By John Thomas
An optimist, a pessimist, and an engineer walk into a bar—and see a glass—with water in it. The optimist says it’s half full. The pessimist says it’s half empty. The engineer says the glass is too big for the amount of water.
When residents are asked about Laguna’s biggest problems, the most common answer is traffic and congestion. The biggest complaint of commercial landlords is too much retail vacancy. In an ideal world, supply equals demand. Laguna doesn’t have a demand problem. It has a supply problem. Actually, Laguna has an over-supply problem. We have too much supply of commercial space for the amount of demand. That’s one big reason for vacancy. The developer’s solution is to try to pump up demand. One way they want to do that is for the City to grant concessions that increase the amount of commercial space or allow more intense use of the existing space, which will increase supply and might increase demand. But these concessions to commercial landlords result in more traffic and congestion, which takes us back to residents’ biggest complaints – too much traffic and congestion.
And yet, believe it or not Laguna has just approved a plan that will allow building owners in the downtown to intensify uses and sometimes add space without mitigating the added impacts on the community. The new plan paves the way for commercial building owners to replace lower-intensity uses with higher intensity uses. It allows changing to a use that will need more parking but it does not require the benefiting building owner to provide the additional parking spaces that will be needed.
That engineer is right. The glass is too big for the amount of water. And Laguna has the same problem. We have too much commercial space for the amount of demand for commercial space. And some people even want to add more commercial space.
The business news tells us it’s not just us. The whole country has too much brick-and-mortar retail commercial space.
There are solutions. To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. To a developer, everything needs to be developed. But if you already have too much, why build more? If there is too much commercial space and too little housing, one solution would be to convert the most marginal commercial space to housing, thereby addressing the imbalance between retail supply and demand and the need for housing. And since housing is a far less intense land use than commercial uses, traffic and congestion would be reduced. Talk about a win-win.
If we have too much commercial space, why create more? More and bigger is not the solution. Why make whatever problem we have worse by intensifying uses and adding supply?
The ballot initiative addresses problems like these and offers solutions. It’s a guidebook to prioritize people over profit. The ballot initiative encourages developers and commercial building owners to make Laguna better not bigger.
A smart developer can make a profit by making something better without making it bigger. Intensifying uses without fully mitigating the negative impacts of the development is a shortcut to short term profits by simply leaving the problems it creates to someone else to clean up. That is not responsible development.
Laguna’s developers see the ballot initiative as a problem. The ballot initiative creators see it as a solution. It does not stop development. It encourages responsible development. The sky is not falling. Simply following the path laid out in the ballot initiative leads to a better Laguna.
John is a member of the Laguna Beach Audit Review & Measure LL Oversight Committee and 1st Vice President of the South Laguna Civic Association.
Wait, there’s a Laguna Beach ARMLOC (Audit Review & Measure LL Oversight Committee) to oversee Laguna Beach BLOZD (Beautiful Laguna Overlay Zoning District)? Who dreams this stuff up? There’s only two reasons a commercial space doesn’t rent: it’s on fire, or the price is too high.
Thank you for very clearly identifying the primary reason behind “empty storefronts”, which we constantly hear about and for which, the “restrictive” regulatory environment in Laguna Beach is blamed.
Thanks too, for placing a spotlight on the 2nd important protection that the LRF Ballot Initiative will provide to residents. It isn’t just focused on over-sized commercial development. It will also help restrain irresponsible commercial INTENSIFICATION. The opponents of the BI constantly challenge supporters to identify any large commercial developments that have been built in Laguna Beach in recent years (e.g. Sam Goldstein). Supporters can of course point to many intensifications that have utterly failed to mitigate their negative traffic/parking/noise/trash effects. As residents, we deserve a right to weigh in on such proposed commercial developments and intensifications, since local tax-payers subsidize the costs for 95% of the visitors who come to our town.
Sam Goldstein, Michael? Like him or not, his one and only project was to restore the historic Heisler Building. I wish the BLOZ supporters would list examples of the intensifications that concern you, so we could consider their merits.
Intensification without adequate mitigation?
Can you say “MOZAMBIQUE?”
I knew you could.
Egregiously under-parked after remodeling and increased capacity, residents in the ‘hood were forced into a parking permit program that was never necessary at the height of its former glory, THE best, most authentic Mexican restaurant EVER in Laguna: Tortilla Flats. A beacon with local flavor and character.
Nobody did Taco Tuesday or Cinco better.
Architecturally & aesthetically, the upper deck looks slapped on, like a ridiculous afterthought, no doubt palms were greased—-so for the revenue, the veritable 30 pieces of silver, neighbors are virtual hostages and sold out by City Council and the CM/staff.
So those boogeymen and women, VL, the old “iron fisted” foggies being portrayed as fascists apparently weren’t so iron fisted, more like feeble arthritic hands that can’t even clench.
The ‘Bique is a disaster unless you’re the owner—-hold fundraisers, hire local musicians (those big fish in a little pond), and VOILA! Victory at the expense of good will, the burden upon homeowners and renters who basically were given no choice.
And we mustn’t forget who the facilitators were: A home grown native-turned-local land use entitlement consultant, an architect and his siamese twin attorney BFF with offices down the hall from each other.
Whattyagonnado Jake, it’s Chinatown.
Agree with your statement Michael Morris: “As residents, we deserve a right to weigh in on such proposed commercial developments and intensifications, since local tax-payers subsidize the costs for 95% of the visitors who come to our town.”
AMEN! Laguna Beach voters:VOTE YES on the LRF Ballot Initiative in November to secure your opportunity to have a say. If not, tourists/developers/investors will speak for you and the costs to support them will be going up. Thanks.
The LRF initative should be DOA. It infringes on real property rights and makes a false big bad boogeyman of all the commercial developers and landowners. Traffic will ALWAYS be a problem in Laguna, always has been. There is little that can be done about that, its the nature of ingress/egress into Laguna. Denying commercial/real property developers the ability to enhance and improve their properties is not the answer. There is already a system in place with checks and balances in the multiple stages of review at City Hall, and plenty of opportunity for public/resident input. Laguna does not need this intiative. The mere fact that EVERY week there is another opinion piece or LTE screaming the sky will fall if residents don’t support the flawed LRF initiative should alone tell you something. It’s the same half dozen people, over and over again. Say NO to this initiative.