your idea sounds a whole lot more reasonable, realistic, responsible and respectful than anything Bob has ever uttered.
MW
Mr. Wells,
A modification to the suggestion is to consider a number less than 2,300 and more than 575, designate it all Senior Housing, and add an actual assisted-living section that some Seniors have been asking for. The assited-living could be more traditional, rental style. So when your lose your spouse and you and you need help to get around, you could sell your condo and move into the assisted-living building(s).
Tom Field
Post a Comment