Posts Tagged ‘Coastal Commission’

On April 5, 2016 the Venice Coalition to Preserve our Unique Community Character (VC-PUCC) Led a Walking Tour Illustrating Their Lawsuit Against the City of Los Angeles’ Flagrant Disregard for Its Own Planning Policies

SaveVenice

Venice, CA: Tuesday, April 5th, 2016 – Acclaimed land use attorney, Sabrina Venskus, explains in detail the “Save Venice”  lawsuit to community members and media on a walking tour through Venice highlighting, not gardens, but over-sized construction that has relied on Los Angeles Planning Department’s illegal development approval procedures.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CASE NO.:
BC 611549 – COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR VIOLATIONS
OF PLAINTIFFS’ CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION (Cal. Const., art.1, para.7), THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT (Pub. Resources Code, para. 30000 et seq.), THE VENICE LAND USE PLAN (Los Angeles Planning and Zoning Law), and CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE para. 526a

For years, the City of Los Angeles Planning Department has ignored planning and zoning laws regulating the Venice Coastal Zone. The City has approved huge development projects through the “Venice Sign Off” or VSO procedure, which effectively allows developers to side-step their responsibilities under the California Constitution to construct large developments without first notifying neighbors or holding public hearings regarding potential projects.

The City of Los Angeles Planning Department’s VSO procedure fails to ensure that developments comply with the Venice Land Use Plan requirements that all development respect the mass, scale, character and landscaping of existing neighborhoods. Additionally, the City of Los Angeles Planning Department has illegally issued hundreds of Coastal Exemptions, which has enabled developers to by-pass important protections imposed by the California Coastal Act.

As a result, huge construction projects have spread across Venice, substantially and irrevocably destroying the character, density, and charm of Venice neighborhoods; blocking airflow and sunlight; destroying vegetation; obstructing picturesque views; and eliminating affordable housing units in this fragile and unique coastal zone.

These projects have completely blindsided residents, who often do not realize that construction has been approved on their streets until bulldozers arrive at 7 a.m. and it’s too late to raise their voices. Today, the Venice Coalition to Preserve our Unique Community Character says enough is enough. It’s time for the City to honor Venice
residents’ Constitutional rights, comply with the law, and respect the neighborhoods and communities that make Venice unique.

HELP US SAVE VENICE – DONATE TO THE SAVE VENICE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND –

save-venice

CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO THE SAVE VENICE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND – THANK YOU!

***

Advertisements

March 26, 2015

DENY 259 HAMPTON PROJECT – NO MORE ALCOHOL LICENSES IN VENICE – THERE IS ALREADY AN OVER-SATURATION OF ALCOHOL IN VENICE – ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

AlcoholBan

Dear friends and neighbors,

Even though the community WON the 259 Hampton Drive appeal at the WLA Planning Commission Hearing on Jan 7, 2015 — the owner requested a re-hearing, because HE LEFT THE BUILDING BEFORE THE HEARING STARTED!!! Now he’s demanding his RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS! As a result, the project will be reviewed AGAIN by the WLA Planning Commission on April 1, 2015 @ 4:30 pm.

It is time we launched into URGENT ACTION in preparation for this Appeal re-hearing of 259 Hampton Drive — NEXT WED 1st April at 4.30pm at West LA Planning Commission.

Go here to watch video of 1st Appeal Hearing that took place on January 7, 2015 – https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4bxvYWxZpRJmJt23sLSX1PCtJizDdj_G

PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU CAN BE THERE TO TESTIFY OR SILENTLY SUPPORT – and bring a friend /neighbor (or three!) We need as many bodies in the room as we can get to save our neighborhood!

**WE WON THE CASE LAST TIME AND WE CAN AGAIN IF WE ALL SHOW UP!!!**

ASAP- WE NEED TO URGENTLY SEND TWO LETTERS:
Please take just 10 mins out of your busy day to do so. One letter to Mike Bonin, and one to the Commissioners. Please send to ALL email addresses I have listed and BCC me on them, so we can keep it on our case file.

THANK YOU IN ADVANCE DEAR FRIENDS & NEIGHBORS!!! Remember, together many voices can and DO make a change!

