Parking Controversy in Venice Beach: Restricted Parking Coming Soon?
by Alex Quaid on June 24, 2010
Venice Beach is eclectic.
All it takes is one trip down the boardwalk to agree with that statement. There are a lot of different factors that make Venice the diverse place that it is. The controversy right now is will restricting parking in the famous beach community ruin the unique nature of the area?
The controversy arises from people who take advantage of the lack of overnight parking restrictions in Venice and sleep in their cars. Now I have seen everything from expensive, heavy duty RVs to people literally sleeping in the bed of their pickup truck or back of their station wagon. Obviously it is the later that most people dislike and, as the topic heats up, a resolution needs to be found.
There are two sides to this story and I find myself somewhere in the middle. I can see the perspective of each side, but each makes a good case.
The Venice Beach homeowner’s argument is simple: people living out of their cars is unsightly and unsafe. If you spent millions of dollars for a home would you want people living out of their cars in front of it? There is no doubt that the lack of overnight parking restrictions brings down home values in Venice.
Not only do homeowners legitimately feel unsafe with them around, they also are just plain unsanitary. I have personally smelled a few as I rode by on my bike and, boy, is it disgusting. If that smell was emanating from in front of my home, I would not be happy. Compounding the issue is the fact that Venice is the only beach community in California that does not restrict overnight parking in some manner. As a Venice homeowner don’t you deserve the same rights as all other Californians?
The other side of the issue is a just as valid and has a ton support behind it as well. Since the ’70s, Venice has been a haven for artists, street performers, and all types of people with alternative lifestyles. Many of them cannot afford housing, but it is their eclectic nature that has made the Venice Boardwalk one of the top tourist stops in California and contributed into making Venice one of the “fashionable” places to live. It is almost ironic that homeowners want to rid the streets of the very people who attracted them – in some degree – to the neighborhood.
Venice has not had parking restrictions for so long, it is almost a way of life. Where will these people go if they are forced to move? If parking restrictions are allowed, what is next? Will people be forbidden to sleep on the boardwalk since that is unsightly and unsafe as well? Where does it end?
This is a controversy that is going to continue to be brought up again and again until a solution is found. What is your take on the issue? Any ideas for a compromise?
I’d have to side with the homeowners on this one. The gentrification of Venice is a reality, and I certainly wouldn’t want one of these tenaments on wheels parked in front of my house. Remember, Venice is not a city, it’s a community in the City of Los Angeles, and the same ordinances should be enforced citywide.
It’s a tough one. I do love diversity — including socio-economic — but if I’m being really honest to your question “if you spent millions of dollars for a home would you want people living out of their cars in front of it?” In a word: no.
An ordinance making overnight street parking illegal in the Venice community is a plausible yet misguided use of government power. This attitude towards homeless people evidences a disturbing form of NIMBYism, while not in step with the standard negative reaction to the presence construction in the immediate area, this is a reaction to the presence of one of, if not the most, marginalized groups in the United States. An ordinance banning overnight street parking would utilize the presence of cars as a means to prohibit the presence of an individual person.
A measure such as this is problematic for many reasons. The amount of negative publicity stemming from such an action could be overwhelming. The backlash to the perceived anti-homeless law trend employed by cities with a large contingent of homeless people, such as San Francisco, Orlando, and Las Vegas, was substantial and met with frequent opposition from advocacy groups including the ACLU.
Would it be beneficial for the same residents who campaign to ban overnight street parking to also campaign for the ban of the provision of food to homeless people by charitable organizations in a certain area? Seemingly, the answer is yes. These residents wish to scour their neighborhood of the presence of the homeless, who are argued to be dangerous and unsanitary. Yet, ordinances such as these which have popped up in states like Arizona and Nevada have been fraught with legal controversies spawning litigation that has lasted years, forcing the division of municipal resources and focus away from problems that really need fixing.
Instead, the responsibility should be placed on the residents and business owners of Venice. If the regentrification of Venice is a reality then it should be coupled with not only proper research but ethical sales practices. The burden should be split between prospective buyers to determine the qualities of their target living area (e.g. school quality, safety, presence of homelessness and drugs, etc.) and the realtors that are employed to sell homes to provide honest and accurate descriptions of the living area, which should include a warning regarding the community and the presence of homeless people.
Placing an added burden regarding living arrangements to a person who is unable to afford proper housing is not only unfair but socially and morally reprehensible. The dip in Venice property values is a reflection of the importance placed by the market on perceived safety and cleanliness. If these qualities are not found by realtors and homeowners in Venice then it is for the market to correct itself, not for people to lobby the government’s action in further subjugating the most powerless of all groups of American citizens. In response to Dane’s hypothetical regarding a question posed to a Venice homeowner, If you were a middle class citizen in Los Angeles who lost his job, was unable to find work, and was relegated to sleeping in his car on a sidewalk every night, would it be fair for the city to expel you from your chosen place of rest, without providing proper resources for you, such as homeless shelters? The current economic climate in California has made this question a reality, and the answer is no.
