By Reta Moser

Most recently it has been called “mansionization.” Formerly, it was “the Persian Palace.” Whatever it is called, it is as distinguishable as a wart growing on the nose and is not only noticeable but is disconcerting to the onlooker. It doesn’t fit.

What doesn’t belong is the 64-dollar question. Is it a beginning of something good or the ending of something good? Is it a jewel or is it a wart? Who is right? Some are displaced happenings and others are in the eye of the beholder but aside from that …

Neighborhoods have been screaming, writing, explaining their dilemma for years. It has all been so subjective in an objective world that is filled with numbers that it gets lost. Architects design by numbers, rules … not what “looks right”

To an architect, it is a jewel in an old community; to the community, it is the wort.

Finally, this week Planning came out with a notice of recognition of the situation, the problem. See LA Times article. Planning not only sees the problem but aims to do something about it. But Planning says this will take at least 18 months. Will the formula be a “fit all?” Venice which is the “character” neighborhood by the sea was not mentioned in the study.

Why?

Venice is the community with all the character that people want to preserve. It has canal communities-old and new. It has walk streets at the ocean. It has walk streets in a community away from the ocean. It has houses dating back to the early 1900’s. It has houses dating back to today. It has many distinct neighborhoods, so distinct that they have names and are equally different. Venice has a smattering of it all and is bordered by the ocean and Marina del Rey.

David Ewing and Laura Silagi, who were both available for a LUPC meet, said it was because area was in coastal zone. Makes sense.

Many Venice residents have been trying to get this message out to the residents but the question and problem are both: How do architects design to this? It has pitted homeowners, developers, architects against members of LUPC, and a community that wants to maintain a certain charm and character.

Sue Kaplan, chair of the mass, scale and character committee, says it can be done. Are she and her committee destined to be the referee for all of this? Her committee, consisting of people from all walks including architects, are going to put things on paper with the intention of giving architects and developers guidelines. Kaplan says they will not be considering architecture design. So if one wants a contemporary house in a row of Craftsman, it can be done. The one thing that Kaplan and her members have found out is that the design must be considered on a block-by-block basis. Not easy! Not impossible. That is how unique Venice is.

Kaplan may be ready to present her guidelines at the next Venice Neighborhood Council meet. These guidelines will have criteria or numbers, not “looks like,” “feels like.”

Ramsey Daham, (8 September 2014 Venice Update) architect and member of LUPC, says the Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan is in itself the restriction for architects and developers.

Mark Kleiman, attorney and member of LUPC, says wait a minute.

Mark Kleiman, (See Update 11 September 2014) made a valid point, when he criticized the Update because it claimed one project was rejected, yet fit the criteria of the Venice Specific Plan. He cited paragraph 8(c)1of the Venice Specific Plan:

That the Venice Coastal Development Project is compatible in scale and character with the existing neighborhood, and that the Venice Coastal Development Project would not be materially detrimental to adjoining lots or the immediate neighborhood.

At a recent Venice Neighborhood Council meeting, one member of the board made the statement that in all good conscience he could not vote down a project that met the criteria of the Venice Specific Plan.

Arnold Springer, long time resident of Venice and participant in the late 80’s workshops that helped feed info for the Venice Specific Plan, said he wanted a moratorium until this can be settled.

I worked in two of the 80’s workshops and was horrified by one group who rejected two-story buildings and rejected consolidation of residential and commercial lots just to name a few things. That is how diversified the thought was and still is in Venice.

In my humble opinion, it was a “miracle” when Venice Specific Plan occurred as it did.

Here we are today trying to please all in a day more than 100 years from when this little community by the sea began.

I believe in miracles!