NEW IDEAS for the upcommunity COMMUNITY PLAN

I have 5 RECOMMENDATIONS I would like integrated into the

PROPOSED 2019 Sherman Oaks-Studio City-Toluca Lake-Cahuenga Pass Community Plan[1]

by: Joann Deutch [2]

INTRODUCTION: Studio City no longer accepts the 1998 PLAN’s definition [3] for our community. Studio City has found its voice and no longer embraces the old trite descriptions of this vibrant Gateway to Los Angeles.[4]

Studio City is not just a media-centric place to work. It is a trend-setter for shops/restaurants/etc. and is an evitable walkable community.

Small storefronts along Ventura Blvd encourage experimental entrepreneurship for small businesses - landing the first Ralphs market; Aaron Brothers (art supplies); Kinko’s (copy centers AKA FedEx); Petco; Bell Weather restaurant etc.

It is a mecca of important mid-century buildings (commercial and residential) which are included in significant collections of architecture. Studio City is also home to more than 3,000 home offices/single offices (SOHOs).

A significant point NOT to be overlooked by Planners is that Studio City‘s surface roads feed a remarkable number of cars transiting from the San Fernando Valley into the plains of Los Angles through:

Cahuenga Pass;

Laurel Canyon;

Coldwater Canyon:

The 101 freeway: and

All the ancillary cut-throughs (imposed on us by WAZE).

For these reasons planning and development for Studio City cannot be “more-of-the-same”. Planning needs to be tailored to the Studio City community, allowing it to continue being a forward-thinking trend-setter and incubator for the City and the Valley.

FIVE (5) Identified ISSUES AND my PROPOSED OPPORTUNITIES (solutions): [5]

• Expansion of Co-Op (Cooperative Stock Association) housing
• “Fence What you Use, Not What You Own”
• Adoption of Green Living walls
• All City agency’s adherence to the MULHOLLAND SCENIC PARKWAY SPECIFIC PLAN (requiring cross-agency education)
• Future building near Studio City’s over-the-hill transit corridors must be restricted to lower densities.

COMMUNITY ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES:

ISSUE # 1: Expansion of Co-operative housing:

The challenge of quickly creating affordable housing has plagued Los Angeles. Here is a solution which has been used in other cities.

OPPORTUNITIES:

Co-ops (Co-operatives Housing) is a system of home ownership that is prevalent in other parts of the US, and common in most big cities. (Co-ops out number condos in NYC by 75%) co-op vs. condo ownership [6]

Co-ops are usually multi-unit structures with affordable individually owned units for middle income families.

• Co-ops can transition from current existing apartment buildings without a developer tearing it down and replacing it with condos which are not generally affordable to middle income families. (NB. one + year off the market to tear down and rebuild)
• Co-op Advantages: Most housing cooperatives are small nonprofit organizations. Tenants pay a fee each month to cover their share of expenses, such as property taxes, utilities, or maintenance costs.
• You don’t need a large down payment like you would with a traditional mortgage.
• Co-ops have lower payments and lower closing costs.
• Tax deductions: According to the IRS, you’re still entitled to many of the same tax benefits and deductions as traditional homeowners. You can deduct the interest on your monthly payment leading to overall savings. [7] You can likely deduct your share of the corporation’s real estate taxes.

ISSUE # 2: “Fence What you Use, Not What You Own”. [8]

Many areas in Studio City are transit corridors for wildlife. Much of the steep slopes in Studio City are not buildable. There is no “adverse possession” which mandates that a homeowner must fence their property (e.g. as in the old-fashioned tradition of barb wiring your property line).

California adverse possession laws require at least five years of possession and payment of taxes throughout that period in order to be eligible for legal title. The possession can not be done in secret. It must be “open and notorious” See Civ. Proc. §§318, 325, 328. How likely is that to happen?

OPPORTUNITIES:

1. Fencing of “sloped” areas should not be permitted.

2. Planting privacy screens to obstruct the vista along MULHOLLAND SCENIC PARKWAY SPECIFIC PLAN area should be cited and removed. (Guideline 66/page 28) page 26 protecting viewshed.[9] There is no current enforcement.

3. Fencing and barriers on the wildlife corridors/connectivity should be similarly restricted.

4. No chain link fences should [10] be allowed without a review and permit.

ISSUE # 3: Managing the transition between multi-level apartments/condos adjacent to small private homes has not be adequately resolved.

OPPORTUNITIES:

• A way to soften the transition between different categories of housing many cities have adopted the concept of “living walls”. (see photograph below)
• These walls incorporate permanent living plants. Living Walls [11]
• This option also helps the city control its air quality.