LETTER #1 TO COUNCILMAN BONIN:

mike.bonin@lacity.org
councilmember.bonin@lacity.org

cc:
chris.robertson@lacity.org
cecilia.castillo@lacity.org
tricia.keane@lacity.org

SUBJECT LINE:
DENY 259 HAMPTON PROJECT…. UPHOLD APPEAL: ZA-2012-1770-CDP-CUB

***Please personalize it as you see fit. It will be better if not all letters read the same! Does NOT have to be LOTS of detail. This is a sample letter, with listed points you can pull from. If you live across the alley, say so. If you own across the street, say so. Make it personal as to how YOUR LIVES will be affected!

***Don’t forget to sign your name and address (if you are close by) at the bottom.
————————-

Dear Councilman Bonin,

I request that you OPPOSE the proposed bar/restaurant with full alcohol at 259 HAMPTON DRIVE due for rehearing on Aril 1st. The project is a 2 story, open rooftop bar/restaurant WITH ZERO PARKING, 15 FEET from peoples homes. It has been operating illegally as a sit down restaurant for five years already.

We thank you for coming out in opposition against 320 Sunset, which was the right decision in support of the Venice community. We remind you that this project at 259 Hampton is a mere block and a half away, hence imposes a worse cumulative negative impact on the community and surrounding neighbors.

To quote from YOUR letter of opposition against Sunset, dated 31 October 2014:-

“It is absolutely imperative that we do not sacrifice the sanctity and well being of the existing adjacent residential neighborhoods. The success of one cannot be to the detriment of the other.”

“The noise and other disruption that will result from the operation of this restaurant/bar is an due burden to place on the neighbors across the alley” [and across the road]

“I am deeply concerned that the noise and its impacts from the patio, given the proximity to residences cannot and will not be adequately mitigated.”

[Zero parking]…”does not meet the REAL demand that a project of this scale will generate.”

We find that all of your concerns as quoted for the Sunset project should be applicable to the 259 Hampton proposal. The intensification of this site sets a very worrisome precedent, and is detrimental to our neighborhood for the following reasons:-

OVER SATURATION OF ALCOHOL
* Venice is over-saturated with alcohol licenses already. Four times the allowable limit per ABC. ABC Regulation 61.4 states that there should not be alcohol licenses approved within 100 feet of residential homes, yet this project is 15 feet from residents!

SENSITIVE ISSUES – ALCOHOL
* This project is on the same block as 2 CHURCHES and A HERITAGE LISTED SYNAGOGUE – as well as CHILD CARE and PRE-SCHOOL. This is an essential factor in the dis-allowing of alcohol per ABC, and adds concern re the density and intensification of 259 Hampton site.

INCREASED CRIME
*It is well documented that there is a direct correlation between high density of alcohol outlets and the increase in serious crime. In this census tract, there is almost four times the average crime rate for LA. The LAPD has weighed in that they DO NOT WANT ANY new alcohol licenses in Venice, and THEY ARE PARTICULARLY OPPOSING THIS APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOL AT 259 HAMPTON DRIVE. Venice may be a tourist destination to some, but to thousands of us it is our home.

NOISE NUISANCE
* A bar/restaurant within 15 feet of residential homes can never be truly mitigated from noise unless it is completely sealed on all four sides and rooftop. This is not the case on this project. It is an open air roof and some open sides. There are several homes across a 15 foot alley, and also 35 feet across the street.

ZERO PARKING
* There is NO ACTUAL PARKING. Not even one disabled space. Paying for in lieu spaces does nothing to help the serious parking drought in Venice. Providing parking for patrons is the cost of doing business, and mandated by the Venice Specific Plan. An $18,000 in lieu fee to the city will not take those vehicles off our residential streets and make the streets safe for our families, nor will it serve to green our environment.

TRAFFIC DANGER
* Traffic is already congested in this area, all day every day. Extra car traffic this business will generate, crawling looking for parking on residential streets adds to the danger. Many families and children walk, cycle, and skateboard in this area. To add alcohol and inebriated drivers into this mix is very dangerous.

