By Roxanne Brown, Venice Neighborhoods’ Coalition
Note: The City Planning ZA determination on the Building & Safety appeal from the neighbors was issued on April 9, 2015, which again denied the neighbors’ appeal of the City’s decision on the neighbors’ initial appeal of October 25, 2013.
The neighbors appealed this latest City determination last Friday, April 24th, and it will be heard by the West LA Area Planning Commission in the near future.
NO CHANGE OF USE For T-Shirt shop conversion to Pub/Restaurant?
The City approved 37 Washington’s (which was a T-shirt/clothing retail store for approximately 20 years) transforming from a retail clothing shop to a Simmzy’s Pub/Restaurant. Though a pub (serving 30 kinds of beer and wine) is likely to attract more customers and be an increased intensity of use, the City did not require a change of use.
Not only did the City NOT require a Coastal Development Permit for this brand new pub and restaurant at 37 Washington, located in the Dual Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone, but they processed it as if it was in the SINGLE Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone, in violation of their own LAMC (Los Angeles Municipal Code) as well as State law.
NO PARKING REQUIRED?
NO LOADING ZONE?
NO HANDICAPPED SPACE?
The neighborhood fought hard in the City’s Conditional Use Permit – Alcoholic Beverage (CUB) public process to get conditions assuring that delivery trucks would not park in the alley between residents’ homes and the Pub. The CUB was conditioned to assure this.
But, after the CUB became effective and the public hearing process ended, the City approved revised plans that prevent the loading zone on Washington Blvd from being used to park delivery vehicles. This forces the vehicles into the alley between the residences and the Pub.
The loading zone on Washington had been used as parking for approximately 20 years by the retail store.
No parking for the Pub is being required, not even one handicapped space. Normally, because there would be additional parking required for a pub as opposed to a retail use.
CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESTAURANT–INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR–IS NOT CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION?
The entire foundation was removed at 37 Washington and significant, deep grading, both throughout the building and in the loading zone, was done in order to allow for all new plumbing and electrical. A brand new commercial kitchen is being built, as there had been no kitchen in the Retail Store for the last 20 years. All but the skeleton of the two walls touching the adjacent properties was removed. And yet the City did not require this brand new restaurant to have a Coastal Development Permit prior to approving its building permit.
On Christmas Eve, a member of the State Coastal Commission staff signed a letter stating that no Coastal Development Permit was required because: the brand new pub/restaurant was merely a “tenant improvement”; there is not only NOT a change of use but there is also not an increased intensity of use; there is no grading or construction/reconstruction, even though the Coastal Commission Staff out of the same South Coast District Office had already issued several written directives to the City and Applicant stating that there is grading, construction and reconstruction and that a Coastal Development Permit is required for Simmzy’s.
This significant December 24th action was not reported to the Coastal Commissioners.
REMEMBER THE LIGHTNING STRIKE? Safe Streets Councilmember Bonin?
The area surrounding 37 Washington, future site of Simmzy’s Pub (part of a chain), is already unacceptably congested, with a significant parking deficit and serious traffic problems.
Does anyone remember last summer’s lightning strike? Due to significant traffic congestion, emergency vehicles and personnel were significantly delayed when trying to reach victims at the beach.
For the City to allow even more traffic congestion in this very area, after lightning struck and gave one and all a devastating lesson that safety had already been significantly compromised, sure seems like dereliction of duty.
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION IS PROTECTOR OF COASTAL ZONE?
So who is protecting our Special Coastal Community of Venice? Who is responsible for safety in this area? Who is responsible to protect Coastal Access for the Public?
Those whom we would expect to be doing these things appear to be “giving it away” as gifts on Christmas Eve. It seems our City and State officials are making decisions that not only cause severe damage to our communities today and permanently harm them forever, but that also set precedents that will cause the already significant detrimental effects that they are allowing to accumulate and thus severely harm the community of Venice, which is to be protected, according to State law.
Our regulators/protectors appear to have been “swayed.” This is particularly unfortunate, as the California Coastal Commission has since its inception in 1976 been known to be one of the premier organizations of its kind. It had not been “swayed” by those it regulated; but actions like these seem to indicate this may no longer be the case.
MAYOR ERIC GARCETTI AND COUNCILMEMBER BONIN’S LEGACY?
Venice is under assault by some developers who are taking full financial advantage of the City’s anything goes attitude. Their profit margins represent the gains from what appears to be illegal and/or legal loophole development. Their gains seem to be at the expense of residents’ and citizens’ safety. This is being allowed by Mayor Garcetti’s administration and Councilmember Bonin’s office.
If this is not brought to a halt, this assault and pillage of Venice, a protected coastal community, will go down in history as one of the worst things to ever happen in the California Coastal Zone.
IF YOU CARE?
Email councilmember.bonin@lacity.org
Do it now or you won’t do it.
One line will do:
“Stop bad development practices in Venice. We want action – not lip service.”
It’s never too late….