“Thermal benefits and associated energy saving effects of [green walls] have been comprehensively studied, in diverse climatic conditions. When installed on buildings, [green wall buildings have been found to provide both cooling and insulating benefits… Gomes, 2016; Perini et al., 2011; Wong et al., 2010a) together with associated cost savings due to lower energy consumption from air conditioning and heating system.” [12]

ISSUE # 4:

Mulholland Drive is a Scenic Corridor with rules and guidelines set forth in its Specific Plan. Many government agencies interface with our portion of Mulholland Drive; yet they ignore the Guidelines. Said agencies permit and encourage incompatible/conflicting uses.

OPPORTUNITES:

LA City agencies need to have a simple reference manual which spells out the goals and restrictions for use of Mulholland Drive for other than recreational uses.

The current Guidelines are specific for building in the area, YET other agencies seem to feel they can use Mulholland as if it were “just any other road”.

EXAMPLE:

• LA DOT considers Mulholland Drive as an arterial route [13], and therefore encourages cross-town traffic to alleviate congestion on Sunset and Ventura Boulevards.
• Obsolete over-head wiring must by Guidelines to be removed. Instead new wiring is added without anything being deleted. I challenge you planners to identity who has the writing inventory and who knows which wires are obsolete.
• Banners are being allowed on the inner and outer corridor of the Mulholland Scenic Corridor. The Specific Plan states there shall be no advertising. (Can you image billboards on Mulholland Drive !)
• Mulholland Drive is designed for a bike path to be marked on the shoulder of the road by a white stripe. The theoretical space for a bike lane is divided between east and west bound traffic which means there is no effective dedicated bike lane on Mulholland Drive.

ISSUE # 5: Studio City has the most roads that service the “over-the-hill” traffic which are already classified by LADOT as “F”.

OPPORTUNITIES:

• ”Typically, one lane of traffic has a daily capacity of between 8000 to 10,000 vehicles per lane. This roughly translates into a daily north-south capacity of [….20,000 on each of our arterial lanes] [14] …Given the overall north-south volume…, the average the north-south streets are already filled with vehicular traffic up to approximately 60 to 75 percent of their daily capacity. ”LADOT study” [15]
• Restricting heavy development along these arterial corridors will mitigate the certain nightmare of getting through the Studio city transit bottlenecks and into the City.
• Controlling development along these major streets used by the San Fernando Valley for access to the Los Angeles Basin in advance will be critical.
• Restrictions in the form of less densification is in order at this time.

While planners envision the use of public transportation in lieu of private cars, such service to valley communities, including access to/from “the-last-mile” is well into the future.[16]

Prepared and Submitted by

Joann Deutch, Author

Studio City - A Mile of Style, What’s History What’s Gossip

KINDLE version is also available

________

[1] 1998 Community Plan https://planning.lacity.org/co...

[2] Original organizer of the Studio City Neighborhood Council; Original Chair , SCNC Land Use Committee; Past President Studio City Chamber of Commerce; past delegate United Chambers of Commerce; current Board Member of the Laurel Hills Homeowner Association; SCRA delegate The Hillside Federation.

[3] Current Community Plan see page I -2

[4] https://www.amazon.com/Studio-City-Style-History-Gossip/dp/1492889008

[5] See following Community Issues and Opportunities addressing each topic

[6] https://www.investopedia.com/a...

[7]https://www.google.com/search?q=IRS+tax+deductions+coop+intest&oq=IRS+tax+deductions+coop+intest&aqs=chrome..69i57j33l3.7391j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[8] https://patch.com/california/studiocity/who-will-be-tomorrows-community-leaders

[9] https://planning.lacity.org/co...

[10]https://www.google.com/search?q=IRS+tax+deductions+coop+intest&oq=IRS+tax+deductions+coop+intest&aqs=chrome..69i57j33l3.7391j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[11] http://gosmartbricks.com/vertical-garden-a-solution-to-mounting-air-pollution/ - Living Walls Tackle Pollution

[12] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.o...

[13] “Arterial streets can be thought of as the City’s trunk lines that provide access to major commercial destinations” Transit Planning document Los Angeles

[14] 300,000 cars daily for the 5 arterial corridors. ( LC= 3 lanes; CC = 2; CPass = 4; 101 = 6

[15] The San Fernando Valley North-South Transit Corridor Study

[16] https://la.streetsblog.org/2018/02/01/new-ucla-study-examines-transit-ridership-decline-blames-increased-car-ownership/