Jean Frost

Jacquelyn Dupont-Walker <jdupontw@aol.com> Tuesday, August 6,2019 5:37 PM Nicholas.ayars@lacity.orgRon.G.Cargill@gmail.com; sherilyn.correa@lacity.org 806 W Asams Blvd - Los Angeles

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:

Date:

Submitted inAugust 6, 2019 CommitteeCouncil File No: jj-IC'OS

.Ujy//w> BItem No.

Deputy.-^Planning Department - City of Los AngelesLA City Hall200 N Spring StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012ATTN: Nicholas Ayars, City Planning Associate

RE: 806 W Adams Blvd - Los Angeles, CA

Gentlepersons:

Please received this communique with reference to the above referenced project. We are the new owners of a housing community at Adams and Hoover which will be home for formerly homeless veterans with a child. The quality of life for them is vital to all. We are 25 + year stakeholders as owners and managers of a 120 unit housing community for elders at Adams and Magnolia (stretching with 50 feet of Hoover).

In this community, we have experienced the outcome of five-bedroom style apartments which have painfully created traffic congestion, parking challenges, and noise that generally accompanies the college age group. The listing of the minimum number of probable residents is misleading. History provides evidence that the single bedroom has two occupants therefore the total occupancy most likely be 10 students per apartment totaling 990 new residents. In spite of the availability of public transportation, the current student mix tends to drive private vehicles, leading us to question if the parking planned is realistic.

The historic character of the surrounding neighborhood begs for something different than the "glass and brass" building represented in the renderings. The promises and commitments of the now defunct Community Redevelopment Agency should be considered. They included design standards compatible with the area, appropriate setbacks, reasonable density, and strong community con census.

Finally, much of the family housing, especially that for low and moderate income families in the greatest need in the area, in spite of USC's best efforts to bring its student population onto campus, speculative projects continue to erode the supply of housing that would guarantee the diversity that we have enjoyed in this community. In fact, this is a de-facto dormitory and as such the community deserves to have a hearing and more discussion about the operations and administration of the developer - who is not familiar in this area.

We look forward to the denial of this project's forward movement, as proposed, and continued collaboration to help this developer fully respect the community stakeholders, legacy businesses, and others who have invested in protecting the quality of life for all here.

I am available to discuss my concerns further.

Sincerely,Ward Economic Development Corporation By Its President

J Dupont-Walker

Jacquelyn Dupont-Walker

(a)UPACijyivtasirt r'Arcpr

January 21,2020

CF19-1603

Dear Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee,

On behalf of the neighborhood, the University Park Action Coalition is writing in support of The Empowerment Congress North Area Neighborhood Development Council’s (NANDC) opposition to the 806 West Adams project.

As a community with an extreme lack of affordable housing, residents fear this development is turning a blind eye to the needs of the neighborhood and would only further isolate current residents by offering even more student housing. What University Park needs is affordable housing units, not more student housing.

The description of the project states that it is a “modem and attractive multi-family residential development that would blend seamlessly into an established neighborhood.” Community members fear, however, that the project’s modem facade and development plans are skewed more towards USC students who would live in five-bedroom units, rather than employees, staff, faculty, or families in the area.

Additionally, the categorical exemption is not an adequate level of environmental review.

Please consider the impacts on the community before proceeding with the approval of this project. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns feel free to contact us at losangeles.upac@gmail.com or (213) 700-6782.

Respectfully,

The University Park Action Coalition Board | Aurora Becerra, Rudy Flores, and Sofia Bosch

A

•2 :♦ NAN DCNorth Ana No^ghboihoixl Development Cowdl

January 4,2019

Mr. Henry Chu Zoning Administrator 200 N. Spring Street LA, CA 90012

Via e mail ( )Cc: (Nicholas.Ayars@lacity.org)

RE: ZA-2018-2453-CU-DB-SPR-VTT-82114, ENV-2018-2454-CE, 806 W. Adams Boulevard, 758-832 West Adams Boulevard, 2610 Severance, a for rent 99 unit townhouse project by Champion Development

Dear Mr. Chu,

The Empowerment Congress North Area Neighborhood Development Council (NANDC) appreciates your granting an extension of time to allow the Neighborhood Council to compete its established processes.

On January 3,2019 the Empowerment Congress North Area Neighborhood Development Council reviewed the project and voted to oppose the project in its current form. The Board adopted the recommendation of the Policy Committee Recommendation to oppose the project in its current form because of issues raised including:

• incompatibility with neighborhood;• orientation;• ground level podium parking;• density;• failure to comply with the NSO;• insufficient affordable units;• inadequate setbacks;• rooftop noise;• lack of variation in design and population;• failure to comply with CRA and South Community Plans;• CEQA exemption.

The Policy Committee met with the developer’s representatives on November 27 and December 20, 2018 and discussed the project. The Committee members raised an extensive range of issues with the current proposal. At the December 20 meeting the Committee had an opportunity to review materials presented on November 27 and recommended that the Board oppose the project by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 abstentions.

1

The matter was placed on the NANDC January 3,3019 duly noticed General Board Meeting Agenda, VII. Motions & Resolutions, item a, and the Board opposed the project of 6 ayes, 0 nays, and 3 abstentions.

The initial reaction by the Committee members on November 27 raised a variety of issues: that this is dormitory style not family housing, that affordable units will not be affordable for South LA residents, the resultant increased traffic and inadequate parking, compatibility with the historic neighborhood, compliance with the NSO, design issues, compliance with applicable plans, and the appropriate level of environmental review. No elements of the project were changed at the second meeting.

NANDC has had successful design and development discussions with University Park developers but in this case could not resolve the complex issues inherent in the current project. No changes were made from the initial presentation leaving all of our issues unresolved. At the heart of the matter is the project’s incompatibility, failure to comply with the intent of the NSO and CRA, and inadequate environmental review which, had it occurred, may have mitigated the severe negative impacts to the community.

We urge the Zoning Administrator to reject the project in its current form and its categorical exemption (CE.)

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Thryeris Mason, President

Cc: Councilmember Curren D. Price Jr. Sherilyn Correa, CD9 Nora Gutierrez, CD9 Nicholas Ayars, Planning

2