ITEM 1-F ON TOMORROW NIGHT’S city Council agenda sounds innocuous enough. It’s “The East Colorado Avenue Improvement Project consisting of pedestrian and neighborhood traffic improvements on Colorado Avenue between 20th Street and Centinela Avenue. Improvements(?) will include mid-block crosswalks with in-pavement flashers, crosswalk enhancements, raised landscaped median islands and curb extensions, new streetlights, traffic signal modifications, and striping and signage improvements at various locations."
City Council is now being asked to appropriate $1,035,496 for the physical work which will put us another step closer to gridlock. I wouldn’t OK this without an elevated pedestrian crosswalk over Colorado between the Water Garden and Yahoo! Center. But, that’s the least of the problems.
Much has happened since Council approval in June, 2005. Just recently, four major traffic generating developments were announced for the immediate neighborhood.
At 2930 Colorado Ave., currently the Village Trailer Park, a private developer proposes 349 dwellings, 48,000-square-feet of office/retail space and parking for 503 vehicles. Less than a block away, a 115,000 square foot entertainment/offices/post production facility is proposed for 2834 Colorado Ave. with parking for 412 vehicles. This project is being reviewed by Planning Commission, Wednesday night.
The former 7.16-acre Paper Mate property was purchased this summer by a mega-developer who has announced preliminary plans for 300,000-square-feet of entertainment related office space on Olympic Boulevard between 26th and Stewart streets. Parking? Possibly for 1,000 vehicles. And, at 3025 Olympic Blvd., 623 units of “affordable” single room occupancy apartments are proposed with parking for 667 vehicles. A few years from now, there’s going to be a lot more traffic with a lot less “street” to carry it if this contract is approved. Smart planning would mean reopening this project for review in light of the congestion these future developments will generate. Despite the fact that our traffic is amongst the most gridlocked in the region, it probably won’t stop City Council from spending one-million bucks to make it even worse.
HOLY PARKING Wednesday night, The International Church of the Foursquare Gospel at 1420/1424 Yale St. will ask Planning Commission for a conditional use permit for a 100-student/11-faculty private high school and a parking variance.
The church property is in a multi-family residential neighborhood. The Lighthouse Christian Academy high school has been in operation for eight years with as many as 75 students. It has inadequate parking and no on-site pickup or drop off for students or daycare clients. Currently, the church can park 14 vehicles on premises although the proposed use requires 101 parking spaces.
The neighborhood has permit parking, however the impact of a 100-student school, a daycare center and other concurrent church uses would severely tax the surrounding area according to the staff report. Wisely, staff recommends LCA enrollment be restricted to 65 students or less to (marginally) minimize traffic and parking impacts.
Two years ago, a similar situation occurred on 18th Street at Arizona Avenue. The Unitarian Universalist Community Church, also in a multi-family residential neighborhood, wanted to expand without providing 12 on-site parking spaces as required for the expansion itself. The church was already short a total of 84 required on-site parking spaces.
Despite the good work they do, the issue for the Foursquare Gospel Church, like the Unitarian Church, is about adhering to zoning requirements, Planning Commission’s continual granting of CUPs and parking variances is a major contributor to severe parking shortages in residential neighborhoods.
Therefore, the Commission should uphold the present codes, limit the enrollment of the Lighthouse Christian Academy and implement monitoring to insure that enrollment limits aren’t exceeded.
FICUS FIASCO PERSISTS Unless postponed, the Landmarks Commission will hold hearings tonight and possibly decide on landmark status for ficus trees, downtown on Second and Fourth streets between Wilshire Boulevard and Broadway.
Some 23 trees are scheduled for removal due to compromised structural integrity. A small but vociferous group of tree huggers has vowed to save these ficus any means including “landmarking” them.
It’s wrong to grant something historical significance just because it’s going to be removed. It’s an abuse of a process that recognizes and protects buildings, art, locations or, yes, even trees, that are rare and/or have historical, cultural or architectural (in the case of a structure) significance. These trees don’t qualify on any level.
LA.curbed.com recently posted this along with photos: “What happened to cause the City (of Los Angeles) to remove all the ficus trees along the east side of La Brea? Commenters on both Curbed and franklinavenue.blogspot.com surmise that the trees were chopped down because they were destroying the sidewalk and possibly providing shade to vagrants. The trees were also going untrimmed and may have been a liability to the adjoining property owner."
Ouch! Where were the tree huggers when these ficus met the woodsman’s ax?
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 12, 2007. Read the original PDF.