web analytics

Venice Update

News of Venice, CA and Marina del Rey CA

Zoning Administer Will Hear Three Venice Way Projects

217 Venice Way, 8 January, 9 am will be heard by Antonio Isaia at West LA Municipal Building, 1645 Corinth 90045. Comments or questions can be directed to Antonio.Isaia@lacity.org or 213-978-1353. They want a coastal development permit to allow the demolition of an existing four-unit residential building on three contiguous lots and the subsequent construction of a new 38-foot 6-inch tall, 2,680 square-foot single-family dwelling with attached 322 square-foot garage, located on a 1,958 square-foot lot in the RD1.5-1 Zone, within the single-jurisdiction area of the California Coastal Zone, and a front yard setback of 10 feet 6 inches in lieu of the 15-foot front yard required by Section 12.09.1-B,1, and a Mello Act Compliance review for the above mentioned project within the Coastal Zone of the City of Los Angeles.

219 Venice Way, 8 January, 9:30 am will be heard by Antonio Isaia at West LA Municipal Building, 1645 Corinth 90045. Comments or questions can be directed to Antonio.Isaia@lacity.org or 213-978-1353.

They want a coastal development permit to allow the demolition of an existing four-unit residential building on three contiguous lots and the subsequent construction of a new 29-foot 10-inch 34-foot 10-inch tall, 2,713 square-foot single-family dwelling with attached 322 square-foot garage, located on a 1,974 square-foot lot in the RD1.5-1 Zone, within the single-jurisdiction area of the California Coastal Zone. They also want a front yard setback of 10 feet 6 inches in lieu of the 15-foot front yard required by Section 12.09.1-B,1, and a Mello Act Compliance review for the abovementioned project within the Coastal Zone of the City of Los Angeles.

221 Venice Way, 8 January, 10 am will be heard by Antonio Isaia at West LA Miunicipal Building, 1645 Corinth 90045. Comments or questions can be directed to Antonio.Isaia@lacity.org or 213-978-1353.

They want a coastal development permit to allow the demolition of an existing four-unit residential building on three contiguous lots and the subsequent construction of a new 38-foot 6-inch tall, 2,743 square-foot single-family dwelling with attached 322 square-foot garage, located on a 1,990 square-foot lot in the RD1.5-1 Zone, within the single-jurisdiction area of the California Coastal Zone, and permit a front yard setback of 10 feet 6 inches in lieu of the 15-foot front yard required by Section 12.09.1-B,1, a Mello Act Compliance review for the abovementioned project within the Coastal Zone of the City of Los Angeles.

Update by Stop 600 Mildred Avenue

Happy belated Thanksgiving, Everyone!!! We hope it was surrounded by Loved Ones and Family!

We apologize for being out of touch for a bit, but we have been working hard behind the scenes. We have been researching and fact finding more valuable information on the proposed project at 600 Mildred. We have also been meeting with City Officials to ensure all Departments are on the same page with the proposed project at 600 Mildred so that as things move forward no questionable details will fall through the cracks!

Although the project seems to be calm and quiet at the moment, the owners of Tesuque Village Market are still full steam ahead with their project in it’s original state, the APPLICATION FILED WITH THE CITY HAS NOT CHANGED. The owners have been approaching some of you with misinformation in hopes to sway your opinion and gain your support. We urge you to look at the real facts… the paper trail filed with the City is their real intention and will be the legalities they will be bound by if the project passes as it is.

As it stands now, the paperwork and permits being filed are as follows…

1. This is a Bar/Restaurant with a Full Liquor License for Onsite and Offsite Sales
NOT a local wine and beer bar for foodies

2. This is a Tequila Bar in the middle of a residential neighborhood with kids
NOT a family time restaurant, this is not a place for children to run around and play

3. This is a Bar/Restaurant operating a Full Menu of Food and Alcoholic Drinks Onsite and to Takeaway 365 days a year, 7 days a week, 17hrs a day.
NOT a BAKERY with sweet smells, coffee and foot traffic

