Planning Commission Turns Down Target Store
By Jorge Casuso
The Planning Commission Monday night voted 5 to 2 to oppose a proposed
Target department store in the heart of downtown, saying that the 162,480
square foot development would create gridlock and discourage pedestrian
activity.
Target officials immediately said that they would appeal the decision
to the City Council.
The vote by the anti-growth commission capped the first phase of a lengthy
process that has pitted supporters, who want more affordable shopping
in an increasingly upscale city, and opponents, who fear the store will
only add to the downtown area's parking and traffic woes.
"This would be a traffic nightmare," said Commission Chair
Kelly Olsen. "The picture that's painted (in the Environmental Impact
Report) is very bleak and it's painted with pretty rosy colors. No amount
of synchronization (of traffic lights) solves congestion. It's about traffic,
traffic, traffic. My interpretation is that it's sure-fire gridlock."
"It fundamentally comes down to the whole traffic question,"
said Commissioner Jay Johnson, who was voting on his first major project
since joining the commission earlier this month. "The intersections
are overburdened now."
Commissioners who opposed the project also noted that if approved, a
retailer other than Target could occupy the three-story structure slated
for the corner of Fifth Street and Santa Monica Boulevard.
"Any other department store could come in here," said Commissioner
Julie Lopez Dad. "We really can't base our decision on whether we
like Target or we like its merchandise. What we're doing is allowing,
enabling any department store coming here. How members of the community
feel about this doesn't make the decision for us."
Dad also echoed other commissioners' concerns that the proposed structure
wasn't "pedestrian friendly."
"One building of this length is not what pedestrian orientation
means," Dad said. "By its nature, it is not pedestrian oriented."
Commissioner Geraldine Moyle said she worried that a large department
store would be bad for downtown businesses.
"Because Target is auto intensive, this kind of use within two blocks
of the Third Street Promenade would be detrimental to the economic health
of the downtown as a commercial unit," Moyle said. "Target needs
Santa Monica more than Santa Monica needs Target."
But Commissioners Anthony Loui and Darrell Clarke disagreed, arguing
that the proposed store would add a much-needed affordable shopping venue
and contribute to the vitality of downtown.
"Target is the sort of store that will meet the needs not currently
served in Santa Monica," Clarke said. "It is a place for everyday
people who aren't rich. We have a commitment to diversity and Target is
the economic model of how affordable shopping is done now."
Clarke argued that the dearth of affordable shopping venues increased
traffic, as well as pollution, by forcing Santa Monicans to drive outside
the city to shop.
"Are we going to solve the traffic problem by telling people it's
better to drive 10 miles than two miles?" Clarke said. "If you
put it somewhere else, everybody will have to get in their car to get
there. What's the best place to put a Target? It's downtown."
Loui, who voted not to oppose the project despite "pretty significant"
traffic and parking impacts, argued that the proposed store would take
pressure off the Promenade.
"The Promenade has a tendency to be over-focused," said Loui,
the only architect and city planner on the commission. "We're forgetting
about the rest of the downtown area. I would be interested in a diversity
of places that would enable downtown to sustain itself and grow.
"I think some development is needed in that area," said Loui,
who advocated scaling down the proposed store. "It could become a
catalyst to take the heat out of the Promenade."
Loui said that he was surprised during a recent visit to the Target stores
in Pasadena and the City of Commerce that many shoppers arrived by public
transportation.
"I was taken aback," said Loui. "I was quite amazed."
Monday's decision came after the Commission heard from some 50 speakers
at its October 18 meeting. |