web analytics

Rss

Venice News Updates

News of Venice, CA and Marina del Rey CA

106 Units for Yard; 260 for Venice Median Says RFQ/P

Posted by :reta On : August 12, 2016
4

Category: Homeless, Housing, Uncategorized

Tags:, , , ,

Yard 5.02.55 PM
City Maintenance Yard on Thatcher getting new, 8-foot, blue wrought-iron fencing.

Venice Parking
Venice Median between North and South Venice Blvd at Pacific. Present parking to be maintained.

There will be 106 units on the City Maintenance Yard on Thatcher and 260 on the Venice median parking lot between north and south Venice Blvd, according to the Request for Qualifications/Proposal (RFQ/P) sent out by the City Administrative Officer (CAO) to prospective builders.

Prospective builders will be visiting the Venice median and Thatcher Yard Wednesday morning.

The “Yard” will be rezoned from public facility to RD1.5, and with 93,347 square feet and two 35-percent density bonuses, will have 106 units. The “Venice Median” will be rezoned from Open Space to R-3, and with 122,171 square feet and two 35-percent density bonuses, will get 260 units.

Bonin May Sell the Two Projects

Councilman Mike Bonin said he would check the figures for both projects as to whether one or both would be more feasible for selling, taking the money, and building elsewhere.

One would only think this would be the case since both are less than a 1000 feet from the ocean. How could one justify putting the homeless there,  when the taxpayer paying for this,  could not afford living there.

Both Projects Would Require Changes to General Plan

Both would require changes to the general plan. The general plan takes into consideration infrastructure to support such a change (sewers, roads to accommodate, traffic to bare the brunt, effects on neighborhoods as well as the total scene, and whether the other zoning was more important for the City, etc.

In the case of the Thatcher Yard, an extra hundred units increases the present neighborhood 30 percent from 350 to 450. And with only ingress/egress access via Washington for 450 dwellings plus being next to Lincoln, is a receipe for disaster. Balanced with those infrastructure problems and the fact that a facility might be more feasible for the location, may deter any rezoning.

An additional 260 units at Venice Blvd would probably deter people from coming to the beach at all. There is the Expo line in Santa Monica which makes Santa Monica more accessible. Venice can be reached by bus and by car. Access to the Venice Beach parking lot is critical for Venice Beach. Venetians all know what the beach is like in the summer. Rebuilding of the lot would contain the present number of parking spaces. But with all the activity of 260 more units would people have access to the Venice parking lot?

RFQ/P Defines Affordable Types

Bonin did say that the Venice Median would be for homeless and the Yard for affordable housing. The RFQ/P defines the housing to be built and refers to them all as affordable.

The following housing types have been identified for the Affordable Housing Opportunity Sites:

Permanent Supportive Housing

This is a type of Affordable Multifamily Housing that is directly targeted to formerly homeless individuals or others who need intensive services. Permanent Supportive Housing is targeted to people who are homeless or chronically homeless. A homeless person is typically living on the streets, in a car, or in a shelter. A chronically homeless person has been homeless for a year or more or has had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years and has a disabling condition. These disabling conditions include physical health conditions, mental health issues, and substance addiction. Permanent Supportive Housing is characterized by significant operating subsidies that allow residents to pay no more than 30% of their income in rent, even if their income is low or nonexistent.

Another characteristic of Permanent Supportive Housing is that each resident has a case manager who connects the resident with existing programs in the community. A third characteristic is that some services are delivered on site. On site services may include life skills training, job training, and mental health counseling. Usually Permanent Supportive Housing does not require sobriety, participation in counseling is usually voluntary, and the housing is usually intended to be permanent, not time-limited or transitional. Permanent Supportive Housing has been shown to successfully stabilize residents, and it reduces the need for high-cost crisis care.

Typical financing sources for Permanent Supportive Housing include 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credit, County NOFA funds, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, HUD or County operating subsidy, and grant-funded services.

Affordable Multifamily Housing

For this type, Developers should propose housing that is affordable to households with a range of income levels. For housing that is targeted to families, at least 25% of the units should have 3 or more bedrooms. Unit sizes must be as follows:
Unit Type Minimum Size Minimum Number of Bathrooms
One Bedroom 500 s.f. One-bath minimum
Two Bedroom 750 s.f. One-bath minimum
Three Bedroom 1,000 s.f. One-bath minimum
Four Bedroom 1,200 s.f. Two-bath minimum

This housing type may also include housing for seniors, people with disabilities and/or people with special needs. Amenities must include outdoor play / recreational facilities, appropriately sized common areas and laundry facilities. See the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee’s 2016 9% Competitive Tax Credit Application for reference.