4. This Restaurant/Bar is applying for extended hours… 7am-12midnight EVERY DAY of the WEEK, 365 days a year
NOT a restaurant with hours sensitive to neighbors from 7am-9pm.
***Even if the owners close early for the first year, AT ANY POINT with the current permit application THEY CAN STAY OPEN TIL MIDNIGHT, INDOORS AND ON THE PATIO***

5. The Outdoor Seating will be the same hours, 7am-12midnight EVERY DAY of the WEEK
This is an ENDLESS PARTY in your front yard, backyard, side yard or even on the next block, NOISE TRAVELS and so do the Patrons with no where to PARK or SMOKE

6. Tesuque Village Market has NO ONSITE PARKING and HAS NOT SECURED a parking contract with any of the city lots nearby

7. This is a FULL SERVICE Restaurant/ Bar that will NEED Trash pick ups EVERY DAY of the WEEK.
NOT the Convenience Store that only requires pick up to disturb the peace of the neighbors twice a week

8. This is a FULL SERVICE Restaurant/ Bar that will be cooking prior to opening at 7am..
The smell of Fried and Cooked Mexican Food will infiltrate the air throughout the neighborhood and IN THE HOMES of the nearby neighbors nearly 24hrs a day/7 days a week

9. This FULL SERVICE Restaurant/Bar will increase Traffic and bring outside Patrons and Intoxicated Patrons to an already Dangerous Intersection
This is NOT a Locals Only hangout that residents will walk to

10. Tesuque Village Market will NEGATIVELY affect the Quality of life for the neighborhood as a whole, forever if the project passes as is…
The next door neighbor is less than 3ft away with small children forced to listen to noise, loss of sunlight, force to smell the cooking, loss of privacy, challenged parking and obstruction to entering their home, etc, not too mention the rest of the families in the neighborhood that will be affected similarly

PLEASE KEEP THESE KEY POINTS IN MIND

As always, we will keep you posted as any pertinent information is released from the City and hearing dates are set. We will need your support once the hearing dates are set, in person and by writing letters to the City.

Currently a Coastal Development Permit and a Conditional Use Beverage Permit is being applied for by the Restaurant Sauce on Hampton, which has the SAME ARCHITECT, SAME PARKING ISSUE AND SAME ALCOHOL ISSUE IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD as 600 Mildred. They are currently operating illegally without a permit for a sit down Restaurant and without a permit for Sidewalk Dining. Please support the community and attend the Appeal Hearing in West LA on Jan 7th.

Wednesday 7th January 2015, from 4.30PM.
WEST LOS ANGELES PLANING COMMISSION,
Henry Medina West LA Parking Enforcement Facility,
2nd floor, Roll call room.
11214 West Exposition Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90064

Although this restaurant is not in our neighborhood of Venice, our Community needs us to pull together so a Precedent is not set for Developers to take advantage of the City Building & Safety & Zoning Processes. Developers must follow the laws and we as Residents that live here, the ones that will be affected daily, must be sure the laws are enforced. Please mark this hearing on your calendar. If this project is permitted by this application, it will set a precedent for other Restaurant/Bars proposed in Residential areas such as 600 Mildred.

Thank you, Everyone for your ongoing support and keeping in the interest of Venice as a Family Friendly/Creative Community!!!

Wishing You All HAPPY HOLIDAYS and a HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

Council Votes to Hire Attorneys

City Council voted yesterday to approve a three-year contact to hire outside Land Use/CEQA attorneys to handle lawsuits against the City from neighborhoods hiring attorneys to fight certain aspects of development in their neighborhoods.

Councilman Mike Bonin was absent for the vote. http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=14-1438 Homeowners association of Encino claims this is not good for the public and the reasons are:

• The City should already have been requiring developers to pay for the City Attorney’s costs and time. The City should have kept track of those expenses, but instead gave developers a free pass for all these years. That is a scandal in and of itself.

• Developers can fulfill their obligation through paying for the City Attorney’s office to increase their staffing to handle things internally.

• Using outside law firms to represent the City will create an economic incentive for the private firms to file harassing motions and use other procedural tricks to increase their billings. The City, being indemnified by the developers, will have no reason to try to control or stop such abuses. The upshot is that community groups will face even more “scorched earth” tactics than already being waged against them.

