Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Enforce Ban on Camping at Venice Beach


PLEASE HELP MAKE VENICE A SAFER COMMUNITY BY SENDING THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE TO MAYOR VILLARAIGOSA, CITY ATTORNEY TRUTANICH, COUNCILMAN ROSENDAHL AND POLICE CHIEF BECK

The disorder and criminality and especially drug use and sales on OFW reverberate throughout our community, driving much of the crime we see in our neighborhoods.  And the City's tolerance of the campers on the Boardwalk and in the park area has created a magnet that brings others to Venice to engage in illicit activity.
The Message:

 


Subject:  Enforce the Ban on Camping at Venice Beach

Please enforce the ban on camping in the Venice Beach Recreation Area (LAMC 63.44 (D) (4)).

The park and its Ocean Front Walk have become a cesspool of drug use and sales, public drunkenness, public defecation and urination, assaults, intimidation, late night noise, off-leash dogs, and a breeding ground for criminal activity that is directed at residents, businesses and private property, including automobiles which are routinely broken into in Venice.

Residents and visitors now feel they must avoid the Boardwalk due to the dangerous conditions that exist there.  Many in the travel press now advise visitors to skip Venice Beach due to these conditions.

The campers who truly want a bed for the night can obtain a bed at one of the several shelters which have been opened early for this purpose.

Please act to restore Ocean Front Walk to its former glory as a safe, cool and friendly place for LA residents and visitors alike.

Sincerely,

tent still up at 10 am
debris piling up around public restrooms
a magnet for drinking and drugs
Click on the links below to edit and send this message to:

Mayor mayor@lacity.org
Deputy Mayor Larry.Frank@lacity.org
West LA Director for the Mayor joseph.hari@lacity.org
Public Safety Policy Director steve.olivas@lacity.org
City Attorney ctrutanich@lacity.org
Atty.Schedule@lacity.org
CD11 Councilmember Billrosendahl@aol.com
Assistant to CD11 Councilmember margaret.hash@lacity.org
Police Chief Charlie.Beck@lapd.lacity.org
Police Captain jon.peters@lapd.lacity.org

Monday, November 21, 2011

Janice Hahn supports VSA appeal of Venice PO closure



Re: Support for Appeal of USPS Decision to Close the Venice, CA, Main Post Office

Dear Mr. Callender,

I am Writing to support the Venice Stakeholders Association and other Venice residents in their appeals of the USPS' decision to close the Venice Main Post Office (VMPO) at 1601 Main Street in Venice, Califomia. The USPS' decision represents a 60% closure and a sale of this historic facility, and thus is an appealable action.

My constituents have informed me that the current level of USPS customer service at the VMPO does not now and has not historically met the USPS' standard of providing window services to the public within five minutes. Apparently, at this location, waits of 20 and 30 minutes are not uncommon for window service.

However, despite failure to provide services in a reasonable period, l have been informed in
meeting with Diana Alvarado of USPS' Pacific Facilities Services Office that it has decided to close three customer service windows and relocate the remaining two windows to the Venice Carrier Annex at considerable expense. This is unacceptable.

The Venice community has long been under­-served by the USPS at the VMPO, even though the physical facilities allow more personnel to be present to reduce the wait time and provide quicker customer service. Given that customers already wait an astonishing amount of time, I am concerned that loss of the three windows will lead to an even lower level of service for local residents.

I also would note that under 39 C.F.R Section 241 .4(Í) USPS has a duty to comply with local planning and zoning requirements and building codes and to provide plans and drawings of new postal installations to appropriate local government officials. I have been informed that USPS has not complied with this statute. It appears to me that the Postal Service should assure that local land-use laws can be met at the proposed new location for customer services before it proceeds any further with its plans to sell the existing facility, which currently has adequate space to provide the requisite level of customer service.