To be fair, the areas that I see the most RVs parked, aren’t in front of multi-million dollar homes. They’re in front of a vacant lot just off Rose, on the street along the Oakwood Recreational Center, and on the street near other quasi-commercial areas — for the most part. Not to say that there aren’t homes in eye-shot of these RVs (or nose-shot, as is sometimes the case), but the argument from the pro-parking-regulation camp is a bit exaggerated.
Alex Quaid brings up good points. He is a handsome fellow too. I’d buy a house from him!
If you want to voice your opinion about the parking situation in Venice, follow the link to make a difference http://www.yovenice.com/2010/06/28/write-in-campaign-for-june-28th-2010/
Good questions, well-balanced. We are all stakeholders here. Venice’s Coastal Zone hosts homeowners, renters, fully-employed, working poor, indigents, businesses and visitors – as do many other communities. Regarding the issues at hand – parking, homelessness, property values, restrictions, consensus – the author’s first sentence says it all.
If it were primarily about money, Venice could easily top the charts of domestic coastal destinations, with 31-storey highrises stealing the ocean views and sea breezes from all of Los Angeles. Venice’s coastline could be gentried, her ingress could be secured; Venice could be on top of the world – for an eager few. The truth is this: Venice is already on top of the world; this is the reason that the money follows.
Venice not about Jim Morrison, or skateboarding, or Muscle Beach. Venice is not about canals, or living on the streets, or murals and beautiful gates; and to be clear: Venice is not about property values (with due respect to the sponsors of this forum). All these things – from the itinerant hobos and stars to the beach itself – all these things are about Venice. What we find here, how we live here, what we do – our lives are made unique by this eclectic and sometimes unruly landscape of a thousand dances.
The character of a community – particularly of one which is world-known for its unique and welcoming eclecticism – is what, in Venice’s case, drives its true value as a property to heights equaling those of the tallest rides at Disneyland. A critical difference between these two playgrounds is that one, for better and worse, is known to be free.
Venice is a mecca of the spirit for millions – visitors who, but for Venice Beach, would simply bypass bottlenecked, sprawling Los Angeles and its burgeoning heat effect. Today’s Venice, bejeweled with contradictions, sparkling with wealth that begins in the heart, draws travellers from all over, who may get to see the California coast just once in a lifetime.
Closer to home, Venice is an essential destination for Angelenos who ache for the cool and freedom that the coast provides. For residents – owners and renters alike – Venice is where we chose to live so that we could absorb and, yes, indulge in the promise of fundamental and unique freedoms that only Venice offers. It is no mere epigram that “We come to Venice not to change Venice, but to change ourselves.”
As we change, as we challenge our neighbors, we must ask what we are doing to Venice, and what Venice is doing for us. Our community can be safer; Venice can be more whole. When we next look in the mirror, we must admit that the way forward is not to move each other out, but to lift each other up. Change begins within our wealthy heart, and it is happening all around. We only need to open our eyes, and to share our time.
[...] This is a follow up post to my previous post regarding the overnight parking controversy in Venice. [...]
Well put Venicepower, I love the way you sum up what Venice is really about. What are your thoughts on the proposed overnight parking restrictions where certain sized vehicles won’t be able to park between 2 and 6 a.m.?
Hello,
I am a homeless individule and I would ask to park in front, or at least be respectful, the “cops” and “citizens” are bad enough to deal with on a day to day basis. If a homeowner want there “spot” then I would give it up, it is a public street, but why make things hard on any situation all around?…LOL…I have told the “cops” were and when I would be staying at a spot, I also was very up front about the fact that I do not dump trash or cause problems…I have only had one situation were I was asked to leave, but I usually stay for about a day or two, then move across the street before I am ever “policed”. While living in a car or an “RV” it is best to not stay in one place becuase some street people will target you as well…it is harder to hit a moving target…while staying in an area, you are watched so do not do anything to make trouble for yourself.
Thanks for your response Jason. If all overnight parkers were as considerate and respectful as you, we probably wouldn’t have a problem.
[...] controversy surrounding Venice’s overnight parking problem (which we have chronicled here) is really heating up, despite Councilman Bill Rosendahl’s best efforts to find a [...]
[...] Venice overnight parking controversy continues to fester in our [...]
[...] perpetrators of this unforgivable act are the RV dwellers that occupy the streets of Venice. As their holding tanks fill up, many RV dwellers lack the means or desire to dispose of their [...]