• Using outside law firms to represent the City will allow these outside firms to learn confidential information, e.g., the City’s philosophy about settlement and other strategic issues, which these outside law firms — which also have a heavy practice representing developers — will use to benefit their developer clients, and hurt the public. The City’s proposed action is ripe for conflict of interest problems.

• Other conflict of interests arise because the outside counsel, being paid by the developers, will protect the developers’ interests, and might not encourage the City to settle or resolve issues, or take positions against the developers, if that were not in the best interests of the parties paying their fees. Again, economic forces will drive the outside firms to run up bills so that their profits are as high as possible. The result will be more harassment for community groups already fighting the government and well financed developers.

LUPC Meets Tonight

Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) will be Wednesday, not Tuesday as normal, 17 December, at Beyond Baroque, 681 Venice Blvd., from 6:45 to 10:45 pm.

In addition 521 Rose Avenue and 1214 Abbot Kinney will be presented.

Chair Robin Rudisill will give a report of the following:
• Review of LUPC master case list, Subarea case management, early review of projects, identification of de 
minimis projects, workload, Neighborhood Committee involvement, Community Outreach Meetings
• City Charter mandate/reason for existence, Mission, purpose, responsibilities
• Review LUPC results of Board retreat brainstorming session
• LUPC’s effectiveness to date (specific questions and what’s working/what’s not working)
• LUPC responsibilities/duties, most effective direction/future role
• Mello Act training and procedures for review, including non-feasibility decisions
• Training priorities
• Use of same location/different address for repeated applications by WTF
• VSO/CEX project
• Coastal Commission—communication/tour
• City Planning interface and review of recent VNC recommendations—January meeting
• Coordination with ZA office on timing of hearings and holding cases open for advisement
• Upcoming West L.A. Area Planning Commission hearings
• Committee member posting to LUPC site
• Amendment to Standing Rules for VNC De Minimis Project wording/description
• Use of In Lieu Parking Fee during period between time of City Councilmember announcement of 
upcoming amendment and time of amendment
• Use of Small Lot Subdivision Design Standards, conflicts with Map Act, etc. (recent APC hearing)
• Creation of LUPC Agenda Ad-Hoc Subcommittee
• 2015 meeting schedule and location
• Review of CEQA cases
• Procedures for case review & neighborhood outreach
• 521 Rose Ave. (duplex), Oakwood Subarea
ZA-2014-2166-CDP and ENV-2014-2167-CE and DIR-2014-1120-VSO-MEL
CITY HEARING TOOK PLACE ON OCTOBER 23, 2014
Project Description: CDP in the Single Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone for demo of 50% of (E) duplex and add 3,319 sq ft to create a 3,510 sq ft, 30’ tall duplex, w/4 parking spaces on a 3,139 sq ft lot, & Mello determination, C4-1 zone Applicant: George Klein & John Reed
LUPC Staff: Robin Rudisill/Maury Ruano
LUPC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation:
http://www.venicenc.org/521-rose-ave/
PUBLIC COMMENT
FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: MOTION
• 1214 Abbot Kinney Blvd. (SFD to artist-in-residence & retail), North Venice Subarea
ZA-2014-1990-CDP-SPP and ENV-2014-1991-CE
CITY HEARING TOOK PLACE ON OCTOBER 16, 2015, DETERMINATION LETTER ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 14, 2014 (appeal period expired 12/1/14)
Project Description: CDP in the Single Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone and SPP for change of use from SFD to 1,502 sq ft artist-in-residence on 3rd floor, 2,300 sq ft retail use on ground & 2nd floors, within (E) 3-story 3,802 sq ft building w/att 864 sq ft garage, located on a 2,700 sq ft lot; height = 29’9.5” (RAS/stair tower 38’), C2-1-0-CA zone
Applicant: Shannon Nonn, LionGate Global #1, LLC
LUPC Staff: Mark Kleiman/Mehrnoosh Mojallali
LUPC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation:
http://www.venicenc.org/1214-abbot-kinney-ave/
PUBLIC COMMENT
FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: MOTION

LUPC Tues Meet Cancelled; LUPC to be Thurs

The Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) meet scheduled for Tuesday (2 Dec) has been cancelled. It will be held Thursday, 4 December at 7:45 pm at Beyond Baroque, 681 Venice Blvd.