For these reasons I urge the Commission to remand the USPS’ decision back to USPS with
instructions to investigate, in consultation with the Venice community and officials ofthe City of Los Angeles, a means to keep this facility in use as a post office and to provide a higher level of customer service commensurate with maintaining a wait time of less than five minutes and with improving the USPS' relationship with its customers.

Sincerely yours,

Janice Hahn
Member of Congress

Attachment: Appeal of Venice Stakeholders Association

Monday, October 17, 2011

Appeal of Venice Post Office Closure


(Venice, CA/10-16-11)  The Venice Stakeholders Association filed an appeal Friday with the U.S. Postal Rate Commission seeking to overturn the U.S. Postal Service's decision to close and sell the Venice Post Office and relocate customer services to the Venice Postal Annex, a sorting and carrier storage facility.
The appeal claims that the Postal Service failed to follow its own rules for the closure and seeks to have the Commission revoke the closure.

The dramatic decrease in the extent of Post Office operations, simultaneous with its "relocation," means that the action is the functional equivalent of a closure - or at least a partial closure - and thus is subject to the right of an appeal to the Postal Rate Commission.

The Venice Post Office, a 1939 Works Project Administration structure, is of significant historical, architectural, and community value.  It also contains the historical mural "Story of Venice" by noted artist Edward Biberman.

John Henning, the Stakeholders' attorney, notes in a letter to David E. Williams, the Vice President of Postal Network Operations, that federal law requires the Postal Service to "comply with local planning and zoning requirements and building codes."

However, the USPS has already announced it will soon issue a contract for approximately $400,000 to install a customer service facility in the Annex.  This is before it has submitted any plans to the City of Los Angeles to review compliance with LA planning and zoning codes, in particular compliance with the current requirements for adequate employee, public and carrier truck parking, and parking lot setbacks, landscaping and re-striping.   City rules will also require up-dating the facility to meet the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Henning suggests that Williams, in his recent denial letter stating that no appeals are permitted to his decision, is attempting to bully Venice residents into not appealing his earlier decision, when closures of main post offices are indeed appealable to the Postal Rate Commission.

Residents fear the loss of the historic structure and mural if it is sold, on one hand, and foresee increased parking congestion and a continuation of exceptionally poor maintenance of the grounds around the Annex, on the other, if customer operations move to the Annex.

"We fully understand the severe budget constraints facing the Postal Service," said Mark Ryavec, president of the Venice Stakeholders.  "But in downsizing, the Postal Service still has to follow its own rules - and they haven't in this instance."

"Representatives of the Postal Service have told us that they do not have to comply with local land-use laws, while a clear reading of the federal law shows this is incorrect," Ryavec said.  "It also shows they have been premature in deciding to relocate customer services before they have determined, in consultation with the Los Angeles City Planning Department, if the re-configuration of the Annex building and adjoining parking lot is legally permissible; for example, can they provide the required parking."

Friday, September 16, 2011

VSA Support for SB 910 to Safeguard Cyclists

Dear Governor Brown,

I'm writing on behalf of the Venice community and cyclists throughout California to urge you to sign Senate Bill 910 so that drivers must give at least three feet of clearance when overtaking a person on a bicycle.

When a passing driver fails to give a bicyclist enough space, the slightest error by the driver or the most minor shift by the bicyclist to avoid trash, broken glass, a car door opening or rough pavement can lead to a collision. This type of collision is the leading cause of adult bicyclist fatalities in California and the U.S.

By requiring drivers to give bicyclists more space when passing, we can minimize a leading cause of deadly collisions and help more people feel comfortable about choosing to ride their bikes. And by making it possible for more people to feel confident about choosing to ride a bicycle, we can encourage more Californians to bike routinely and begin to achieve some of the state's crucial goals for less gas consumption and improved air quality.

Specifying a minimum passing distance provides a more objective and easily understood measure of what constitutes "safe" and gives law enforcement and the courts a more objective basis for enforcing a safe passing requirement. Most importantly, it helps emphasize a driver's responsibility to safeguard more vulnerable road users like bicyclists. It will save lives without imposing any costs on government.

