Landscaping will echo the fire station's

Plants to be used in landscaping the new Taco Bell will be chosen from the same varieties that will be used at Fire Station 62 on the opposite corner, Taco Bell representative Coby King has promised.

RUSTY'S STORY
AND PHOTO
ON TACO BELL

TACO BELL WINS ITS LAST BATTLE BEFORE THE L.A. CITY COUNCIL

The Taco Bell project at the corner of Inglewood and Venice Blvds., which has been hotly debated for at least five years, moved a step closer to reality on Nov. 9.

The City Council’s Planning and Land-Use Management Committee gave a quick green light to the plan on Oct. 27 after hearing from a delegation of neighborhood people opposed to it as well as a representative of Taco Bell.

And the full City Council also approved the new Taco Bell, 13-0, on Nov. 9. Council Member Cindy Miscikowski voted in favor

The issue was the only one that could be appealed to the council from a decision of the West Los Angeles Area Planning Commission in favor of the project — whether a zone variance should be granted to allow more compact parking spaces than would otherwise be required. [See story below.]

PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTS
TACO BELL PERMISSION TO BUILD A NEW RESTAURANT

The West Los Angeles Area Planning Commission on June 16 told Taco Bell in effect that it can go ahead and build a new, enlarged restaurant on the northwest corner of Inglewood and Venice Blvds.

It rejected a decision by associate Zoning Administrator Daniel Green against certain elements of the proposal (see earlier story below).

Maritza Przekop, Urban Planning chair for the Mar Vista Community Council, said "the community" will likely appeal the portion of the decision dealing with parking to the City Council.

"I will hold one day of mourning in honor to the beliefs and hopes of 165 community members that wrote letters, made phone calls, sent e-mails, signed petitions and showed up at all meetings thinking and believing that their commitment makes a difference," she wrote in a report to the MVCC Board. "My candle is lit. Let's move on."

The effect of the Planning Commission's decision includes:

• 10% window transparency in lieu of the required 50% (smaller windows). But Taco Bell representatives have promised that no temporary signs will be placed in those windows.
• 56% compact parking spaces in lieu of the maximum 40% (more cars on the lot but fewer full-size slots).
• Easing of landscape requirements if Inglewood Blvd. is ever widened. That's so parking spaces won't be lost.

The decision came after many months of community meetings. One activist said the affair has gone on for at least five years.

The MVCC Directors eventually approved all of Taco Bell's proposals, which the restaurant chain had modified since its plan was first advanced.

Coby King, a representative of Taco Bell, said in advance of the June 16 hearing that the restaurant chain's appeal was in “complete conformity” with the Mar Vista Community Council’s desires.

King made this statement:

• We have honored every agreement we have made
• We have worked diligently to meet community concerns over the impact of the restaurant
• Taco Bell cannot and will not replace the outmoded and outdated restaurant with the new and improved building unless the variances requested are granted.

We are grateful that the [Mar Vista Community Council] reiterated its support for the project [by a 5-4 vote, with three abstentions and one absence].

In addition, it is important to understand that Taco Bell's overriding reason for seeking these permissions is because it wants to upgrade its restaurants. The amount of additional customers it will generate is almost secondary to the project.

“Taco Bell’s appeal is your appeal,” he told the Board at one of the many meetings on the subject..

Sarah T. Roos, a neighbor and one of the leading opponents of the projecct, said at a MVCC Board meeting that the “quite emotional” opposition to the Taco Bell proposal “has been going on for five years or so.”

She said the Bell has not responded to the feelings of the community, which was getting “more and more frustrated and angry.”

Of the Planning Commission's final decision, she e-mailed The Sun: "It was disspiriting."

The Urban Planning Committee's Przekop said:

"I expect that all advocates of this project stay involved, not only with their support vote towards Taco Bell, but to assure that all conditions of approval are met and that a better project results out of our involvement as part of the Mar Vista Community.

"I encourage zone Directors to negotiate for a better project, starting with a review of their exterior elevations and landscape plans, which will go a long way."