NIGHT-TIME DANGER
* We should not be deprived of the ability to park close to our own homes and be forced to park 3 to 4 blocks away at night – and worry if we will make it home safely at night. This strips our quality of life and put us in grave danger.

Councilman Bonin, I urge you to act in favor of our, the Venice community’s interests. Please back us up in preserving the sanctity and well being of our neighborhood. We have a right to peace and quiet enjoyment in our homes, and look to you for protecting our rights.

PLEASE DENY 259 HAMPTON.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME…
YOUR ADDRESS…
———————————————————————————————

LETTER #2 TO PLANNING COMMISSION:-
email:- APCwestLA@lacity.org

SUBJECT LINE:
DENY 259 HAMPTON DRIVE, VENICE … UPHOLD APPEALS: ZA-2012-1770-CDP-CUB-1A, and DIR-2010-2932-SPP-1A-REC

***AGAIN- Please personalize it as you see fit.

***Don’t forget to sign your name and address (if you are close by) at the bottom.
————————

LETTER STARTS HERE:-

Dear Commission Executive Assistant – WLAAPC,

Would you please print 15 copies of my letter to follow (for the file, 5 commission members, Planning Dept, ZA Dept, Commission Executive, and City Attorney) and distribute accordingly, in time for the April 1 re-hearing. Thank you in advance.
———–

Dear Commissioners,

I request that you uphold your decision, of January 7, 2015, to DENY the proposed bar/restaurant with full alcohol at 259 HAMPTON DRIVE, which is due for rehearing on April 1st. As you may recall, the project proposes a 2 story, open rooftop bar/restaurant WITH ZERO PARKING, 15 FEET from people’s homes. It has been operating illegally as a sit down restaurant for the past five years.

These are the reasons why this project should be DENIED AGAIN:

OVER SATURATION OF ALCOHOL
* Venice is over-saturated with alcohol licenses already. Four times the allowable limit per ABC. ABC Regulation 61.4 states that there should not be alcohol licenses approved within 100 feet of residential homes, yet this project is 15 feet from residents!

SENSITIVE ISSUES – ALCOHOL
* This project is on the same block as 2 CHURCHES and A HERITAGE LISTED SYNAGOGUE – as well as CHILD CARE and PRE-SCHOOL. This is an essential factor in the dis-allowing of alcohol per ABC, and adds concern re the density and intensification of 259 Hampton site.

INCREASED CRIME
*It is well documented that there is a direct correlation between high density of alcohol outlets and the increase in serious crime. In this census tract, there is almost four times the average crime rate for LA. The LAPD has weighed in that they DO NOT WANT ANY new alcohol licenses in Venice, and THEY ARE PARTICULARLY OPPOSING THIS APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOL AT 259 HAMPTON DRIVE. Venice may be a tourist destination to some, but to thousands of us it is our home.

NOISE NUISANCE
* A bar/restaurant within 15 feet of residential homes can never be truly mitigated from noise unless it is completely sealed on all four sides and rooftop. This is not the case on this project. It is an open air roof and some open sides. There are several homes across a 15 foot alley, and also 35 feet across the street.

ZERO PARKING
* There is NO ACTUAL PARKING. Not even one disabled space. Paying for in lieu spaces does nothing to help the serious parking drought in Venice. Providing parking for patrons is the cost of doing business, and mandated by the Venice Specific Plan. An $18,000 in lieu fee to the city will not take those vehicles off our residential streets and make the streets safe for our families, nor will it serve to green our environment.

TRAFFIC DANGER
* Traffic is already congested in this area, all day every day. Extra car traffic this business will generate, crawling looking for parking on residential streets adds to the danger. Many families and children walk, cycle, and skateboard in this area. To add alcohol and inebriated drivers into this mix is very dangerous.

NIGHT-TIME DANGER
* We should not be deprived of the ability to park close to our own homes and be forced to park 3 to 4 blocks away at night – and worry if we will make it home safely at night. This strips our quality of life and put us in grave danger.

I urge you to act in favor of our, the Venice community’s interests. Please back us up in preserving the sanctity and well being of our neighborhood. We have a right to peace and quiet enjoyment in our homes, and look to you for protecting our rights.