Will Salao, head of LA/Metro District ABC office, will not speak at the Thursday meet.

To Those who Complain about Beautification of Venice/Marina

By Danny White
Folks,
Week after week I read the complaints about those people who hold resentment towards homeowners that decide to remodel and restore their properties. I am not a developer but try to improve my property a little bit every year to increase my equity and home appearance.

I would love to be able to build my dream home in Venice someday. I have been given nothing and know what it’s like to earn my lifestyle. I cannot for the life of me understand how people associate new construction and progress with “lack of character.” What character is there in dilapidated properties? Please take a look around. If a house is being knocked down, it is usually because the previous owners failed as homeowners. There is usually negligence, economic hardship, rodents, mold and disgust. I don’t know what character is being lost. We aren’t talking about historic homes…these are homes built in the 40’s-50’s with terrible aesthetics for the most part.

I also can’t help but make this generalization, and I’m sorry if I’m wrong, these same people that complain, are the same people that defend the vagrants and oppose new restaurants (and the dreaded alcohol sale- oh the humanity!!!!!) I understand that you folks have been here for decades in a lot of instances and I can appreciate that. But, if your neighborhood is a nest of economic progress, then you should be ashamed of yourselves for trying to suppress it.

If you do not want to do a thing with your home, then don’t. That’s your 100% right. But it is my absolute right to improve my home as well. If a developer wants to do the same, then that is his right too.

I laugh when people complain about improvement. Unbelievable.

So I will assume, if you want to preserve these old homes, you have been living in these homes for decades. Excuse the assumption but it’s not far fetched. You then pay 1/5 of the property taxes that I do…and probably do not contribute to the local economy as much as I do. I’m not judging…just facts.

I should have just the same right to petition the Venice Council to force you to fix your house. Sound ridiculous? Not more than your position sounds to me.

Its time to face reality…this area is now as desirable (and more) as other great places like Manhattan Beach. The market dictates these things and fighting it is futile. If you no longer accept this then you are also free to move to another place just as those that would like to be a part of this move here.

Head of ABC to Speak at LUPC

Will Salao, head of LA/Metro District ABC office, will speak at Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) meet Tuesday, 2 December, 7 pm at the Oakwood Recreation Center, 767 California.

Possible motion to be made is:
The LUPC recommends that the VNC Board request the City to prepare a study of cumulative environmental impacts of development on the entire community of Venice over the past ten years, which is necessary because since the environmental analysis for the Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan was last performed, in 2004, development has been increasing at a significant and unforeseen pace, and also many of those developments are incompatible with and are having significant adverse cumulative impacts on the existing neighborhoods, such that there is a serious concern within the neighborhoods that the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place appear to be having a very significant cumulative adverse impact on the character, social diversity, and quality of life of the existing neighborhoods.

Active cases to be considered are the following:
LUPCAgendaNovember25,2014
Map shows subareas of Venice according to the Venice Specific Plan. Larger dots show cases being discussed this week.
a. REVIEW OF CASES FOR VNC DE MINIMIS PROJECT CATEGORIZATION (aka VNC Fast Track Project), NOTE: Public Comment is by case, voting is one vote for all cases under consideration.

i. 1774 Washington Way (duplex to SFD), Southeast Venice Subarea DIR-2014-1836-VSO-MEL
LUPC Staff: Mehrnoosh Mojallali Applicant: John Bowman

b. REVIEW OF ALL OTHER CASES
i. 635 San Juan Ave; Oakwood Subarea ZA-2014-2514-CDP and ENV-2014-2515-CE
CITY HEARING DECEMBER 18, 2014, 9:30 AM Project Description:
LUPC Staff: Mark Kleiman and Gabriel Ruspini Applicant: Gary Werner
Public Comment
 FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