Quote without comment Director Ken Alpern: Do you think Taco Bell has the right to tell you how to renovate your house? Do I have a right to tell my neighbors how to renovate their house? This is their property. They’re going to pay for this. They’re going to spend a lot more money than the original plan that I saw a year ago . . . Regardless of who’s right or wrong, I can see good-faith effort now over the past year on the part of Taco Bell, and I’m concerned about what I’m hearing from the opposition. . . . If we’re going to take into account the Stakeholders of the whole community . . . the neighbors are going to just have to accept where they live. Director George Chung: We need to provide credibility to all businesses, so that we can attract businesses to upgrade Mar Vista. If we send them [Taco Bell] back to the drawing board . . . [other businesses] will say, “Forget it, you guys are unreal.” You’re going to live for a long, long time with ugly commercial buildings because everybody else, when they come into MVCC, they’ll say, “You know what? You guys are just unreasonable." Director Rob Kadota: This really sticks out like a sore thumb, and it’s a style that I don’t see on the other two corners, where that is much more benign. This is objectionable to me, so I will vote against it.

•

Click here for The Sun's editorial opinion on the design of the proposed building.

In fact, Green suggested that Taco Bell might be making a mistake in trying to put the larger restaurant on 12,829 square feet of land.

"Perhaps the parcel is simply too small for the proposed project," Green noted in his written report. "As the farmer would say, 'You can't put 10 pounds of potatoes in a 5-pound sack.' "

• He was particularly dyspeptic over the Bell's request to cut back on the number of full-size parking in favor of "compact" spaces (56% of the total, or 17 spaces).

"The applicant would have the zoning administrator believe that . . . 'the variance actually contributes to the public welfare by limiting the likelihood of customers parking on nearby residential streets.' "

Green disagreed. "The applicant's statement can only make sense if standard-size cars can fit into compact stalls," he observed archly. "The applicant has provided no independent studies which show 56% of cars on the road are compact."

• Taco Bell also sought permission to reduce the "see-through" percentage of window glass on Inglewood Blvd. to 10% of the entire wall and on Venice Blvd. to 30% from the city standard of 50%. (That means the Bell wanted smaller windows.)

"It is important from a design category to provide as appealing a design as possible," Green wrote. "Windows perform that function for customers inside the restaurant and for prospective patrons walking by or driving on the streets looking in."

• Green said the plan submitted by Taco Bell amounts to "emasculating the landscape standards" established by city ordinance.

"The applicant's small lot size for the proposed use is not a valid reason to support development of the site without the same landscape standards that apply to all other properties which have been required to dedicate property," Green wrote.

---

Click here for a map of the area.
Click here for a report on the property

A story from December 2003:
The Taco Bell Project on Venice Blvd.

The Mar Vista community rang the bell with Taco Bell.

The company with the little chihuahua listened to the concerns of the Mar Vista Community Council over the Bell’s proposed new restaurant at Venice and Inglewood blvds., tore up the plan it presented last May and came up with a new one to meet the objections.

Result: If the project is finally approved, the spiffy new restaurant just opposite the new library and fire station would have more trees and landscaping, no outdoor seating and reduced hours of operation.

The current Taco Bell would be torn down. A new building would be constructed where an empty lot now lies.

A plan proposed in May for a 1,784-square-foot restaurant showed parking spaces on Inglewood Ave. with no landscaping. The new plan for a 1,594-square-footer shows three trees and a swatch of vegetation in that area.

The catch is: If the street is widened, then the landscaping will be torn out. But —

“We don’t feel that the neighborhood would allow the widening of that residential street,” said Ira Handelman, a government and community affairs consultant working on behalf of Taco Bell.

Hours of operation would be reduced. At present they are 8 a.m. to 1 a.m., extended to 2 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. in the future they would be 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., with the drive-through windows open until midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.

Loudspeakers would be of a new type, directed toward the car window, said Coby King, a public relations representative also working on the taco team. And there'll be a 6-foot wall to block the noise, he said.