Crenshaw/Imperial Workshop 2

 
The second of four Community Workshops for the TOD Plan for the Crenshaw/Imperial area was held on March 9, 2017, at Bennett/Kew Elementary School. Ten to fifteen Inglewood residents attended, along with City staff and the City’s consultant team.

Mindy Wilcox from the City of Inglewood and the City’s consultant team briefly introduced the land use and open space alternatives under discussion at the workshop. These alternatives were:

Corner of Crenshaw and Imperial – Use/Density Alternatives
1. Higher-Density Mixed-Use and Residential (80 du/ac)
2. Lower-Density Mixed-Use and Residential (40-60 du/ac)
3. Status Quo – Shopping Centers

Corner of Crenshaw and Imperial – Open Space Alternatives
1. “Ring” concept
2. “Corner” concept
3. “Interior” concept

West Gateway Corridor District (north side of Imperial Hwy. west of Crenshaw Blvd.)
1. Extended Mixed-Use Corridor – allow residential and commercial back to 113th Street. Commercial access only from Imperial. Residential from 113th.
2. Mixed-Use Corridor on Imperial Only – allows commercial, residential or mixed-use
3. Acquire abandoned gas station at Yukon and Imperial for pocket park

South Gateway Corridor District (Crenshaw Blvd. south of 116th St.)
1. Lower-Density Residential (R-3 zone)
2. Higher-Density Residential (R-4 zone)
3. Status Quo

A group discussion was held, and then workshop attendees placed dots on a chart to express their approval or disapproval of each one.

During discussion, community members confirmed the finding at the first workshop that they do not like the status quo in these areas. However, several members of the group also expressed their clear displeasure at plans to increase density in the planning area. A discussion about density as a strategy to improve the quality of retail options and streetscapes in the area ensued.

Voting revealed that the majority of the group did approve of housing at the corner of Crenshaw and Imperial. The opinion regarding higher-density housing was about evenly split, and lower-density (40-60 du/ac) housing was strongly supported. Open space at Crenshaw and Imperial and Yukon and Imperial also received high approval ratings

Alternatives Illustration 1 (Low Density) – PDF
Alternatives Illustration 2 (High Density) – PDF
Alternatives Panel – PDF
Discussion Notes and Alternatives Voting – PDF