-
State Officials Back-Off From Over-Ambitious Ballona Restoration Proposal

NEWS ALERT!!! Friday, January 30, 2009

In a surprising and welcome turnaround, the managers of the state-owned Ballona Wetlands preserve have withdrawn a $209 million proposal to let heavy equipment loose on the site in order to create their vision of a restored wetland.

The proposal was unveiled as the "preferred alternative" at a community meeting last September to almost unanimous disbelief and disagreement from the groups that have worked up to 30 years to save the wetlands from a developer's bulldozers. What is notable is that groups that have frequently disagreed about Ballona issues in the past, such as the Friends of Ballona Wetlands, Ballona Institute/Wetlands Action Network, and our group, BEEP, were united in our distaste for this plan.

The plan we all agreed went too far would have converted what is currently a bio-diverse area with 3 habitat types and hiking paths into almost exclusively open water with almost all one habitat type, salt marsh. While we at BEEP want to see more water brought into this site as part of a restoration plan, we feel this went too far.

To compare the State's proposal to what is there today, currently 29% of it is a salt marsh, 19% is a freshwater marsh, and 49% is an upland/grassland area that contains most of the hiking trails. The State's plan would have been 82% saltmarsh, 2% freshwater wetland and 16% upland. It's uncertain where the Ballona Creek bikepath would have been re-routed and it's most likely that, given that most of this area would be under water, most of our hiking trails would be gone.

There is no question that the wetlands have been altered by man in the past, such as by road construction and by the development of the Marina Del Rey yacht harbor which resulted in dumping up to 10 feet of wetland mud onto the north part of the wetlands. But despite all the damage done 50 years ago and more, Ballona has bounced back and some of the areas that were most heavily altered are covered with thickets of wetland and upland plants, providing nesting areas and hunting grounds for numerous kinds of wildlife.


The New Proposal unveiled on January 20th by Dr. Shelley Luce, executive director of the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission: does not convert the parcel east of Lincoln Blvd. from uplands/grasslands into a deep water marsh like in the previous plan. It also does not require that Lincoln Blvd. be completely rebuilt and elevated. To attempt such a change to this exceedingly busy highway would assuredly be a many-year traffic nightmare.

We have a lot more to say about why the planning process for the Ballona Wetlands went astray, and that will be posted soon. While this latest proposal may still go too far, as I've heard from some, and dig up too much of this site, we are glad that the State has recognized that the local Ballona community wanted something better for our wetland.


--Rex Frankel, director of the Ballona Ecosystem Education Project
-----------------------------------

BELOW: the September 2008 proposal from the State. (Click on image to enlarge)

I have added elevations above sea level to give an idea how much dirt would have to be removed in the State's proposals. The current elevation of the land north of Ballona Creek is around 15 feet, while the land south of Ballona creek is around 3 feet.

BELOW: the revised State restoration proposal unveiled in January 2009

BELOW: a restoration proposal drawn up by the Friends of Ballona Wetlands in September 2007

-------------------------------------------------
HERE IS MORE BACKGROUND ON THE STATE'S SEPTEMBER 2008 PROPOSALS:

To read the report summarizing the 5 proposals:

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/BallonaFeasSept2008_TxtFigsApp.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/BallonaFeasFIGS-Sept2008.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/BallonaFeasAPPENDIX_ABC-Sept2008.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/BallonaFeasSept2008_TxtFigsApp.pdf

To see maps of the proposals:

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/Draft_Alt1_Sept_2008.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/Draft_Alt2_Sept_2008.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/Draft_Alt3_Sept_2008.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/Draft_Alt4_Sept_2008.pdf

http://docs.ballonarestoration.org/Draft_Alt5_Sept_2008.pdf

TABLE COMPARING THE HABITAT-CONVERSION UNDER THE 5 ALTERNATIVES:

TYPE OF HABITAT	ACREAGE CURRENTLY	UNDER ALT. 1	ALT 2	ALT 3	ALT 4	ALT 5
ESTUARINE-SALTMARSH, PICKLEWEED, OPEN WATER	29%	41%	52%	78%	79%	82%
FRESHWATER: WILLOWS, MULEFAT, SEDGE GRASS	19%	4%	3%	3%	3%	2%
UPLANDS: HIKING TRAILS, SAGEBRUSH, WILDFLOWERS	49%	51%	41%	19%	18%	16%
OTHER: UNVEGETATED & BALLFIELDS	3%	2%	2%	2%	2%	0.1%

NOTE: Percentages here are computed based on the total land owned by the State that can be modified as part of the restoration project which is 579.8 acres. The percentages exclude the 39.8 acre Freshwater Marsh urban runoff basin that was constructed by Playa Vista on State lands and the 10.9 acre Southern California Gas Company facility.

-----------------------------

HOW CAN YOU TELL THE DIFFERENT HABITATS APART?