PLEASE DENY 259 HAMPTON AGAIN!!! Thank you.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME HERE…
YOUR ADDRESS…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stay in touch with the Spirit of Venice — spiritofvenice.net

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

KEEP VENICE STREETS FREE — HEARING @ CA COASTAL COMMISSION – THURS. JUNE 13

JATAUN_NOPDJune 6, 2013 at 5.00 pm, was the last day to submit letters, emails & petitions opposing Overnight Parking Districts (OPDs) in Venice.

BUT…we can still make our voices heard by attending the CA Coastal Commission (CCC) hearing next Thurs. June 13 which begins @ 8:30 am in Long Beach, CA.

If you are available on that day PLEASE join us in telling the CCC that you want to keep coastal access to Venice beach free and open to all, as stipulated by the 1976 CA Coastal Act; and, if you live in Venice, that you don’t want to have to pay to park on your street!

NOPDs supporters are meeting @ 7:00 am on Thurs. June 13 at Beyond Baroque, 681 Venice Blvd., Venice, CA 90291 –

We will be busing and/or carpooling to Long Beach – contact David Busch for info. about bus/carpools.

PLEASE COME IF YOU CAN, ESPECIALLY IF YOU LIVE IN VENICE.

The hearing will be held at City of Long Beach, City Council CHAMBERS, 333 West Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90802 (415) 407-3211

Go here to view the CCC agenda, scroll down to Thurs. June 13: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html

Go here – CCC_NOPD-6-2013 to view the May 31, 2013 report made by CCC staff, Charles Posner, who states: 

“Staff is recommending that the Commission approve the coastal development permits for the proposed permit parking program with special conditions to ensure that the public will continue to be able to access the shoreline recreation areas in the early morning hours. The recommended special conditions begin on Page Three.”

For more info. on this topic go here: https://spiritofvenice.wordpress.com/nopd/

Hope to see you there — it will be well worth the effort 🙂

Best,
SOV

Mark Ryavec at NOPD Coastal Commission Meeting 2010

Mark Ryavec at NOPD Coastal Commission Meeting

If you live in Venice, CA and you pay attention to local politics – you will, no doubt, eventually come across the name Mark Ryavec.  To some, he is a hero who seeks to gentrify Venice and improve it’s ‘quality of life’; while to others, he is a villain and, some might say, a bigot – who seeks to rid Venice of it’s free-spirited homeless population and install permit-parking on its streets, in an attempt to protect 24 hour street parking for residents only.  How you perceive Ryavec, the man, may depend entirely on which side of the argument you come down on.

But for those who are still straddling the fence, let’s take a look at what we know about Ryavec, the man – courtesy of Google.

To begin with, Mark Ryavec is the president of Venice Stakeholders Association – whose mission is: “dedicated to civic improvement”; and, as such, in March, 2013, filed a complaint to the Department Of Neighborhood Empowerment (DONE) for an “Investigation of Ethics Violation by Linda Lucks, President of the Venice Neighborhood Council’ (a position that Ryavec has coveted for several years, having run – and lost to Linda Lucks, twice, for the position of president – in the last two local Neighborhood elections).

Ryavec is a leading proponent of Preferential Parking Districts (PPDs) in Venice and has spearheaded a movement to implement Overnight Parking Districts (OPDs) for the past several years.  Twice he, and his supporters, have lobbied the City of L.A. (COLA) and the CA Coastal Commission (CCC) for OPDs in Venice – and twice, first in 2009 and then in 2010 his efforts have been thwarted by those who prefer to keep the streets of Venice free – and open to all – in alignment with the CA Coastal Act of 1976.

In spite of his two stinging defeats at the CCC in 2009 and 2010, Ryavec has drummed up support to continue his lawsuit, started in 2010, which according to the Venice Beachhead argues that: “no Coastal Commission approval is needed in order to establish OPDs in Venice. City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, although at first against Ryavec’s lawsuit, changed his mind and joined forces with Ryavec against the Coastal Commission.”