Mixed-Income Housing

Mixed-income housing developments include both market rate and subsidized affordable units. Unit sizes for the affordable units must follow the minimum size guidelines for Affordable Multifamily Housing. There is no minimum unit size for the market rate units. Amenities must include appropriately sized common areas and laundry facilities.

Affordable Homeownership

Developers should assume all subsidized units have covenants or other mechanisms to ensure that the subsidy remains with the project. There are no minimum size requirements or amenities for this building type.

Innovative Methods of Housing

Micro Housing, Stacked Modular Housing and Manufactured Housing are examples of types of innovative methods that would be considered under this RFQ/P. All innovative methods must meet City zoning code and building standards, as well as State codes where applicable.

Bonin, Sobel, Ordundo, Shannon on Panel to Discuss Homelessness

Posted by :reta On : June 26, 2016
0

Category: Councilman, Homeless, Housing, Uncategorized

Tags:, , , ,

Panel
Carol Sobel, advocate and attorney for the homeless; Councilman Mike Bonin; Alisa Ordundo, Mayor Eric Garcetti’s Homelessness Policy Director; and Susan Shannon, of Department of Public Social Services.

Note: This reporter had no intention of covering the panel discussion. Just wanted to attend and listen. Ended up taking notes to pass along.

The four comprised a panel discussing homelessness and what to do about it at a local Democratic club.

Carol Sobel, advocate and attorney for the homeless, said she tried to prevent confiscation of private property and criminalization of homelessness.

Regarding funding, it was stated that the Governor did not want to declare a state of emergency, county wanted a millionaire’s tax, and the city wanted a fee on developers and a bond on the November ballot.

Councilman Mike Bonin, who was lauded as the councilman spearheading help for the homeless, mentioned that two of the eight City lots identified for sale or development were in Venice. He said the City will provide the land and the county will provide the services. The City plans to either build on the City property or sell and build elsewhere.

Susan Shannon mentioned “Brilliant Corners” which finds places for individuals and guarantees to landlords that the apartment will be in present shape when vacated, provides supportive services to tenant, and is paid for by vouchers. Another program she mentioned was the “Master Lease” which takes over a building and fills it with homeless and provides them services.

Councilman Mike Bonin mentioned the “Safe Parking” program as one of the new programs he is proposing. He wants to designate commercial, industrial properties as a safe place for motor homes amd people who live in cars to park during certain hours. This will last one year until safe parking areas are identified, such as parking lots in church lots, empty parking lots, etc. Bonin said there were 4600 in vehicles in Los Angeles. The ordinance is to be considered this week. See LA Times story http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-homeless-car-ban-20160623-snap-story.html

One of the panelists mentioned that it saves the city $25 to 35K per year when a homeless person is put in permanent supportive housing. Someone mentioned that the Veterans Administration is finally helping to reduce the number of veterans on the street.

The plan is to house people first and then give them services. This was tried as Project 50 and was successful. There is also a plan to place those with animals. Right now it is hard to find places for people with drug or alcohol problems or with an animal.

Someone brought up the situation with Manchester Square where approximately 100 motor homes will be displaced when work starts on the LAX project. All agreed this was a problem because these people had established community and finding places for them would not be easy.

All panelists agreed that every method needed to be tried, not just one.

All panelists agreed that homelessness is a situation, not an identity.

All panelists also agreed that now was the time.

Vera Davis Community Meet–Determine Future Use

Posted by :reta On : June 25, 2016
0

Category: Housing, Uncategorized

Tags:,

2

Pardue Wants Councilman to Question FAA About Using LAX Project for Homeless; Great Opportunity

Posted by :reta On : June 21, 2016
4

Category: Councilman, Homeless, Housing

Tags:, ,

 

By Kip Pardue

Yesterday I sent an email asking why housing was not part of the recently-approved LAX-adjacent development.  Councilman Bonin’s office immediately responded by saying the land is bound by FAA regulations and therefore cannot contain housing of any kind.

To me, this begs further questions:  How hard to did the Councilman fight for housing on this property, if at all?  There are private homes on the north end of the property – so ostensibly, proximity to LAX is not an issue (there is also a high school and a golf course).  The development plans include retail, office space, and green space – all of which will host people daily – so pollution or noise is not too much of a concern.  This property is HUGE – over a half of a square mile – parts of which would be perfect for housing of all types, especially housing for the homeless.

