Oxford Triangle rebels against Trammell Crow project
A room full of Venetians trekked to a city
building in West Los Angeles, Dec. 8, to protest Trammell Crow Corporation's
plans for a 298-unit luxury apartment complex smack up against the Oxford
Triangle neighborhood.
All but three of those who spoke were
against the project. Some were opposed to any apartment complex next to the
single-family homes, and brought “No Apartments” signs. Others
opposed the complete lack of affordable units in the
project.
Traffic from 600 new
resident parking spaces was on everyone's mind. The developer claimed to have a
new study by Traffic Engineer Stan Ross which found no significant impact on
Lincoln Blvd. traffic. Curiously, they also claimed that not having the existing
businesses drawing traffic to and from Washington Blvd. would have a significant
impact on that street's traffic.
Since
the project was first previewed last April at the Land Use and Planning
Committee (LUPC) of the neighborhood council, an access strip to Lincoln Blvd.
has been found. Previously, Trammell Crow had planned to dump its traffic on the
residential streets of the Triangle. Now, all that traffic will exit on Lincoln
Blvd., where a traffic light will be
erected.
The hearing officer for the
Planning Commission, Jon Foreman, listened politely to the several-hours-long
testimony from the Oxford Triangle residents, representatives of Venice
community organizations and neighborhood council
members.
Elizabeth Wright, an
Oxford Triangle resident, described a petition that had been circulated in the
neighborhood which had 62 percent participation. Of those responding 97.2
percent were opposed to the project, said Wright. She and other circulators
declined to submit the petition, which was perhaps a strategic mistake (the
petitions are expected to be turned in at the next hearing, Feb.
4).
Steve Clare, executive director of
the Venice Community Housing Corp., spoke in favor of enforcing the Mello Act,
which requires affordable housing in new construction in the coastal zone.
Representatives of the community organization, POWER, also spoke in favor of
affordable housing at the
site.
Currently, Trammell Crow is
opposed to providing any affordable housing, either at the project or off-site.
However, Attorney Lucinda Starrett said the developer is "voluntarily" talking
with Mercy Housing about off-site units. The Mello Act requires the housing -
either 20 percent affordable or 10 percent very-low income - to be on-site. The
developer's representatives are now saying that rents could top $5,000 a month
for some of the envisioned
units.
Neighborhood Council Board
member who spoke were Lydia Poncé, DeDe Audet, Dennis Hathaway, Jataun
Valentine and Jim Smith. All except Audet opposed the project. Former LUPC
chair, Daryl Dufay, also defended his committee's approval of the project. As
reported in the November Beachhead, the LUPC approval was overridden last month
by a decisive vote of the neighborhood council
board.
Kevin Keller, the chief planning
deputy for Councilmember Cindy Miscikowski spoke at the end of the hearing,
essentially in favor of the project, saying that it met all the requirements of
the Oxford Triangle specific plan. The site in question in at the southern edge
of Venice and not far from the Marina properties of Miscikowski and her
developer husband, Doug Ring.
Trammell
Crow has retained the fourth-largest law firm in the country, Latham and
Watkins, to represent it. The international law firm <http://www.lw.com>,
which had two attorneys present at the hearing, reeks with political influence.
Its presence indicates that Trammel Crow may be determined to fight the
inclusion of affordable housing, either by influencing city officials or by
legal action, possibly including challenging the constitutionality of the Mello
Act.
Affordable housing advocates are
waiting to see the feasibility study being prepared by Latham and Watkins, which
is supposed to show why Trammell Crow cannot provide on-site affordable housing.
Another issue that may loom large is that no environmental impact report (EIR)
has been filed by the developer, who contends that none is
needed.
The project is by no means a
done deal. Foreman's report and recommendations will go to the West L.A.
Planning Commission, which is scheduled to hold a hearing on Feb. 4. The Coastal
Commission has yet to weigh in on the whole project. Then there are the
courts...
Posted: Thu - January 1, 2004 at 06:56 PM