|
Why LA Said No to Las Lomas |
|
|
The City
Edited by Sara Epstein
In an unprecedented action, the City Council said no to the mammoth Las Lomas project on Wednesday. The vote was split 10-5. Here are reports and opinions on what happened … and, why.
 What the City Council did: Some of the David Zahniser report from the LA Times-
A divided Los Angeles City Council voted today to halt its review of the 5,553-home project known as Las Lomas, dealing a devastating blow to the company that had spent six years trying to get a hearing for the mega-development planned for north Los Angeles County.
In a sign that even Los Angeles has limits on the amount of growth it will approve, the council voted 10 to 5 to instruct the Planning Department to stop processing the application submitted in 2002 by the Las Lomas Land Co.
The vote represented a huge victory for Councilman Greig Smith, who represents the northwest San Fernando Valley. Smith had argued that the council had no need to review a project that would flood the region with traffic and yet is outside the city limits.
-break-
"Our city attorney has said that if we fail to move forward, he believes we are in great jeopardy of being sued," said Councilman Richard Alarcon, whose San Fernando Valley district borders the Las Lomas site.
Alarcon voted to keep the project alive, along with council members Ed Reyes, Jose Huizar, Herb Wesson and Bernard C. Parks.
-break-
Dan Palmer, the president of Las Lomas Land Co., voiced disappointment in the council's decision, saying his company has not decided its next move.
"We believe that Las Lomas is a fine project providing many benefits to the community, and we remain committed to it," he said.
_____
Councilman Grieg Smith’s report on HOW.
The Las Lomas project was too big, too dense, and couldn’t be planned in a worse place. It would have a devastating effect on traffic, the environment and would unacceptably strain our water, infrastructure and public safety resources. The huge coalition of opponents to Las Lomas who came together to say no to this project have our gratitude and praise for stepping up to the plate to defend our community.
Residents, community groups, elected officials, Neighborhood Councils and environmental groups took official positions of opposition to Las Lomas, wrote letters of opposition, and made public comments against the development at Neighborhood Council meetings, City Council meetings and Planning & Land Use Management Committee meetings.
Today was a big victory for the San Fernando Valley in the fight to protect our quality of life and ensure that we focus on the needs of our communities.
_____
David Coffin on WHY. (Posted the day before the City Council action.)
Santa Clarita wanted to annex it to kill the 5,553 single family home or at least control it but developer Dan Palmer wants the city of Los Angeles to annex the land so his project can move forward.
You see… Palmer wants LA’s water. He wants the City of Los Angeles to annex the area of his development that resides on county controlled property in between Santa Clarita and the City of Los Angeles so that he can apportion some of LA’s limited water resources for his massive project.
The City of Los Angeles has a historic ceiling of 704,000 acre feet of water and a 650,631 acre feet average over the last ten years.
With the 25-30% MWD cutbacks already announced this year and the court appointed restrictions of Mono and Owens Valley water, the city has nothing more to share.
What that means to LA’s residents is further reductions to its water availability along with other city resources such as police, fire, sidewalk repair, potholes, and schools (yes more schools in the LAUSD as if providing a marginal education to 700,000 students weren’t enough!) .
All are services that Los Angeles clearly cannot support today as it jockeys for more fees, rate hikes and tax increases.
On Wednesday, the city council will deliberate and vote on whether to continue work on annexing the Las Lomas area. The city council should recognize that it simply does not have the resources to annex (acquire) more regions into the city.
The city council should VOTE to STOP WORK on the Las Lomas proposal. Acquiring the area will most certainly hurt Los Angeles residents.
(David Coffin is a writer and a contributor to CityWatch. He is an education activist and a member of the Neighborhood Council of Westchester-Playa del Rey. Read more of Coffin’s views at www.westchesterparents.org ) _
|
