By Ted Winterer Santa Monica
Reasons to say “no” to the Macerich Company’s plans to redevelop Santa Monica Place with three 21-story condo towers, 85,000 square feet of office space and 600,000 square feet of retail: 1. The absence of any compelling evidence that the benefits to the public coffers of the increased tax base of commercial developments is greater than the new costs incurred by the city to provide public safety and services. 2. The obvious and unmitigable costs of even more downtown congestion; the loss of the air and light, which makes our city such a desirable place in which to live; and years of construction noise, dust and traffic interruptions in a downtown that has only recently become hospitable again to pedestrians and drivers after a building boom. 3. The enormous environmental costs that come with tearing down the old mall and hauling the debris to landfills; extracting nonrenewable resources for the new construction; and consuming the large quantities of energy required for both these processes. Isn’t the city trying to decrease its environmental footprint? It would take a lot of fluorescent fixtures and energy-efficient windows to even begin to offset the environmental degradation of this project. 4. Yes, the affordable housing which comes with this project is necessary and desirable. But we’ve already created a miniature Playa Vista between Fifth and Seventh streets downtown for the sake of the affordable housing built by a certain developer. Do we really need to a mini-Century City downtown, or at some point do other community goals of sustainability take precedence over affordable housing? 5. Building tall towers in a seismic zone may be less of a fool’s mission than it was 20 years ago due to new design and construction standards. But in today’s hostile geopolitical climate, does it make sense to erect structures so vulnerable to terrorist attacks? Why not just paint a big bulls-eye on downtown Santa Monica?
Macerich is essentially looking for the public to bail them out of shortsighted decisions made 24 years ago by a private entity. Should the residents of Santa Monica be asked to shoulder the burdens of a behemoth project just because Macerich unwisely envisioned that an indoor mall anchored by aging department store chains was the wave of the future? And if this project doesn’t pan out for some reason, will we be asked for a handout again in another 20 years?
While the goals of a pedestrian connection between the Promenade and the Civic Center and the revitalization of a floundering commercial property are worthy and commendable, Macerich’s earlier notion to adaptively reuse Santa Monica Place was a far less intrusive and more environmentally friendly option. Why not just open up the existing mall and give it a facelift? And if the anchor tenants of Macys and Robinson-May no longer draw shoppers, why not buy out their leases and bring in tenants such as Target or Trader Joe’s who have been eager for a downtown presence and would lure consumers to a spiffier open air mall?
Now that’s a plan I could live with.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 22, 2004. Read the original PDF.