I certainly don’t deny that the FAA has a bureaucratic definition of how their land is developed.  But the current housing situation, by Bonin’s own admission and campaigning (and by what we all see each day), is in crisis.  A literal State of Emergency.  The councilman was recently in Sacremento asking the governor for a BILLION dollars to combat the homeless crisis.  Along those lines, was every stone unturned in the LAX development?  It seems to me that anyone who is focuses on “ending homelessness” would fight for any and all opportunities to actually end it.

Bonin repeatedly told me that all that is needed to build more housing is land – the money for the building is readily available.  Was this land fought for?  How could this seemingly arbitrary FAA regulation be more thorny than building on the most expensive real estate in LA, surrounded by families, elementary schools, tourists, and raging homelessness?  How could Bonin not plead with federal and state officials to lease and isolated 3 acres of this property?  This work would almost certainly be less of a climb than asking for one billion tax-payer-dollars.  And if these steps were in fact taken by Bonin, why were they not done publicly (the way he very publicly put the Venice Blvd lots in the housing for the homeless category)?

This seems like a lost opportunity for Venice and all of LA.  I truly hope the councilman fought as hard for housing there as he has for housing in Venice.

 

Council Office Answers Pardue About Homeless on 340 Acres

Posted by :reta On : June 20, 2016
0

Category: Councilman, Homeless, Housing

Tags:, , , ,

In a previous story, Kip Pardue asked the question about why not put homeless on the 340-acre LAX project. https://veniceupdate.com/2016/06/20/why-not-homeless-here/

David Graham-Caso, communications director for Councilman Mike Bonin, answered the question as follows:

The 340-acres that will be turned into open space, retail, offices and airport support facilities is on airport-owned land that must comply with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grant requirements. This means that FAA will not allow any noise-sensitive land uses (including housing of any type) on that property.

 

340 Acres at LAX; Venetian Asks: Why Not Homeless Here?

Posted by :reta On : June 20, 2016
5

Category: Homeless, Housing

Tags:, , ,

By Kip Pardue

Thanks to all who voted in the VNC elections a few weeks ago. The turnout was amazing and many of you are directly responsible for that. The more we continue to unite in our vision of Venice, the stronger our voice will be.

On that note, I came across this a few days ago…

http://la.curbed.com/2016/6/16/11957828/340-acres-near-lax-getting-total-overhaul

For the record, I personally have ZERO details on this project beyond what is written, so everything I am saying is my opinion…

This development has been in the works for YEARS with several iterations. Those proposals were blocked for various reasons – but almost always because of density and public will. What has finally passed and will be built seems like a great fit for the area – but not one single mention of housing for the homeless (or housing of ANY KIND). The new development even has 49 acres of green space.

I think the development itself is fine…it’s just so strange that Bonin is “involved” (in some capacity at least) and there is no desire for him to use that land for housing. To me, this shows Bonin is forcing housing on Venice (and ONLY VENICE). This location would be much better suited to the needs of the homeless and certainly better for the residents of Venice. Again, there is SO much I do not know about this project…but if Bonin’s actual desire was to build housing for the homeless ALL OVER THE CITY, and not just in Venice, I would think he would have the ability to use 2 acres of this property.

Kaplan Sheds Light on Mass, Scale, Character Draft Document

Posted by :reta On : May 26, 2016
1

Category: character, Housing, Mass, Scale

By Sue Kaplan, Chair, Ad Hoc Committee on Mass, Scale, and Character

It’s election season, so people are shouting about things that would be better discussed amicably. I’d like to clarify a few things about the work of the VNC’s Ad Hoc Committee on Mass, Scale, and Character, which as you know I chair, and of which I am very proud. I’ve seen a lot written about it over the past weeks that contributes a lot of heat but very little light.

1. The purpose of the draft report is to begin giving working definition to policies that already exist in the Venice Specific Plan and the Coastal Zone Land Use Plan. For years, these were simply ignored. Now they are being implemented, both by the City and the California Coastal Commission, but without consistent guidelines. The purpose of this committee’s work is to make those guidelines consistent, fair, and efficient.

2. The committee’s draft report is just that, a draft. It was never intended as a final report. It is a working document we have put out as a starting point for public comment, further revision, and fine-tuning. We have been welcoming comments and criticism from all.

3. The report is the product of consensus among all eleven committee members. It also incorporates much from the public comments we have received prior to publication.

4. The most important part of putting together this draft was getting the process right: creating a collaborative space in which people of widely varying views were able to sit down together and work toward a common goal as neighbors.

5. The public comment period was widely announced, yet criticisms I’ve read lately have been from people who did not submit comments when they could have been incorporated in this draft. I hope anyone feeling aggrieved will participate timely going forward.