Please sign SB 910 into law.
Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Mark Ryavec, President

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Planning Commission Reverses Gjelina Decision

West LA Area Planning Commission Reverses Decision/Reduces Gjelina Seating and Imposes New Conditions to Protect Residents

The West Los Angeles Area Planning Commission, acting in response to the VSA’s legal challenge to its earlier decision allowing Gjelina restaurant to increase its seating from 60 to 100 seats – with no additional parking – has reversed itself.

In the reversal, the Commission found for Appellant Arminda Diaz, a Venice architect, who had argued that City code prohibited the Commission from increasing seating by more than 20%. The earlier action on April 20th had increased seating by 66%. VSA’s attorney, John Henning, had also argued that the Commission had violated the requirement to give the public notice of the proposed increase. The VSA also noted the Commission’s action would have set a dangerous precedent that restaurants could increase seating in Venice and other parking-starved areas of the City without fear of any repercussions.

In addition to re-imposing the original conditions of operation, such as the 60-seat limit, the Commission also imposed new conditions, including:

• No serving on the patio past 10 pm
• The patio to close at 11 pm
• No use of the second floor for any private dining
• No use of the garage as storage
• Outdoor seating limited to 16 out of the allowed total of 60

“This was a significant win for the residential neighbors,” said Mark Ryavec, president of the VSA.

“The City has to stop allowing new seating capacity up and down Abbott Kinney without requiring new off-street parking to accommodate all the cars.”

“The Planning Commission and the Building and Safety Department also need to pay attention to the late night noise coming from outdoor dining facilities and from noisy patrons returning to their cars on residential streets,” Ryavec said.

“We support fine-dining restaurants and are sympathetic to the parking problems faced by neighborhood-serving commercial establishments,” the VSA leader said. “But the way to facilitate these establishments is for the Council Office to take the lead in developing neighborhood parking infrastructure, not to throw out planning and the rule of law.”

Sunday, May 15, 2011

VSA Opposes Sale of Venice Post Office

I am writing on behalf of our organization to oppose the sale of the historic Venice Post Office.

This structure represents one of the few remaining Works Projects Administration projects in our community. The murals in its foyer depict notable moments in our community’s history.

We are concerned that the protection afforded by the State Historic Preservation designation, which we understand has not yet been awarded to this structure, will not ultimately prevent demolition, should a new owner wish to make another use of the site. This protection simply allows a government entity or a private party to purchase the structure to avoid demolition, which leaves the future of the structure in perpetual doubt.

Further, as pointed out by Mr. Richard Maher of the Postal Service’s Public Affairs and Communication Office in his appearance before the Venice Neighborhood Council, the Postal Service cannot assure that the historic foyer of the building would remain open to the public once the property is sold to a private party. If re-proposed as a bank, for example, it is likely that the foyer would continue to be open to the public. However, as a law office or film production office or in many other potential uses, it is not likely to be accessible to the broad public.

We believe the only course of action for the Postal Service is to maintain possession of the Post Office and move the sorting operations for Venice (or for the section of Venice near and around the Post Office) into the Post Office building, with the rest being moved inland to less expensive property.

Further, please find attached plans for the Annex site to be converted to a community and arts center and a public park. We would propose that the City and County of Los Angeles sponsor a park bond act for this and other meritorious parks projects throughout the County, as was done with Proposition A some years ago. The proceeds would be used to fund the purchase and retrofitting of the building and site to this new community use. Proposition A provided $10 million dollars for the refurbishment of the Venice Boardwalk and many other parks project in Los Angeles County and this mechanism is certainly available in this instance as well.

Sincerely yours,



Mark Ryavec, President

Adaptive Re-Use Proposal to Create
a Windward Circle Park and Community/Arts Center

Attachment 1
Attachment 2