This is a freshwater wetland:

Cattails growing in the lowlands west of the Gas Company facility.

old Centinela Creek west of the Gas Company facility

Sedge, a type of grass in the lowlands near the Gas Co. facility

WHAT IS A SALTMARSH?

The wettest part of Ballona, the tidal channel south of Ballona Creek, surrounded by pickleweed and mud flats

The tidal channel on the far north side of Ballona, alongside Fiji Way

The confluence of tidally influenced salt water channels and the freshwater Centinela creek. The wood piers used to support the Pacific Electric Railway. This is next to the small businesses on Culver Blvd. in Playa del Rey.

This is the high salt marsh that exists on top of soil dumped from the construction of Marina Del Rey. The saltmarsh plants such as pickleweed and alkali heath and saltbush that survive here get their water from rainfall, not the ocean.

FINALLY, WHAT IS AN UPLAND?

An upland is typically anything above 5 foot elevation

Coyote Bush north of Culver Blvd., and east of Lincoln Blvd.

Thickets of laurel sumac and loop hiking trails north of Ballona creek and west of Lincoln Blvd.

Fragrant coastal sage brush growing on the bluffs

Purple-flowering bush lupine near the Villa Marina Condos

-
Tracking the Lost Streams of Ballona Creek

The report titled "Seeking Streams" was written and published in 2001 by students at Cal Poly Pomona, and is described as "A Landscape framework for urban and ecological revitalization in the upper Ballona Creek watershed of Los Angeles"

One of its authors, Jessica Hall, writes a blog here: http://lacreekfreak.wordpress.com/

Hall and BEEP's executive director Rex Frankel were also quoted extensively in

http://www.laweekly.com/news/the-lost-streams-of-los-angeles-2146181

published the fall of 2006.


Here is the Full Report:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5SGRAMv8RXuSnJMbDZCcUM2SUU/view?usp=sharing

high quality scan:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5SGRAMv8RXuSDNYcEkxbnFiR3M

Our 2008 Year-End Progress Report:

The 10th Anniversary of a Major Scoop and the Start of Big Successes in the Battle to Save the Ballona Wetlands

This is the Tenth Anniversary of the release of the Playa Vista company's 1998 secret business plan. Insiders in the development firm gave us this 198 page document that contains political strategy, what the owners paid for the land and what our public opposition was costing them, and the frank admission of how "generous" the City Council had been to them.

To read the full plan, click here:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5SGRAMv8RXuUWd1Tnk0bzY4cnM
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5SGRAMv8RXubFNIRTBSV0VkU2M

To read our analysis of the plan's contents, read here:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0138798/stories/2006/08/03/whistleblowersReleasePlayaVistaSecrets.html

Soon after we published excerpts of this report, Playa Vista's key tenant DreamWorks Pictures backed out of the project, after 4 years of public protest at their film premieres and a loss at the local Water Board when they sought to be exempted from financial liability for groundwater contamination at Playa Vista;

Read more here:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0138798/stories/2004/12/23/toxicWaste.html
http://radio.weblogs.com/0138798/stories/2006/08/03/september1999IssueOfSaveAllOfBallona.html

A year later, Patricia McPherson and her group the Grassroots Coalition discovered high levels of explosive methane gas underneath the proposed community for 20,000 people.

http://radio.weblogs.com/0138798/stories/2006/08/03/august2000IssueOfSaveAllOfBallona.html

also see: http://www.grassrootscoalition.org/

By 2001, Playa Vista began negotiations with the State of California to sell the Ballona Wetlands, taking the development of all the land west of Lincoln Blvd. off the table.

With the State's purchase of the wetlands in 2003, fully 70% of the original 1087 acre Playa Vista project was permanently preserved from development. Approximately 300 acres of the site has been developed or is in the process of being developed as part of the project's Phase 1. We were successful in 2007 in overturning the development plans for the remaining 110 acre Phase 2 site and with the election of friends at City Hall in 2005, we have excellent working relationships with L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and City Councilman Bill Rosendahl.

Read more about our legal efforts here:
http://ballona.blogspot.com/2007/09/playa-vista-loses-huge-case-to.html

Above and Below--two views of the Ballona Wetlands State Preserve


BELOW: The condominium development at Playa Vista. In the background is the remaining Phase 2 site which totals 110 acres. Can we preserve this land? Maybe 2009 will bring us another big victory!

---------------------------------------------------

Excerpts of the 1998 Playa Vista Business Plan:

Here are some of the most interesting pages; CLICK ON THEM TO ENLARGE:

"The site has issues of...poor soil conditions".
"The entitlements received for Phase 1 are generous"

WHAT WE HAVE ACCOMPLISHED IN 20 YEARS:
OPEN SPACES SAVED;
TRAFFIC DISASTER PREVENTED!