ii. 627 Oxford Ave (SFD); Southeast Venice Subarea ZA-2014-2141-CDP and ENV-2014-2142-CE
CITY HEARING TOOK PLACE ON NOVEMBER 25, 2014 Project Description: Demo/new 3-story SFD
LUPC Staff: Robert Aronson & Mehrnoosh Mojalalli Applicant: Matthew Royce
Public Comment
 FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

iii. 625 Oxford Ave (SFD); Southeast Venice Subarea ZA-2014-2137-CDP and ENV-2014-2138-CE
CITY HEARING TOOK PLACE ON NOVEMBER 25, 2014 Project Description: Demo/new 3-story SFD
LUPC Staff: Robert Aronson & Mehrnoosh Mojalalli Applicant: Matthew Royce
Public Comment
 FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

iv. 27-29 Lighthouse St. (change from 2 to 3 units); Ballona Lagoon West Subarea CPC-2014-2654-SPE-SPP-CDP-MEL and ENV-2014-2655-MND
CITY HEARING DECEMBER 15, 2014
Project Description: legalize conversion of storage room into 3rd unit for (E) duplex LUPC Staff: Robert Aronson and Ramsey Daham 
Applicant: Alvaro Ramirez
Public Comment 
FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

v. 29 Windward (parking lot); North Venice Subarea 
CASE NOT YET SCHEDULED FOR CITY HEARING 
Project Description: add automated/hydraulic car lifts to a surface beach parking lot. Capacity of lot would increase from 38 to 68 spaces
LUPC Staff:
Applicant: Clare Bronowski & Dillon Johnson 
Public Comment FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

vi. 55 27th Ave; North Venice Subarea ZA-2014-2356-ZAA-SPP and ENV-2014-2357-CE
CITY HEARING DECEMBER 4, 2014, 10:30 AM Project Description:
LUPC Staff: Gabriel Ruspini and Kathleen Rawson Applicant: Peter Ocko
Public Comment
FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion
c. CASES NEEDING RESOLUTION/CATEGORIZATION:
i. 521 Rose Ave. (duplex), Oakwood Subarea
ZA-2014-2166-CDP and ENV-2014-2167-CE and DIR-2014-1120-VSO-MEL
CITY HEARING: October 23, 2014, 1645 Corinth, 2nd floor, 9:00 am
Project Description: CDP in the Single Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone for demo of < 50% of (E) duplex and add 3,319 sq ft to create a 3,510 sq ft, 30’ tall duplex, w/4 parking spaces on a 3,139 sq ft lot in the C4-1 zone
Applicant: George Klein & John Reed
LUPC Staff: Robin Rudisill/Maury Ruano
LUPC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation:
http://www.venicenc.org/521-rose-ave/
PUBLIC COMMENT
FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: MOTION

ii. 1214 Abbot Kinney Blvd. (SFD to artist-in-residence & retail), North Venice Subarea ZA-2014-1990-CDP-SPP and ENV-2014-1991-CE
CITY HEARING TOOK PLACE ON OCTOBER 16, 2015, DETERMINATION LETTER ISSUED NOVEMBER 14, 2014 
Project Description: CDP in the Single Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone and SPP for change of use fr SFD to 1,502 sq ft artist-in-residence on 3rd floor, 2,300 sq ft retail use on ground & 2nd floors, within (E) 3-story 3,802 sq ft building w/att 864 sq ft garage, located on a 2,700 sq ft lot in the C2-1-0-CA zone; Height = 29’9.5” (RAS/stair tower 38’) 
Applicant: Shannon Nonn, LionGate Global #1, LLC LUPC Staff: Mark Kleiman/Mehrnoosh Mojallali LUPC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation: http://www.venicenc.org/1214-abbot-kinney-ave/ PUBLIC COMMENT 
FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: MOTION Comment

LUPC to Meet Tuesday, Terrace Restaurant

Land Use and Planning Committee will meet Tuesday (25 November), 7 pm at the Terrace Restaurant meeting room, 7 Washington Blvd (north side, next to Venice Pier). It may be moved at last minute. Data will be posted at Terrace, if so. Projects to be considered are the following:

