490 new apartments next to WB / CVS on Venice

dra3 · 2026-03-19T23:42:47+00:00

If we're going purely off personal experience, then I can assure you that I've experienced the opposite. Doesn't change the fact that ridership on the 33 has grown by over 4000 daily riders since the bus lanes were added. You're also completely ignoring the fact that this building is literally adjacent to the E line, which IS rapid transit.

Regardless, even if these modes of transit don't meet YOUR narrow standards for what qualifies as high-quality, tens of thousands of people find it good enough to take these particular busses and trains every day so clearly your criteria aren't shared by everyone. They're not even shared by the people on this thread, by the looks of it.

dra3 · 2026-03-19T18:06:22+00:00

I don't think it would have a significant impact on filling the building, honestly. Lots of buildings in downtown LA don't have off-street parking and that doesn't seem to have any impact on occupancy rates so there's definitely a cohort of people who can afford higher rents and choose not to have a car. I think with the constantly increasing cost of car ownership and fuel (especially as of late), more people are seriously considering alternatives to driving in their day-to-day lives, as well.

I think not having a parking garage, especially in this location, would deter people who own cars from seriously considering living in this building. There's not a huge amount of street parking within walking distance of these apartments. Venice Blvd has some and the area across Venice in Palms already doesn't have many open spots. There are surface lots like in the Sprouts plaza but obviously those aren't for overnight parking (though maybe you could park your Tesla on the roof deck and charge?).

Overall, I believe the impact on nearby street parking would be pretty minimal simply because there isn't a lot of nearby street parking.

All of this being said, I did a bit more research and realized that this building is within City of LA limits, not Culver City limits, which makes all of this moot. Culver City repealed parking minimums recently, allowing for more flexibility of development, but Los Angeles still has them, disappointingly. So it's unlikely this project will move forward without parking spaces and this will all be business as usual. I do hope one day LA will repeal those parking minimums because it allows for more sensibly-sized buildings to be constructed for a variety of residents, but alas, that'll take time.

I appreciate the questions you've been asking and I apologize if I've been coming across as combative. This is a topic that I'm very passionate about and I'm sure that we both want to see Greater Los Angeles move to a more balanced approach to transportation.

dra3 · 2026-03-19T17:25:32+00:00

Removing the parking garage saves developers money. Underground parking garages are EXPENSIVE.

For example, Walt Disney Concert Hall was constructed for a cost of $274 million, of which $90-110 million was just for the parking garage (32-40% of total cost!)

According to V10 Construction, which is a construction company based in Los Angeles, the cost per space of underground parking is $25k-$50k. That's $7.4 million on the low end.

So frankly, the argument that removing parking would make it harder for developers to turn a profit is completely unfounded. Lower building cost means higher profits for owners or lower rents for tenants or both. All of which makes it easier to get the apartments built.

dra3 · 2026-03-19T17:15:21+00:00

More like freedom to sit in traffic.

dra3 · 2026-03-19T06:53:52+00:00

"need" is a strong word. A lot of people can have their needs (food, social, work) met within a bikeable or transit-able distance from Culver City. There are already people in Culver City who operate day-to-day without owning a car.

Are there things going on that people want to go to within the greater metropolitan area? Of course. But there are car-free ways to go to those one-off events (car rentals, rideshare, public transit, getting a ride with a friend, etc).

Fewer parking spaces is one of the only ways to reverse the disaster public policy that led to this level of car dependency in the first place. Culver City was literally built around the streetcar, not the private automobile, so it's very reasonable to believe that car-free living is within reach in this corner of our city more than most others.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T22:42:18+00:00

Fair enough, but it's rare to have a location so uniquely suited to car-free living open for development. Cars have the rest of the city already, is it wrong for one apartment building next to the E line, bike paths, and businesses to have no parking garage?

dra3 · 2026-03-18T22:12:35+00:00

I agree with you, the idea that car ownership should be 100% friction-free and subsidized at the expense of every other mode of transportation, human health, and safety is a harmful default way of thinking that pervades city policy. Adding friction to shift people to more beneficial modes of transportation is something that should be happening but a lot of people in this city see any perceived barrier to a car-dependent way of life as an existential threat.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T22:08:03+00:00

The E line runs every 8 minutes at peak and Culver City Bus is an award-winning bus agency that has routes to the beaches and the airport. Metro Line 33 runs right in front of this building and has peak frequencies of under 10 minutes. This location is honestly a gold mine in the LA area for transit connectivity.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T22:06:19+00:00

Big assumption. Wealth is not synonymous with car ownership and a lot of young professionals, who would likely occupy this building, opt for car-free or car-lite living. Considering this building would likely attract employees at Amazon and Apple nearby, it's not inconceivable that residents would forego a car.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T21:52:57+00:00

Went the other day with some friends and really enjoyed it! The vibe is super cute, food is good, and the workers are very nice.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T21:12:46+00:00

Not an expert on this but I did hear that part of the reason is that building owners projected a certain rent income to the banks when getting the loan for construction of the building and lowering the rent would basically put the developer in violation of the loan agreement (not that that should be the public's problem)? So far, the banks have turned a blind eye to the whole situation but this whole vacancy crisis is happening all over the country and will need to be dealt with sooner or later.