11/4/2008

When we first began fighting the onslaught of mega-developments that out-of-town builders were planning here, the threatened traffic gridlock would have been staggering. City planners told us the traffic on Lincoln Blvd/Highway 1 would DOUBLE. Traffic on the 405 Freeway, which is now a virtual parking lot, would increase by 28% from Playa Vista alone!

By working with our partners and friendly elected officials, we have scaled back what would have been a disaster to much more manageable growth. We didn't get all that we wanted, but, for example, we saved 2/3rds of the Playa Vista/Ballona Wetlands. We still have a chance to save another 10% of this site. We preserved blufftop trails and the Cabora Road trail system. And we cut the size or eliminated many of the other major projects: Fully 60% of the new car trips per day that were on the books in 1989 have been cancelled!

TABLE OF DEVELOPMENT-TRAFFIC PROPOSED IN OUR AREA IN 1989:

(the traffic totals come from an L.A. City Planning department report from 1989)

PROJECTS IN 1989	CAR TRIPS PER DAY	OUTCOME
LAX Northside and Continental City	72,705 37,000	Both Not Built due to changed LAX plans
LAX 55 Million annual passengers Expansion	18,950	18,950 trips (more growth was proposed in the late 1990's that was cancelled)
Howard Hughes Center	37,350	Around 30,000 trips completed
Playa Vista	200,000	Cut to 79,000 trips due to State Parkland Purchase; Only around 25,000 trips completed so far
Marina Marketplace (Gelsons)	18,293	18,293--completed
Marina Place Mall	34,699	Cut to around 10,000; now CostCo/Albertsons/Sav-On center
Corporate Pointe	12,859	Around 5,000 completed
Sepulveda/Slauson offices	13,914	cancelled
Santa Monica Commons	17,231	cancelled
Marina Del Rey redevelopment	25,056	Approved but mostly unbuilt
TOTALS	488,056	BUILT: 107,243 CANCELLED-REDUCED: 286,549 --------------------------------- REMAINING TO BE BUILT: 94,265 54,000 AT PLAYA VISTA, 25,056 IN MARINA DEL REY plus Hughes Center buildout of 4 remaining lots

SOME BACKGROUND:

In 1985, the City Council which was very-friendly with developers approved the "Big-4" super-sized developments which surrounded the communities of Westchester and Playa del Rey. The only concession offered by these developers was that they would pay to widen most of the major roads in this area to the width of a freeway--or 10 lanes across. What made the plan fall apart was the discovery in 1988, (after voters elected a new councilperson to represent us at city hall,) that the money promised to fix traffic problems was less than half of what was required. That meant that taxpayers would have to fork over $100 million to fix problems, while these developers stood to make billions in profits.

(Also, note that in the table above, traffic totals are for the entire day, while in the article below, traffic totals are for each rush hour. Normally, to convert rush hour car trips into daily trips, multiply by 10.)


City Cites 2 Highrise Projects Over Funding Shortfall

By Rex Frankel

(originally printed in the Westchester Journal September 29, 1988)

The traffic management plan created by former Councilwoman Pat Russell in 1985 was denounced by City officials and Russell's successor Ruth Galanter last Thursday as giving special favors to two local high rise projects, the Howard Hughes Center and Continental City. Galanter criticized the granting by Russell in 1986 of development agreements for the two projects which lock-in traffic improvement fees at one third that to be paid by all other new businesses.

Representing the City Dept. of Transportation, Haripal Vir said the Coastal Transportation Corridor Specific Plan (CTCSP) will come up about $100 million short of its target of raising $191 million for traffic improvements from developers of commercial and industrial projects in the area bounded by the San Diego Freeway, Santa Monica City limits, the Pacific Ocean and Imperial Highway. Vir told the approximately 50 audience members that "only a change in land use can ultimately balance the development and transportation infrastructure" in the area. Galanter agreed, stating that reducing densities of Westside building projects was the major issue in her successful campaign against Russell last year.

The traffic fund would pay for the widening of most non-residential streets in the area, including Lincoln and Sepulveda Blvds. The plan also recommends that Falmouth Avenue in Playa del Rey be continued north from the edge of the Bluffs to Admiralty Way in Marina Del Rey.

One audience member shouted that "the whole ordinance should be scrapped." Others didn't like the proposed continuation of Falmouth and the widening of Lincoln and Sepulveda, while others opposed elimination of parking along major streets and loss of local businesses to the proposed street widenings.

The $191 million figure was the estimated amount needed to widen local streets to accomodate the total buildout of all commercial and industrial property in the Westchester, Playa del Rey, Del Rey, Mar Vista and Venice areas to at least 3 to 1 density. (For comparison, building densities in Downtown L.A. average out to 3.5 to 1 density.) This buildout would have caused creation of 34,560 rush hour vehicle trips. The Hughes Center and Continental City projects will create 10,300 of these trips. Adding the 9800 trips planned by Playa Vista and the 7500 planned at the LAX Northside project--a total of 27,600 rush hour trips will be created by these 4 projects. High rise construction on Century Blvd. will add several thousand more trips.

