City Planning Hearing Tips & Talking Points!
We hope as many members of the community as possible are able to attend the May 18th city planning hearing at 10:30 am. For more details on the hearing CLICK HERE.
Anyone who wishes to speak will be given a maximum of 60 seconds to share their position. Below are some examples of topics to cover in your 60 second speaking window. Attendees are encouraged to share their own views on the proposed development, but are also welcome to use these example topics.
We have been advised that City Planning is more interested in facts about intended specific use than in emotional appeals against the business in question. We encourage everyone to voice their specific concerns about this community killer. A high volume commercial business of this type is not right for a residential community for a long list of reasons, including the example topics below.
Example talking points:
60 seconds on traffic:
The addition of a high volume commercial business in an already heavily congested area less than 500 feet from a freeway on-ramp is unacceptable. According to a 2019 LADOT traffic report, the intersection at Franklin ave & Vista Del Mar saw upwards of 34,000 cars in a single day. A local franchisee of the applicant reports that he requires a minimum of 5000 cars per day to meet his sales goals, the addition of this volume of new traffic to an already heavily congested area is extremely dangerous for all who live here, including the elderly & school age children from the nearby assisted living facility & elementary school.
60 seconds on the environment:
Exempting the site of a car garage with current CalEPA violations from CEQA guidelines is dangerous & absurd. Not to mention that the exemptions applied for do not even pertain to this development. The new building is nowhere near the same use—going from a car garage to a retail store—& the proposed 2744 square foot building requires substantial construction including demolishing the existing structure & altering the property itself. The existing CalEPA violations paired with the location’s current use of hazardous materials make this development dangerous to all who live here & any potential future customers.
60 seconds on crime:
Brain White, the LAPD officer in charge of this neighborhood, directed residents to the Crime Mapping website to view the crime stats for this area. The two identical businesses within a single mile report an increase in both violent crime, as well as petty theft, vagrancy, loitering, & car break-ins. The nearest location, within a half mile of the proposed site, reported three major violent incidents in just a four day period—a shooting, a stabbing, & an assault. In an area which already struggles with violent & petty crime, including having more than 10 car break-in’s in a single night a few weeks ago, the increase in crime is unacceptable.
60 seconds on hours of operation:
Within less than a quarter mile of the proposed development there are currently no fewer than three 24 hour establishments. The neighboring convenience store—less than 150 feet away—is approved to operate 6am-2am. There are multiple additional 24 hour stores located within a single mile. There is absolutely zero benefit to the community in adding yet another 24 hour store. The hours between 2am & 6am (when several existing businesses are open but the adjacent convenience store is closed) already show a demonstrated increase in rubbish fires, petty crime, & car break-ins, as is clear by both LA Fire Department & LAPD records. The proposed insertion of a high traffic commercial business provides no value to the community & in fact brings only additional & exacerbated issues.
60 seconds on 7-Eleven's statement that they will provide an amenity not currently available:
The applicant’s provided application materials state that the proposed development would “provide an amenity that is not offered within a one-half mile radius of the subject property and thereby compliment the existing uses in the area.” This is a complete falsehood. Within 500 feet there are two nearly identical businesses, including one operating 24 hours. Within a half mile there are two 7-Elevens one 0.4 miles & one 0.5 miles away. Less than 300 feet from the proposed site there is an existing convenience store (incorrectly labeled a “grocery store” in the application). There are also two CVS stores, one 0.3 miles away & one 0.5 miles away that also operates 24 hours. There are three gas stations with attached snack shops; the Mobile which is 299 feet away, the 76, which is 0.3 miles away, as well as the Arco, just 0.1 mile away. Additionally, there are at least 15 other 7-Eleven stores within a two mile radius. To state that the proposed development provides ANY amenity not already readily found in the immediate vicinity is absurd.
60 seconds on benefit to the community:
Within a two mile radius there are more than 15 identical businesses, this newest location provides no additional benefit to the community. This area is already served by multiple gas stations; Mobile, Aarco, & 76 each open 24 hours & within a quarter mile of each other, as well as an existing family owned convenience store less than150 feet away. There is absolutely zero added benefit to the community to add a high traffic corporate chain in an otherwise residential area.
Things to remember:
- We have been advised that City Planning cares more about tangible issues backed up with data than they do "community sentiment". Sharing specifics of why a high volume commercial business is unsafe & unneeded in this community is the best route to victory.
- The issue is not 7-Eleven & how we as a neighborhood feel about that store, the issue is the material harm such a high traffic business brings to this area.
- Our opposition is not just specific to 7-Eleven: any high traffic corporate commercial business on that property is dangerous to the entire community.
- 7-Eleven franchise owners are not our enemy, it is the corporate decision makers who undermine their own people by putting more than 15 locations (each with a different owner) within a 2 mile radius that we oppose!
UNNEEDED. UNWANTED. UNSAFE.