Changes at Virginia Avenue Park

Modifications to Planned Expansion Approved
by VAPAB, Parks and Rec, ARB

Clara Sturak
Associate editor

   Part One of Two
   When last we covered the Virginia Avenue Park Expansion, it seemed, for the first time in almost two decades, to have moved from “concept” to project. After hearing from dozens of residents, both for and against the various elements of the expansion, the Santa Monica City Council had voted to approve the Environmental Impact Report and City planners’ designs and begin what some in the neighborhood thought they would never see – the actual expansion of the long neglected Virginia Avenue Park.
   Not so fast! say City planners. It turns out that some of the long-debated, loved and hated elements of the expansion will not go forward as approved. When it comes right down to it, there just isn’t the money to do some of them, and others aren’t legal in the State of California, or the County of Los Angeles. Yet another, a few people still just don’t like.
   That the City found out these tidbits of information after the project was approved, is not surprising, says Assistant Director of Community and Cultural Affairs, Karen Ginsberg. “At the schematic design level you don’t look too closely at finances. When you get to [the actual project], some things get easier and some things get more challenging,” she explains.
   The three major elements that are going back to the drawing board are the wading pool, the open air pavilion, and a mural which was to cover an outdoor wall of the Thelma Terry Center. The mural is a story in itself, one that we will attend to next week.
   For now, we’ll stick with the pool and the pavilion. Without going into the entire two decades worth of “public process,” suffice it to say that the wading pool has been a hotly contested element in the park expansion since it was first discussed in 1999, when the City held a series of public meetings in which it encouraged Pico neighborhood residents to “dream” all of the elements that they’d like to have in their local park. Several residents, now characterized by City leaders as mostly young Latina mothers, said they’d like a wading pool for their young children to play in. Others in the community argued that a pool would be too loud, too expensive, and redundant, since the Santa Monica Municipal pool, located just down the street at SMC, was in the process of being renovated.
   Some even argued that the pool was a twisted form of segregation -– the “coloreds” pool – promoted by the City to keep minorities away from the municipal pool. Other, more pragmatic, opponents wondered about safety and usage issues. What would happen to the pool during winter months? What about accessibility for disabled children? The City suggested that the pool would be covered with a strong rubber material in cold weather so that it could be used as a playground. It planned a “zero depth” entrance to the pool – like a beach – so that disabled children could enter it easily.
   It was a dream kiddie pool, and for better or worse, it, along with multiple mitigations to keep the noise level down, was included in the final plan. Unfortunately, the pool as proposed and approved really was a dream –- not at all feasible for a variety of reasons.
   It turns out the State of California doesn’t allow the type of cover originally planned for the pool. In order to serve as a “floor” over which children could play, the rubber cover must be supported by steel trusses that span the length of the pool, attaching at both ends, and that cover would have to be installed with the use of a crane – thus eliminating the zero level entrance, and adding significant cost ($75,000, to be specific).
   One option, something Ginsberg says is done in many other cities, would be for the pool to simply be covered in colder months and closed to the public. But that solution doesn’t match the “stated objective” of a year-round use of the space.
   So, City planners are suggesting that the pool be replaced with an “interactive water-jet play area.” Similar to the fountain at Universal City Walk, the play area would feature vertical jets of water rising up from a base flush with ground level. Although the design is still being created, Ginsberg says that interactive “play pieces” would be added. The pool support building would be reduced in size, thus leaving more space for the play area. During winter months, the fountain would be turned off and the space would serve as a multi-use “plaza.” Lifeguards and other pool-related staff would not be necessary.
   Ironically, the idea of an interactive water feature as a way to satisfy the needs of young families (and to avoid the negative side-effects of building a pool), was brought up by many residents during the extended series of public hearings on the park expansion, and summarily dismissed by City planners.
   Across the park, an “open-air pavilion” had been planned to serve as a combination food vendor area for the Saturday farmers’ market, sites for community events and concerts, and a shaded eating area.
   The pavilion was to be created by taking down the walls and roof of the existing Police Activities League (PAL) fitness gym on the southwest side of the park, leaving the structural members standing. A cloth canopy roof would cover the area, making an open yet shaded space.
   Again, after shepherding the design through the public process, including approval from the Virginia Avenue Park Advisory Board, the Planning Commission and the City Council, those in charge of the project now find that to renovate the PAL building would be, in Ginsberg’s word, “infeasible.” Project managers recently discovered that the building needs significant seismic upgrading – including sealing of all of the exposed beams, and installing so many X-braces as to “compromise the look of the structure.” Additionally, state safety standards require the installation of sprinklers, another unexpected expense.
   Even if the pavilion had not been financially out of reach, it was also recently discovered that the Los Angeles County Health Department does not allow food vending under a roofed structure, even if that roof is made of cloth. “They can be under their own canopy, but not ours,” Ginsberg explains.
   Instead, project designers will tear down the PAL gym, and replace it with a trellis structure that won’t have a continuous roof. It will be in the same location, will be approximately the same size, and will be a shaded area. Ginsberg will not say if it is still considered an event spot, but answers her own question: “Does it have electricity? Yes.”
   Not surprisingly, this simple, far-less-expensive trellis had also been suggested by several neighbors during public hearings.
   As far as the City is concerned, there is nothing to be concerned about. Ginsberg reiterates that this type of setback is to be expected. “When we [began work on] the project we came to a combination of technical challenges, and financial realities combined with technical challenges, including code issues. It’s not something you can determine [until you begin work.]”
   Pico Neighborhood resident Peter Tigler is not so sanguine. “[City planners] told us ‘Dream whatever you want to do,’” he says, but never shared budgetary information with the residents. “Then everybody gets disappointed. It’s frustrating.” Tigler’s frustration stems from what he calls “wasted time.”
   “I’ve been involved with this [Virginia Avenue Park expansion] for years, while [City planners] went their own political bushwhacking route,” he says. Tigler also believes that such significant changes in the design call for another look at the EIR, and the mitigations that were decided upon for the old design, something that the City does not plan to do. In fact, the changes have already been unofficially approved by the VAPAB and officially approved by the Recreation and Parks Commission and Architectural Review Board. The new elements will be heard by the City Council on June 11.
   Given the City’s insistence that these “challenges” are par for the course, and residents like Peter Tiglers’ belief that each change demands another public hearing, it’s no wonder that Virginia Avenue Park has been in the development phase for almost twenty years, will likely be in development for a few more before shovel hits dirt or brick hits mortar.
   Next week, the story of the mural everyone approved but no one liked.