By LILY TINOCO | Reporter
The Pacific Palisades Residents Association and member Harris Leven collectively filed appeals of the Palisades Highlands eldercare project’s building and retaining wall permits with the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety on Tuesday, August 18.
PPRA President Sarah Conner explained that the two appeals are in addition to the PPRA’s appeal to overturn a Superior Court Order, which approved the Palisades Drive eldercare project by Brentwood-based developer Rony Shram in April.
“They address matters that were never revealed by the developer, Palisades Drive, LP, during the reviews and hearings on the project before city agencies and the Coastal Commission in 2017 and 2018,” according to a press release.
The appeal of the permit for the retaining wall at 17310 Vereda de la Montura requests that the permit be revoked, denied or reconsidered for failure to include the wall in the application for a Coastal Development Permit for the project and for failure to comply with the California Coastal Act.
According to the appeal, “the developer … never showed, discussed or included a retaining wall anywhere near the size that the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety has permitted. In fact, the developer filed and showed just the opposite information.”
The appeal reports that the developer filed and showed a rendition of the completed project that did not show a retaining wall.
“Omitting a description and visual rendering of a 280-foot retaining wall can hardly be considered an ‘adequate’ description of the project, and the developer’s failure to provide such a description and visual depictions … with the retaining wall included in the CDP application for its project, was and is a violation of [Los Angeles Municipal Code],” according to the appeal.
Additionally, the appeal of the permit for the four-story building and subterranean parking requests that the permit be revoked and denied for failure to comply with provisions of the LA Planning and Zoning Code, or that the permit be modified so the building complies.
“It may be argued that the project has already been approved by the Superior Court in a decision handed down in April 2020,” the appeal continues. “That decision is currently going to the court of appeal for review. Since the city argued that the final interpretation of the codes in question would be made by DBS in a separate process and be subject to appeal per code if made in error, these issues have now been decided by DBS in error, and petitioners seek the correct code applications.
“Thus, this appeal is justified and appropriate.”
The DBS has at least 60 days to respond to the appeals, and if denied, the appeals can eventually be taken to the West LA Planning Commission or the Central City Planning Commission.
“The code allows for anyone to appeal a building permit to LADBS,” Rony Shram said to the Palisadian-Post in response to the appeal. “However, the substance of the PPRA appeal was raised in Superior Court and has been explicitly and unequivocally adjudicated in its ruling.”
Last week, the site was being excavated and dirt hauled out. Shram said this should take about six more weeks.
Updates can be found at the project site: 1525pali.com.
This page is available to subscribers. Click here to sign in or get access.