On April 16, 2013 the proposed lawsuit settlement was brought before the VNC monthly board meeting.  Ryavec and a panel of OPD supporters (Arturo Pina, District Director of CD11;  Jane Usher, Senior Advisor to the City Attorney; and Tamara Martin of LADOT) discussed the OPD settlement being proposed to CCC –

 

On October 15, 2012, according to PRnewswire, Mr. Ryavec announced his candidacy for the CD11 seat on Los Angeles City Council vacated by Bill Rosendahl.  “Formerly a legislative analyst for the City Council and chief deputy tax assessor for Los Angeles County, [Ryavec] said he is running to return the City’s focus to traditional municipal services.”

However, claiming “lackluster community and fundraising support”, Ryavec “quietly” withdrew his candidacy on November 7, 2012 stating:

“When I decided to enter this race I thought that I would be running against Councilman Bill Rosendahl.  He appeared to be confident that he would recover from the cancer that he was battling and run for a third term.

In the end, as we have seen, he has continued to improve but also made the prudent decision to focus on his health and not run.

In very short order, Bill endorsed his deputy Mike Bonin and Bonin immediately announced his candidacy, released the names of a whole passel of campaign co-chairs and endorsements from senior Democratic party elected officials and then reported that he had raised over $50,000 in nine days.  As a former political consultant myself, I have to say, “Well played, Mike.”

Later, on February 8, 2013, Ryavec endorsed former City prosecutor of 25 years, Tina Hess, in the CD11 race, presumably in the hope that Hess would carry on the fight to rid Venice of its homeless population.  As it turned out, Rosendahl’s deputy, Mike Bonin, won the race hands down; and we have yet to see if he will follow in Rosendahl’s footsteps, policy-wise.

Previous to these recent political sorties, Ryavec was always very verbal on the issue of (not) helping the homeless.  For example, on June 17, 2012 he brought a motion before the VNC to step up police enforcement of city codes aimed at homeless people living on Venice streets.

 

Earlier, on May 17, 2012, he had posted this article on Venice Patch: “Food Giveaways on Venice Beach Enable Status Quo, Ineffective at Helping People Get into Housing” – arguing that feeding hungry people was not a constitutionally protected activity and only served to encourage homeless people to stay in Venice.  Ryavec omits to acknowledge that there is no affordable housing available for homeless people – which is why many remain on the streets.

On March 3, 2012, in an article about a proposed ferris wheel at Venice Beach (opposed by many Venetians), the LAIST reported Ryavec (who never misses an opportunity to push his agenda) as stating: “the wheel could grant Venice the chance to apply with the Coastal Commission for 24-hour preferential parking permits for beach-adjacent residents.”

Ryavec always, it would seem, a law unto himself, has spearheaded a number of attacks on what he considers to be ‘blight’ on the streets of Venice, namely homeless people sleeping on sidewalks and living in vehicles.  And, in April 2012, to get back at those sympathetic to the homeless dilemma, he published a list of names and home addresses of 11 activists, journalists and politicians “who he said shouldn’t mind having the homeless set up tents and sleeping bags outside their doors because they had expressed sympathy for them.”  In fact, he even offered $20 to any homeless person who would set up camp outside their homes.

Back in the summer of 2010, Ryavec started his own personal campaign to rid Venice streets of RVs by lobbying hard “for permit-parking zones that would have locked out many RV dwellers” and claiming “The left here in Venice doesn’t want to see any rules… ’Keep Venice free’ and all this crap. They think there’s something romantic about people living in RVs. This is a marginal existence.”  And, for those unable to afford the high rents in Venice and most of Los Angeles, the only existence they can afford.

yv

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stay in touch with the Spirit of Venice — spiritofvenice.net

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An interview on KPFK’s “Uprising” with Sonali Kolhatkar

Residents and activists in Venice beach say police are harassing community members and the homeless as a new wave of gentrification hits the city, best known for its eclectic beach-loving population. Last Wednesday dozens of homeless people lost their personal belongings when the Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, in cooperation with the LA Police Department, raided a homeless encampment at Third Street between Rose and Sunset Avenues in Venice Beach. Los Angeles City Councilman Bill Rosendahl said the city was conducting a “sanitation action” that was only meant to sweep up abandoned property.