710 California Ave (SFD); Milwood Subarea ZA-2014-2135-CDP
CITY HEARING NOVEMBER 20, 2014 Project Description: Demo/new 3-story SFD
LUPC Staff: Todd Darling & Maury Ruano Applicant: Matthew Royce
Public Comment FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

627 Oxford Ave (SFD); Southeast Venice Subarea ZA-2014-2141-CDP
CITY HEARING NOVEMBER 25, 2014 Project Description: Demo/new 3-story SFD
LUPC Staff: Robert Aronson & Mehrnoosh Mojalalli Applicant: Matthew Royce Public Comment FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

625 Oxford Ave (SFD); Southeast Venice Subarea ZA-2014-2137-CDP
CITY HEARING NOVEMBER 25, 2014 Project Description: Demo/new 3-story SFD
LUPC Staff: Robert Aronson & Mehrnoosh Mojalalli Applicant: Matthew Royce Public CommentFOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion

27-29 Lighthouse St. (change from 2 to 3 units); Ballona Lagoon West Subarea CPC-2014-2654-SPE-SPP-CDP-MEL and ENV-2014-2655-MND
CITY HEARING DECEMBER 15, 2014 Project Description: legalize conversion of storage room into 3rd unit for (E) duplex
LUPC Staff: Robert Aronson and Ramsey Daham Applicant: Alvaro Ramirez Public Comment FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: Motion
Cases Needing Resolution/Categorization

521 Rose Ave. (duplex), Oakwood Subarea
ZA-2014-2166-CDP and ENV-2014-2167-CE and DIR-2014-1120-VSO-MEL
CITY HEARING: October 23, 2014, 1645 Corinth, 2nd floor, 9:00 am Project Description: CDP in the Single Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone for demo of < 50% of (E) duplex and add 3,319 sq ft to create a 3,510 sq ft, 30' tall duplex, w/4 parking spaces on a 3,139 sq ft lot in the C4- 1 zone Applicant: George Klein & John Reed LUPC Staff: Robin Rudisill/Maury Ruano LUPC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation: http://www.venicenc.org/521-rose-ave Public Comment FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: MOTION 1214 Abbot Kinney Blvd. (SFD to artist-in-residence & retail), North Venice Subarea ZA-2014-1990-CDP-SPP and ENV-2014-1991-CE
CITY HEARING: October 16, 2014, 1645 Corinth, 2nd floor, 10:30 am Project Description: CDP in the Single Permit Jurisdiction Coastal Zone and SPP for change of use from SFD to 1,502 sq ft artist-in-residence on 3rd floor, 2,300 sq ft retail use on ground & 2nd floors, within (E) 3-story 3,802 sq ft building w/att 864 sq ft garage, located on a 2,700 sq ft lot in the C2-1-0-CA zone; Height = 29’9.5″ (RAS/stair tower 38′)
Applicant: Shannon Nonn, LionGate Global #1, LLC
LUPC Staff: Mark Kleiman/Mehrnoosh Mojallali LUPC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation: http://www.venicenc.org/1214-abbot-kinney-ave Public Comment FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: MOTION

LUPC Meets in Morning

Land Use and Planning (LUPC) met Tuesday morning at Beyond Baroque in lieu of their first Tuesday, which in this case, was Election Day. LUPC meets first and fourth Tuesdays of the month.

Robin Rudisill, chair of LUPC, explained the new system of assigning two people to each subarea as explained in 30 October Update. Tuesday she said one person in each subarea would rotate each month, giving members an opportunity to learn the Venice area.

Mike Newhouse, president of Venice Neighborhood Council, attended the meeting and announced that Sue Kaplan, chair of the Mass, Scale and Character committee, was working or objective criteria.

Group is looking for a place to hold meetings and at present is thinking of Extra Storage Space at 658 Venice Blvd.

450 Sherman Canal, a single-family home, and 26 30th Avenue, demo and single family home were both approved.

258 Lincoln
P1040190

258 Lincoln Blvd, a Chevron gas station with a convenience store, was approved with conditions. The gas station is the northwest corner of Lincoln and Rose where there is one now.

David Ewing had this to say regarding the gas station.

This morning LUPC heard the case for an 1800′ convenience store to be added to the Chevron station on the corner of Rose and Lincoln, in place of the empty Tom’s Burgers.

