By Councilman Bob Blumenfield
While the proposed Permanent Supportive Housing project next to the 101 freeway on the vacant plot of land adjacent to the Bowlero along Ventura Boulevard is a private/non- government project, I’m writing to share a quick update on what I know about it.
Normally, I would expect such a proposal to have to go through the City’s land use process, however, it is being processed under State Assembly Bill 2162. What does that mean?
What does that mean?
Even though the site is located within the Ventura Cahuenga Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan boundary, the City cannot require the usual land use standards because of the State law. Also, as the project is utilizing Density Bonus provisions of State Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), which allows deviations from the Specific Plan when a project provides affordable units, it can be bigger than what is normally allowed. Both AB 2162 and SB 35 supersede the Ventura- Cahuenga Corridor Specific Plan and preempt the City’s ability to impose certain restrictions
.Even though I don’t have the authority to compel the developer to do much at all, I have asked them to present their project to the Neighborhood Council and to listen to their input. They have assured me that they plan to do so. The date of this meeting is still to be determined. I encourage you to attend the Neighborhood Council meeting and submit any comments and concerns.
Again, while I don’t have the legal authority to impose conditions on this particular project, I will still strongly encourage the developer to take all of our concerns into consideration.
As State laws designed to circumvent the City planning process are utilized and as new reforms are put forward to reduce the City Council’s land use discretionary power, we will see more and more circumstances like this where your voice as spoken through your local elected representative, and as spoken directly through public hearings, will be muted.
As State laws designed to circumvent the City planning process are utilized and as new reforms are put forward to reduce the City Council’s land use discretionary power, we will see more and more circumstances like this where your voice as spoken through your local elected representative, and as spoken directly through public hearings, will be muted.