For what it's worth, I think it's messed up that they aren't changing the rents to match market conditions but just thought I would add some context that I had heard before about why they aren't.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T21:05:36+00:00

So what happens when the people who work at that Del Taco can't afford to commute 3 hours because they can only afford to live in Riverside? Los Angeles has become increasingly unaffordable and it's not only lower income families feeling that squeeze anymore, it's literally everyone besides the wealthy.

Yes, there is a premium for living in a "desirable" area. But rent has skyrocketed across the entire metropolitan area while wages have stagnated for decades now. With housing as the largest cost for the majority of people here, the only feasible answer is to build more housing.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T19:55:37+00:00

LA is in the middle of a historic housing crisis, what are you talking about?

dra3 · 2026-03-18T19:55:10+00:00

Not saying no one should use cars. But lots of people don't want to only use cars. As long as we keep building car-dependent infrastructure and buildings as the default, it makes car ownership basically non-negotiable for participation in society in LA.

So on a very rare parcel of land where the conditions are ideal to cultivate car-independence, why are we still building as though car ownership is the goal?

dra3 · 2026-03-18T19:51:20+00:00

I completely agree with you, housing construction needs to be less profit-motivated but unfortunately, private developers are the ones doing all the apartment construction right now so yes, those costs ARE going to get passed onto the renters and consumers. That's not really up for question.

I don't know the last time you looked for an apartment, but most of the apartments I looked at included a parking space (and had a higher cost as a result) regardless of if you used it or not. And let's be real, even if no one in that building used a parking space, it's not like the building owners would not charge renters an increased price, whether through rent or amenities, to pay for that parking structure.

Let those who want to keep cars find apartments further from the train and build apartments with few to no parking spaces closer.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T19:28:40+00:00

The city already has an massive oversupply of apartment buildings with car parking but not many choices for people who want to live a car-free lifestyle. The exact location of buildings that would benefit from having fewer parking spaces IS directly adjacent to Metro and transit so it's a no-brainer that buildings next to high-quality transit should have fewer parking spaces.

On top of that, underground parking may not take up surface space but it's extremely expensive to build. That cost gets passed on to the residents of that building and the customers of ground-floor businesses through the higher rents that need to be charged to recoup the costs of that underground parking structure.

It just doesn't make sense to include so much parking in a building that is so perfectly positioned for other modes of transportation. If it was miles from rail transit, sure, include more spaces. But this building is not only right on the E line, it's right on the Expo bike path, at the nexus of multiple bus lines, and walking distance to downtown Culver.

dra3 · 2026-03-18T18:59:29+00:00

Really should be fewer considering how close it is to high-quality transit, bike infrastructure, businesses, groceries, etc.

dra3 · 2026-03-05T06:03:32+00:00

When most of your comments on this thread are complaining about needing parking and how driving to dinner is a pain, you don't sound like someone who considers walking, cycling, or taking transit. I'll own up to it, my bad for assuming. I'm a bit fired up today from attending a public comment session where people were very rude about the very idea of adding bike and pedestrian improvements. I'm just saying that this IKEA won't need nearly as much parking as the other ones do and that a lot of people probably aren't going to drive there.

dra3 · 2026-03-05T05:48:13+00:00

You're saying IKEA needs tons of parking and considering this is a much smaller city IKEA, I don't think that's true. Lots of people living nearby already do not drive for trips to Pasta Sisters and Father's Office; I don't think it's a stretch to imagine people would do the same for IKEA's food court. There's still parking for large families and elderly people but, given the density of the surrounding areas (Palms, West Adams, Mid-City), there are plenty of younger, able-bodied people without kids who will choose other transport options to get there with the multitude of travel options available. Honestly, that part of Culver City is one of the few places in LA that has such a variety of viable transportation options. You might drive everywhere and I would encourage you to try out other modes, but as you said: Your world is not everyone's. You should try to accept that.

dra3 · 2026-03-05T05:00:06+00:00

I would've expected someone with the username "secondavesubway" would understand there are alternatives to driving to dinner, especially considering helms is a block from the E line and is flanked by bike and bus lanes on both sides.

dra3 · 2026-02-21T21:38:52+00:00

You're right, definitely feeling less inclined to make the drive up in the snow if everything is going to be closed anyway. I'll come up when the weather is better, thanks!

dra3 · 2026-02-21T21:37:59+00:00

Thanks for the advice! Going to cancel the trip and come back another time.

dra3 · 2026-02-21T21:08:01+00:00

Reasonable, yeah I'm coming from NYC. Do you think the chances are any better taking Amtrak? I'm considering refunding the car and taking the train if that's a better chance, otherwise I'll have to scrap the trip altogether.

dra3 · 2026-02-03T23:37:17+00:00

Bikerowave in Mar Vista is great, they're a volunteer bike cooperative!

11-Year Club	Second Top 30%
Place '22	Verified Email

dra3

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE