web analytics

Venice Update

News of Venice, CA and Marina del Rey CA

LUPC Wants City to Evaluate Other “Bridge Housing” Sites Before Selecting MTA Lot

The Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) will be making a motion to be presented to the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) this month that the City provide a feasibility study of certain other sites as well as consider the other sites mentioned for smaller enclaves, rather than one large site for the proposed “Bridge Housing.”

Jim Murez presented a power point Thursday night to an audience of about 15 people and the LUPC committee of several other sites for the “Bridge Home” as alternatives to the MTA site which was selected by the City without any discourse.

Some of the evaluation criteria used for selection was proximity to schools, proximity of entry level jobs, closeness to shopping etc.

First Murez evaluated the MTA site. “The site has a dining area that is totally open which would make people cold or hot depending on the day,” Murez said. No place for meal preparation and no loading area for trucks if food were to be delivered. Lack of parking, animal facilities, utilities. The site is close to a school and surrounded by residential.

One person brought up the fact that the area was close to the beach and that those who were addicted would be close to that environment. One person said “You don’t try to help someone stop drinking and put them next to a liquor store.”

The other places mentioned were the 5601 Manchester, which the LAPD uses infrequently; the City complex on Corinth, which is adjacent to a school; the City complex on Manchester; and someone mentioned the Daniel Freeman Hospital, which is vacant.

To most, the City complex at the corner of Lincoln and Manchester seemed to be the place that made the most sense based on the criteria.

Daffodil Tyminski made the point that why not have a site on all of these places, but just make them smaller, and “it would be nice to have one for just women,” she said.

Joe Clark asked how many in the room liked the MTA site. No one raised his hand. Joe felt the MTA site was the most suitable because of its proximity to the beach. He felt that people came to the beach to be at the beach and to not have the site locally was defeating the purpose.

The vote was 5 to 1 to have a different site other than the MTA lot. The motion will be presented 20 November to the Venice Neighborhood Committee.

Comments (7)

  1. Steven Burns

    I’ve lived in Venice long enough to understand that this is a done deal. LUPC and others might delay it, but Hizzoner and our Councilman have obviously already signed off.

    My suggestion: LUPC and the community needs to get involved in the contracting process to assure it goes away as promised in 3 years. That promise is worthless if its not in writing and backed by cash. Otherwise it will remain and blight in the area for endless decades.

    Incentivize the non profit running it with a big bonus payment to shut it down on time, and another bonus to dismantle it and haul it away within 60 days. Corresponding penalties for delays need to be in the contract.

    Money and shame are the only things that can motivate people to do the right thing to my experience. The current politicos will have likely moved on in 3 years so assuring it goes away automatically and quickly is crucial.

  2. The Truth Teller

    I vote for Daniel Freeman Hospital for all the addicts and mentally ill people since a hospital bed is what all of them really need. That would leave all the homeless people who aren’t addicts or mentally ill. And those people I think should be left alone as long as they’re not loitering around all day doing nothing, making big messes, keeping their tents up all day, breaking things or stealing anybody’s stuff.

  3. sea

    the dwp lot in WLA is another great suggested location presented by Mark Ryoveck , months ago, it is in an industrial area, quite large, why is this location never being discussed

  4. Anonymous

    Bridge housing only benefits the communities that they’re located in. So any suggestions for operating this at any location outside of Venice will not benefit Venice, nor will it reduce homeless in Venice. And Murez lives across the street from the Metro Yard and clearly has a conflict of interest. Why LUPC allowed him to make such a biased presentation is highly questionable.

    I wish I could say that I’m surprised that after multiple community meetings, an Open House and a Town Hall that people still aren’t able to wrap their minds around how this project is supposed to work. They don’t want to understand it and all the information and resources the city’s provided has been ignored and disregarded and this is just another shameful round of “build it anywhere but here”.

    • Another Anonymous Person

      Hi Will. Venice just wants to be legitimately heard by the city like K-Town was. That is only fair. So far the process has been exceedingly unfair and you know it.

    • Anonymous

      “They don’t want to understand it and all the information and resources the city’s provided has been ignored and disregarded”. You must have information that we do not have. The city has provided no feasibility or suitability studies nor a basis for how such a program in this location will work. The only info they provided was “we have to do something” and Mayor Garcetti said that the only thing we can tell you is that we opened the “El Pueblo” site in DTLA 3 weeks ago and already we have people 3 or 7 people that left “El Pueblo” and 11 matched with homes. A day later, in an LA times article there was a correction by the Mayor’s office that no one has left El Pueblo and there are only 5 people that are potentially matched with a home.
      There is no basis for how the MTA location is feasible. It is an enabler site if anything. There are many other city owned properties in CD11 that would provide more suitable exit strategies for a homeless person to transition back into society, find a suitable job, and an affordable place to live. I am in favor of having the city present studies comparing the MTA site with other suitable site based on important criteria that is focused on exiting homelessness.
      I personally scoured the city owned properties database and recorded a few such properties.
      My favorite is 19 mins drive from the heart of Venice, is in a Tier 3 Transit Oriented Community, surrounded by companies that will provide entry level jobs, zoned appropriately for building and land use, does not require Coastal Commission approval, has 3 bus stops outside of it, pharmacies and groceries within walking distance, no schools or parks within 500 feet, easy to build as a Bridge Home and PSH, is > 143K sft, ready to build now with sewer connections already in place and capped. Why not compare that site and evaluate it? It makes a ton more sense for any logical person.

      • Another Anonymous Person

        A 19 minute drive from Venice? How will the entrants continue to buy their meth & heroin if they aren’t a block from the drug marketplaces on OFW? Where will they find enough bikes to strip and sell for their next high?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.