The owner requested an exemption from a Cirecycling area either in the building or outdoors, as well as two exceptions to Lincoln Blvd. Community Design Overlay (CDO). One was the prohibition on pole signs. There is an existing, grandfathered sign, but a new one would lose that status. The other exception was to the requirement that the store entrance face Lincoln Blvd.

Robert Aronson staffed the project for LUPC. His motion proposed holding firm on the pole sign prohibition but allowing the store entrance to be set back to better address business from the pumps.

Public comments were made by me and Laura Silagi to uphold the terms of the CDO, a long-term, incremental program to make Lincoln more pedestrian friendly. We also raised concerns that the unusual height of the building for a single story structure, at 24 feet, would provide a very
tempting venue for CDO-prohibited signage.

The owner said he has already agreed to a covenant prohibiting window signage. He also agreed to a suggestion by LUPC member Kathleen Rawson to turn the unglazed surface of the north wall into a “green wall,” with vegetation on a trellis. This and the window signage covenant were added to the motion as a friendly amendment by the applicant.

The committee found a compromise on recycling issue, recommending the project be allowed to eliminate the space as long as recycling containers accompanied trash containers at the pump islands.

The only signs recommended under the motion are two small signs on the canopy over the gas pumps and a Santa Monica-style “monument” sign with the Chevron logo and gas prices. There was some question about whether the monument style would be allowed by the Department of Transportation due to sight line considerations, so a clause was added recommending DOT review. The entrance remained where it was. There were compliments on the architecture from several on the panel. The owner, whose family has had the property since before the 1920s, seemed pleased with the outcome.

204 Hampton, which is St. Joseph’s, proposed a sound barrier wall dividing the neighbors from a nursery school on St. Joseph property. It was determined that St. Joseph’s group should get with the neighbors to work out the particulars of the wall.

320 Sunset Hearing Thursday

P1040194

P1040159
Family emjoying lunch and sunshine.

Hearing for 320 Sunset will be 13 November at 10:30 am by zoning administrator at West LA Municipal Building, 1645 Corinth Ave, LA 90025.

Business, called Gjusta, has been open for less than a month and is now operating as a bakery/kitchen/retail but owner wants to broaden the scope of the business to include a restaurant with alcohol and off-site sale of beer and wine.

Councilman Mike Bonin has already provided his concerns and disapproval for the project to the zoning administrator in a letter dated 31 October 2014. Letter was posted in 1 November Venice Update.

Not since the Abbot Kinney Hotel has there been such opposition. Owner, Fran Camaj, has another business on Abbot Kinney that has no parking and owner has flaunted the rules of occupancy. Residents are up in arms about another establishment ignoring the rules. Some object to M-1 being used commercially. Artists need the area they say. Others say the area is congested as it is without the bakery. The area is adjacent to Gold’s Gym. Many point out the narrow street. It is a 60-foot designated street but probably measures in the 30-digit range. The main concern is lack of parking and the use of a patio for eating and drinking with only a 13.6-foot alley between that and a residence.

The 5000-sf building is on a 6000-sf lot zoned M-1. The alley is a substandard 13.6 feet. The lessee has a lease on the abutting 6000-sf, westerly lot that he plans to use for parking, loading and unloading, and trash. The lessee has a 10-year lease on lot to be used for parking but the overall lease is not contingent on extra lot. Bakery could lose use of lot ten years down the line and not have any parking.

Sign posted in window states 320 Sunset is seeking a “change of use of existing 5000-sf commercial bakery/kitchen/retail building to a commercial bakery/kitchen/retail/restaurant with 717-sf of service area and 22 indoor seats, 65 patio seats, on-site sale and consumption of full line alcohol and retail sale of beer/wine.

“Proposed hours of operation are 6 am to 12 am (midnight) Sunday thru Thursday and Friday and Saturday, 6am to 1 am.”

Correspondence can be addressed to JoJo Pewsawang at JoJo.Pewsawang@lacity.org. Case No. is ZA2013-33769CDP)(CUB)(SPP), ENV2013-3377-MND.