> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Growing sentiment on city development - URL: https://www.smdp.com/growing-sentiment/ - Published: 2008-08-02T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-24T20:29:27.000Z - Author: Guest Author - Tags: Real Estate & Housing, Santa Monica, #archive-import This past week, Q-line asked: Which direction do you feel the Land Use & Circulation Element should go? Some feel that it should limit development while others want to see the city continue to be developed to provide more business opportunities and affordable housing. Here are your responses: “THIS CITY IS WAY BEYOND over-development. If it grows anymore we won’t be able to walk on the sidewalks or dive on the roads at all. It is so uncomfortable and annoying and dangerous, to a large degree, being either a pedestrian or a driver in this city.” “THEY SHOULD STOP HAVING everything grow. Every time they tear down a building, they build up something bigger, which means more people and more traffic. If they want to replace buildings, fine, but they should keep it so that, even if people go in, they will have the same amount of people that were there before. We don’t need more traffic, or any more people.” “CITY HALL SHOULD DEFINITELY LIMIT new development — all new development. What they should do, instead of now, is acquire and redevelop, or at least create, affordable housing opportunities and even small businesses in existing buildings, such as vacant buildings, or, as Mr.Shriver wanted to do with the VA hospital. Any kind of available building could be redeveloped for affordable housing.” “I THINK THAT THE DOCUMENT SHOULD make real slow growth, as we are in the midst of a very big water shortage. And until we can develop other water sources, such as desalination, we shouldn’t have any development at all. We just can’t do it. I recently heard news that San Diego went into a water alert because they are using way more than they should, and if we have more development, we are going to use up more water.” “HAVING LIVED IN SANTA MONICA FOR A good many years, I cannot remember a day when I have not heard the steel head of a hammer striking the flathead of a nail, due to continuous construction. The rebuilding of the RAND Corp., the library, and now the Santa Monica Place mall, to name three. The only individual I have heard of, who enjoyed the continuous construction noise, was the heir to the Winchester rifle fortune, who had carpenters driving nails into wood 24 hours a day — seemingly forever — to complete her Winchester rifle house. We all know what folks said about her mental state.” “OUR UGLY TOWN. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THE so-called city elders to do a job leading this town that’s on par with cleaning out septic tanks? The RIFT plan is great news. What is all this overdevelopment getting the long time citizens — that means those with at least 25 years? You can drive, park, or keep your money. Our elders love Europe so much that they support this Unitarian, socialist approach to urban planning. The half-billion-dollar budget is an abomination. We copy Santa Barbara. No building taller than two stories has been built in 30 years; a true beach town. What have we become? A true extension of L.A. Rich is for those who support increase business, unrestricted height limits, bicycles, non- English speaking people, low income housing, and Big Brother cameras. Stop the insanity. First, it’s the losing of Starbucks, now losing a wonderful beach town.” “ALL THE MAJOR URBAN PLANNING textbooks underscore, as a fundamental element, the need to pace development. The LUCE does not pace development, and that is its big failing.” “THE CITY NEEDS TO LIMIT DEVELOPMENT in a big way. I’m thrilled that RIFT has made it to the November ballot. The city has gone crazy with overdevelopment, and the low income housing on Santa Monica Boulevard at Berkeley and at 26th street are so dense, and the buildings are ugly. In regards to RIFT, ignore the school’s complaints of decreased revenues. They have always cried for more money, and they always will. Parking and traffic are already nightmares and we don’t need any more buildings that are more than two stories. Why is it that there is no low-income housing North of Montana or South of Pico? I’m sure that the developers can pay off City hall to ignore zoning laws and spread around all the high density if it’s going to persist, unless, of course, that is where city representatives live. It’s that ‘not in my backyard’ thing.” “THERE IS ALREADY NO AFFORDABLE housing, and limited business opportunities, so what if you build it and no one comes? We’re reaching a crisis with the traffic, so no. No more.” “THIS IS BECOMING THE DEVELOPER’S republic of Santa Monica. Enough on further business development. Affordable housing, yes, because Santa Monica is becoming more and more not affordable for those of modest means.” “YEAH, I THINK SANTA MONICA IS overdeveloped. The parking situation is so bad here, we don’t need anymore development. There are plenty of other places where they can go and do development.” “THAT LUCE REPORT IS JUST A USELESS bureaucratic exercise just giving money to a bunch of stupid people to try and rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. Whatever your cause, it’s a lost cause, without immigration and population control. “YES, I FEEL AS THOUGH THERE IS TOO much traffic here in Santa Monica. There is no parking, and it seems to be overdeveloped as it is. I feel as though we should slow things down here and probably conserve a little bit more, especially energy-wise, too.” “I LIVE IN VILLAGE TRAILER PARK ON Colorado Avenue, and I just can’t agree with the proposed building that they’re trying to do here and in other parts of Santa Monica. You cannot, even after 4 *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on August 2, 2008.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/080208.pdf?ref=smdp.com)