The homeless disagree, and say their personal items, including prescription medications, wallets, and clothing, were indiscriminately collected and immediately dumped into garbage trucks. Adding to the outrage of the community is a feeling of betrayal, because police began directing the homeless to the Third Street encampment when the city began enforcing a no camping ordinance on the boardwalk, which displaced many homeless individuals. Venice residents from the Oakwood neighborhood and others also report an increase in community members being ticketed by police for small infractions, such as not having the fence around a home properly painted.

GUESTS: David Busch, an activist with the Spirit of Venice Coalition, Maria Fitzsimmons, and organizer with People Organized for Westside Renewal, or POWER, and Kendra Moore, a POWER leader and president of the Holiday Venice Tenant Action Committee Visit http://www.power-la.org for more information.

There will a direct action training in relation to the Venice area activism on April 14-15, 2012. For more information, visit http://www.99spring.com.

DOES VENICE NEED THIS ?

Posted: March 1, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags:
DOES VENICE BEACH NEED THIS PROPOSED ATTRACTION?

COME TO THE MEETING ON MON. MARCH 5

AT THE WESTMINSTER SENIOR CENTER

6:30pm-7:30pm
1234 Pacific Ave, Venice, CA. 90291

TO WEIGH IN ON THE DISCUSSION

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stay in Touch with the Spirit of Venice ~ http://www.spiritofvenice.net

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NEW CURFEW RESTRICTS ACCESS TO OCEAN FRONT WALK CAUSING MORE HOMELESS PEOPLE TO OCCUPY 3RD AVE. JUST A BLOCK AWAY FROM “SILICON BEACH” (GOOGLE’S NEW HQ ON 2ND AVE.) IN VENICE

Close to 100 people gathered on 3rd Ave at Rose Ave in Venice on Thurs, Feb. 16, 2012 to protect the rights of homeless people to sleep on the sidewalk from 9:00 pm – 6:00 am, as stipulated in the Jones Settlement (allowing homeless individuals to sleep on the sidewalk).  The settlement, in effect city-wide now for several years, on behalf of the homeless –was brought in response to the civil case, Jones v Los Angeles –by the city’s prominent civil rights attorney, Carol Sobel.

They were met by several LAPD patrol cars occupied by officers who informed them that people do not have the right to sleep, sit or lay on the sidewalk – anytime – day or night. The demonstrators stayed until the police left the area, and they vowed to return the next night and every night, if necessary, to stand in solidarity against the police, to protect the rights of homeless people to sleep – somewhere.

There were no arrests that night and, so far, one week later, there have been no arrests or sweeps on 3rd Ave.

But that could change at any time.

This most recent focus on homeless people sleeping on 3rd Ave. seems to be related to the recent curfew imposed by the City of Los Angeles on Venice’s Ocean Front Walk (aka “Boardwalk”) from midnight to 5:00 am, where some homeless people had been camping for the past several months.

Not everyone in Venice, or in Los Angeles, for that matter, are happy with the curfew which restricts access not only to the beach but to Ocean Front Walk from midnight to 5:00 am.  This latest action by the City seems to have been instigated by a small group of disgruntled residents of Venice, intent on gentrifying this eclectic beach town that has historically hosted hippies, homeless and young travelers since the 60s.

Activist, David Busch, believes that this latest assault on the poor sleeping on 3rd Ave. is related to Google’s recent move to 2nd Ave. (one block west of 3rd) where they are building a “campus” that will encompass an entire city block, with plans to expand further in the next year or two.  Recently, Venice Neighborhood Council  postponed and rescheduled (April 12) a special Venice Town Hall meeting entitled: Silicon Beach – to consider the impacts of Google and other production-based businesses locating in Venice and Westside communities.

Meanwhile, as Venice gentrifies, homeless people are displaced with nowhere to go but Skid Row; and what was once considered the “people’s beach” is rapidly becoming an exclusive enclave for the rich.  Busch maintains that this is segregation, pure and simple, because all people should have equal access to the beach 24/7, just as the 1976 California Coastal Act stipulates:

Busch claims: “Whether the city of Los Angeles recognizes them or not, Venice Beach’s poor artists, homeless, and youthful beach-travelers should always have a place in Venice –despite the fact that all these [city] officials apparently want to do, now, is cater to Google. And we’ll be facing arrests again tonight, and in coming nights, if we have to.”

###