Combing through thousands of public records gives us a window into the casual conversations about things that matter dearly to residents, things that are not casual at all.
Paavo Monkkonen is a Culver City resident, a professor at UCLA, and also an appointed member on the Culver City General Plan Advisory Committee. In this email exchange (one of many) with Professor Elmendorf from UC Davis, Monkkonen casually tosses around the idea of taking Culver City single family neighborhoods and converting them into thousands of apartment buildings. And all of this would be to satisfy an even smaller number of required low income housing.
This glimpse into their academic conversation reveals a coldness towards the people that currently live here in single family homes. Homes and neighborhoods do not matter — it’s just the numbers that matter. Satisfy the numbers.
But even then, the numbers don’t add up — we all already know that any newly built homes, single family or condominium or apartment, would all be expensive in Culver City. So for Professor Monkkonen to suggest that we convert half of the single family homes into giant buildings does nothing to help affordability. And affordability is the rallying cry of the YIMBY all along. It’s a false flag, folks.
Our own consultant and planning commission have both concurred that there will be no affordable homes gained by eliminating R-1 single family homes. Yet here we have evidence of two influential University of California professors shaping the narrative and feeding the YIMBY Movement our single family homes. Monkkonen writes, “Culver City has 7,000 single family houses, if they allowed 6 plexes w 1 low income unit on half of them, even with a 25% probability of development that’d almost satisfy their entire low income RHNA.”