By Jon Nahhas, Boaters’ Coalition
Report on the SCHC meeting …
The Commission violated the Brown Act again and I am pursuing the Public Integrity Division to see if they will act. They didn’t give any notice to the public or the Commissioners on the Scoping Meeting for Mariners Village and tried to discuss it illegally (of course, no condemnation for the Dept. hiding this pertinent information from the Commission).

Venice Pumping Plant Dual Force Main Project Update …
There has been no update on this item since the last meeting. On June 18, 2014,
representatives from the City of Los Angeles and the County Departments of Regional Planning, and Beaches and Harbors met to discuss the Coastal Development Permit (CDP) from the County required for the Venice Dual Force Main project. The representatives from the various departments discussed how best to coordinate the Dual Force Main Project with other planned projects in the Marina, to minimize impacts to Marina visitors and residents. A CDP for the project was filed with the Department of Regional Planning on May 21, 2014. The City will also need to secure a CDP from the California Coastal Commission for the segment under the Marina’s main channel.

Latest on MDR Visioning Process …
Here is a link to the newly formulated LA Register article about the MdR Visioning Process. The headline of the article speaks loudly as to what the County considered the Visioning Process to be: http://www.losangelesregister.com/articles/marina-601309-county-rey.html

It should read: County ignores controversial issues, Community concerns and the directives of the California Coastal Commission

What was agreed to:

So the County has made a commitment also to a visioning process within the next five years, whereby the County will reexamine and update the LCP, addressing the remaining Periodic Review recommendations through a public process. And this review would comprehensively reevaluate the LCP and would examine some major controversial issue areas in the marina, including the density of development, building heights, and potential for additional parkland in the marina just to mention a few.” (California Coastal Commission Hearing Transcript, Nov. 3, 2011, pp. 7-8)

However, I would note that that’s not to say there should never be any future parkland over on the west side of the marina. Additional parkland on the waterfront near the channel entrance at the end of Via Marina would provide for a more attractive location for visitors in the future, and the County has agreed to explore this option through the upcoming visioning process.” (California Coastal Commission Hearing Transcript, Nov. 3, 2011, p. 11)

The roadmap and visioning process was designed to address the cumulative impacts of the known projects that were moving through the pipeline here. We asked the County to initiate a longer term process to address these lingering controversial issues that continue to surround Marina del Rey. And it was no secret that Commission staff, and more specifically our former executive director, Peter Douglas, was never happy with the density and intensity of development in Marina del Rey. So we entered into a conversation with the County and gently convinced them to reexamine this broader scope of issues through this visioning process, followed by an LCP update in this five-year period.” (California Coastal Commission Hearing Transcript, Nov. 3, 2011, pp. 181-182)