SB 79 Alternative Plan

A resident homeowner urged the council not to rescind the SB 79 alternative plan prematurely, citing HCD's inconsistent interpretations and warning that tall buildings in single-family neighborhoods could permanently alter their character.

Written comment supporting Scenario 3, noting the La Cienega area already has density and freeway access; Scenario 2 as second choice.

40-year resident backed Scenario 3 for practical and aesthetic reasons, with Scenario 2 second.

Wrote simply, 'Option three is preferred.'

Wrote, 'Scenario three is preferred.'

Maple Drive resident called Scenario 1 'disastrous' and supported Scenario 3 for its proximity to existing density and the freeway.

North Palm Drive property owner supported Plan 3 as best for the neighborhood and city.

Favored Scenario 3 focusing density near the La Cienega station; Scenario 2 second.

Supported Scenario 3 with Scenario 2 second-best.

Backed Plan 3, citing wide streets at La Cienega/San Vicente and freeway access for handling traffic.

Called Scenario 3 best for the city since the area borders Los Angeles; Scenario 2 acceptable as a fallback.

Supported Scenario 3 for its proximity to La Cienega, San Vicente, and the 10 Freeway.

California Housing Defense Fund warned the city's height limits can't physically accommodate the required densities and could violate fair housing law on family-sized units — urged the city not to evade the law.

Architectural Commission chair urged reconsideration of the La Cienega-focused plan, arguing density should be equitably spread across both metro stations and that freeway access is contrary to SB 79's transit-oriented intent.

Wrote: 'I think scenario three.'