6. There are a couple of misunderstandings about specific items.

a) One is about the formula for FAR, which stands for Floor-to-Area Ratio. This is a standard planning tool for limiting the size of a building by setting a maximum limit on the amount of floor space allowed when building on a lot of given size. In other words, if you are allowed a floor area that is 50% of the size of the area of your lot, that would be expressed as an FAR of .5.

The FAR we used for the draft report was .45. This was the City’s proposed FAR for single-family dwellings included in the Baseline Mansionization ordinance. (It has since been raised to .5). However, since Venice lots are nearly all smaller than the City standard, many people feel the standard FAR would be overly restrictive. Not to panic. We recognize that this is going to take more public input and more consideration of surroundings. We look forward to digging farther into it.

b) Another concern is that we only dealt with single-family dwellings. This was partly a practical matter. We had to start somewhere, and single-family dwellings were the easiest starting place with the greatest impact.

However, some have worried that by doing so, we had abandoned the concerns of those who are being displaced from neighborhoods as multi-family housing is demolished by speculative developers to make way for big box homes.

It’s important to understand that our rules are to be applied to any single family home, whether it’s built on a lot with single-family or multi-family zoning. This makes a multi-family lot much less tempting to developers, since they won’t be able to build a big box house on it. It also includes Small Lot Subdivisions, since they consist of houses that are legally single-family homes that would be subject to the rules.

If the VNC asks us to move forward, we’ll also tackle multi-family buildings like apartments and condos, as well as commercial buildings.

I hope this helps explain a project that may seem obscure and worrisome to some. Our goal is to protect the Venice we know and love for all Venetians.

Open Letter to Bonin Regarding Vehicle Camping

Posted by :reta On : May 20, 2016
0

Category: City Attorney, City Ordinance, Councilman, Homeless, Housing

Tags:,

Dear Councilman Bonin,

Venice continues to be inundated by scores of people living in their vehicles right next to schools and residences with all the problems that this generates.

The City Attorney last year presented the City Council with new language for LAMC 85.02 that meets the constitutional concerns of the court. You can view it in CF 14-1057 and City Attorney Report R15-0088. The CA’s report includes alternative language that would allow car camping at remote locations in conjunction with participation in a program with social service agencies to find permanent housing.

I am writing to ask that you press your colleagues on the Homeless and Poverty Committee to pass this new version of 85.02 and send it to the City Council for a vote.

Thank you,

Coastal Commission Urges Closure of Venice Redevelopment Loophole; Gives Notice to City Officials

Posted by :reta On : May 17, 2016
0

Category: California Coastal Commission (CCC), Housing, Planning

Tags:,

Note: This is a press release from Noaki Schwartz, public information officer for California Coastal Commission.

The Coastal Commission has asked the city of Los Angeles to stop its practice of approving the demolition and reconstruction of homes in Venice by mischaracterizing them as remodels.

“It’s been deeply frustrating for all parties and could easily be avoided at the city level,” said Commission Chair Steve Kinsey, who sent a letter to the city’s planning director urging action on the matter (attached).

The commission, at its April hearing, considered 13 projects that had been recently appealed to the state agency by Venice residents. The city of Los Angeles determined the projects were minor remodels even though more than 50 percent of the structure was being demolished and reconstructed. This mischaracterization created a loophole whereby homeowners did not get the necessary coastal development permit from the commission to build substantially larger houses.

After hours of testimony which included weeping homeowners, images of houses stripped to their foundations and frustrated Venice neighbors who see the quirky and unique character of their community disappearing, the commission denied the vast majority of exemption requests. Go to http://www.coastal.ca.gov/meetings/mtg-mm16-4.html to see those projects that were denied/approved.

In his May 6 letter, Kinsey alerted the city to the problem and urged its immediate attention.

“The commission would like to work with the city of avoid these types of appeals in the future, which result in increased workload for both our staffs, costly delays and confusion for applicants, and anger and frustration by applicants,” Kinsey wrote.

Ltr to City of LA Permit Exemption Processing 050616_000001

Ltr to City of LA Permit Exemption Processing 050616_000002

Yard Going, Neighbors Get Notification

Posted by :reta On : April 19, 2016
0

Category: Councilman, Housing, Triangle

Tags:, , , , ,

trucks
One of the last truck loads of equipment from the City Maintenance Yard on Thatcher leaves the yard prior to demolition.

Councilman Mike Bonin sent a letter out to neighbors stating that the City Maintenance Yard on Thatcher, and commonly referred to as the Thatcher Maintenance Yard, would be demolished and a wrought-iron fence would be put up surrounding the property. Work would begin next week.

He mentions near the end that he wants to rezone the property for affordable housing but would thoroughly vet the prospect with the community.

Bonin Yard_000001_edited-1