(Editor’s note: Just as Pacific Palisades, Venice residents have been fighting over land use issues, which makes this relevant to residents. In a February 2022 City Watch story (“Sound the Alarm: Ignore the Venice Median Project at Your own Peril” https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/neighborhood-politics-hidden/23877-sound-the-alarm-ignore-the-venice-median-project-at-your-own-peril.), the author writes “The Venice Median is basically an outrageously blatant land grab masking as affordable housing that speaks volumes about the play-to-play /quid pro quo culture at City Hall that goes on behind closed doors.”
The Venice Median project would be placed on two city-owned parking lots on Venice Boulevard between Dell and Pacific Avenues. The project was supposed to go before the City’s Planning and Land Use Committee on May 17, 2022, but before the meeting started it was announced there was a problem with Zoom—the only item on the agenda with issues.
The project should have been rescheduled with PLUM, but instead, [Former Councilmember Mike] Bonin sent the project to the Homeless and Poverty Committee, of which he was a member.
If the project were to be completed, two nonprofits, Venice Community Housing and the Hollywood Community Housing Corporation, would be the beneficiaries.
The project went before the transportation committee on December 10 and the story is below.)
This is the area that two nonprofits want the City to give them to develop affordable housing.
By ANGELA MCGREGOR
In a Board Report to the city’s Board of Transportation Commissioners, LADOT’s General Manager, Laura Rubio-Cornejo, recommended that the Board reject the use of Venice’s Lot #731 for the affordable housing project proposed by Venice Community Housing Corporation and Hollywood Community Housing Corporation known as Venice/Dell, and instead use that lot for a transit hub and explore the use of an adjacent lot for an affordable housing project.
At their special meeting on December 10, the Transportation Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to abide by staffs’ recommendation.
The Board agreed to advise the Los Angeles Housing Department to explore “the feasibility of relocating the proposed affordable housing project to Lot No. 701.”
Lot 701, adjacent to the Venice Public Library and the current site of Venice’s Farmer’s Market, is a smaller parcel. But unlike the currently proposed, 2.65 acre project which would require the replacement of at least 177 parking spaces, the report recommends that in exploring the use of the smaller lot, the Board look into “potential changes to the zoning and height limitations…to effectuate a maximum number of affordable housing units with no replacement parking required.”
The meeting was heavily attended; an estimated 150 people crowded into a conference room with a capacity of just 108.
The Report also appears to chastise both the project’s developers and the City Council for failing to present the Transportation Committee with “any information” in June 2022, when they issued a development agreement for the project, despite the fact that the city’s administrative code exclusively grants them “the power of managing all matters respecting the acquisition…of all public off-street parking places by the City.”
Tuesday’s special hearing was the first time Transportation was afforded the opportunity to decide upon or hold a hearing on this project, which has now been eight years in the making.
In public comment, many of the project’s supporters, including attorneys from the legal firm representing the developers, insisted that the Board of Transportation had no authority to weigh in on the project, and encouraged them to take no action.
“I’m sorry you’ve been made to sit here and waste your time,” one of them said. “There’s nothing for you to do.” Their sentiments echoed those of a recent op-ed in the LA Times, which characterized the staff report as “disingenuous,” insisting that the judge in a recent lawsuit against the project had deemed LADOT’s authority over the parking lots as “not binding.” LADOT’s judgment, the Times maintains, “should not be allowed to hinder progress.”
In fact, the June 4, 2024 judgment in the case brought by the Coalition for Safe Coastal Development against the City doesn’t dispute Transportation’s authority over L.A’s parking lots, and even quotes the same section of the city’s administrative code this report cites to assert its authority.
According to that decision, the city confirmed that the Project “will be put before the Transportation Commission prior to seeking approval for the ground lease,” which implies that the city agrees that LADOT approval is a prerequisite for the project to move forward. As we reported last week, the City Council is expected to hear the project again in the future.
In Board comment just before their vote, one of the Board members pointed out that they had made binding decisions recently on similar projects, most notably a city-owned parking lot at the corner of Midvale Avenue and Pico Boulevard that is now designated for a temporary homeless shelter.
CD11 Councilmember Traci Park was on hand at the meeting to comment on the project, encouraging the Board to adopt the recommendations of LADOT staff, echoing the sentiments of most of the project’s opponents. “Lot #731’s location near key transportation corridors makes it ideal for a future mobility hub,” she told the Board. “The site could integrate car sharing, bike sharing, micro-mobility options, EV charging stations, and create a model for sustainable urban transportation.”
The project as presented would require the city to pay for a new parking structure on the site, “with a cost conservatively estimated by the city at $22 million.” As the City Attorney stated in a letter to the Coastal Commission which asked them to defer their decision on the project (which is still on the agenda for their December 11 meeting), this expenditure comes at a time when this cash-strapped city can least afford it. In her comments, Park also pointed this out.
The Coastal Commission appears poised to approve a development permit for the project at their meeting in Newport Beach on Wednesday the 11 (they’ve even updated their website’s homepage with an image of the recently revised plans).
But even if they do, it’s unclear where Venice/Dell goes from here. After all, what good is a building permit if there is no (parking) lot to build on?
About 150 participants packed the room meant for 108 for the Transportation Committee Hearing on the Venice/Dell project.
Photo: ANGELA MCGREGOR