Galanter criticized the approach used by Russell's CTCSP as saying that " 'any amount of growth is OK as long as we keep widening streets and improving intersections to handle it.' I don't accept it and I believe very few of my constituents do either."

Galanter told the crowd to expect more public hearings on the revisions to the CTCSP in early 1989.

The changes to the CTCSP recommended by the City Transportation Department are as follows:

1. Raise the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) fee charged developers of new commercial and industrial projects from $2112 to $5690 for each additional rush hour vehicle trip created. The 20-year development agreements enacted for the Hughes Center and Continental City by Russell lock in these fees at the lower level. The report recomends prohibiting the setting of these TIA fees in future development agreements.

2. Cut the amount of time to pay the fees from 20 to 10 years.

3. Make new local-serving commercial projects, such as markets and mini-malls, pay TIA fees at 30% of that charged the more-regional commercial projects, such as offices and hotels. The DOT report cites a study showing that 70% of the area's traffic passes through and only 30% is locally generated.

4. Require widening of streets or improvements to intersections before a building can be occupied.

5. Modify the concept of "in-lieu credits", which are traffic improvements paid for directly by the developer which theoretically benefit the surrounding community, too, and are credited against the TIA fee. Both the Howard Hughes Center and Continental City projects make extensive use of these credits, further cutting into the city's ability to raise the needed $191 million.

6. Find ways to make LAX pay TIA fees for its proposed expansion from handling 40 million annual passengers to 65 million.

7. The report also suggested making now-exempt residential developments pay TIA fees if they generate "significant" amounts of traffic.

------

State Unveils Restoration Plan for Ballona Wetlands to Extreme Alarm of the Folks Who Fought For Years to Save It;

They would reduce the relatively balanced three native habitat communities at Ballona down to almost entirely one type

And here's the contradiction: While we are told there isn't money to buy the remaining open spaces next to the wetlands that are threatened by developers, there is over $200 million to pay for bulldozing the wetlands?

Restoration By Bulldozer Is Not The Way to Go...

Dear Friends,

We have been informed by the State officials in charge of the restoration planning for the Ballona Wetlands that they favor the most habitat-altering proposals of the 5 that were unveiled in September. Alternative 5 is the plan which proposes dredging out over 90% of the 600 acre wetland/wildflower property, and it would replace what is there now almost entirely with an arm of the ocean. Gone would be the hiking trails, the little league fields, and almost all of the uplands that are now covered with sage brush and trees and the freshwater habitats.

I have posted some of the State's maps. Look at the map legend for the phrase "new habitat to be created" compared to the areas labeled "existing habitat to remain"; this shows how much of the land is to be dredged/bulldozed under each proposal.

The director of the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, Dr. Shelley Luce, informed me last week (Nov. 6th) that the EIR for the restoration will only consider Alternatives 4 and 5 and doing nothing at all. That ignores the more reasonable proposals that restored some of the wetlands while preserving existing trails and upland habitat.

-----------------
COMPARING THE PROPOSALS:

EXISTING: SALTMARSH/ESTUARINE: 27%
FRESHWATER MARSH: 18%
UPLANDS: 45%
OTHER: 11%

ALTERNATIVE 5: SALTMARSH/ESTUARINE 75%
FRESHWATER MARSH: 2%
UPLAND: 14%

OTHER: 8.5%

To view the 5 alternatives, here is a link to the State's website:

http://www.santamonicabay.org/smbay/ProgramsProjects/HabitatRestorationProject/BallonaWetlandsRestoration/tabid/149/Default.aspx

(click on the "documents" link)

ALTERNATIVE 4: COST $170 MILLION

ALTERNATIVE 5: COST $209 MILLION

ALTERNATIVE 2-- COST $61 MILLION

---------------------

HERE IS A TABLE OF THE COST ESTIMATES OF ALL 5 ALTERNATIVES:

-------------------

Here is our opinion of the Plan that was endorsed by the Restoration project's Science Advisory Committee:

Alternative 5 is an outlandish, over-reaching solution without a problem. There is very little that needs fixing at the Ballona Wetlands. We spent 20 years fighting to keep this land from being bulldozed and turned into condos and a yacht harbor. Now the State wants to bulldoze it and wipe out two of the three natural habitats at Ballona to turn it into an inland sea. The community loves Ballona because it is a remnant of the three habitats that were once common in Los Angeles: salt marsh, freshwater creeks and grass and wildflower-covered uplands ringed by hiking trails. All of these natural habitats are nearly extinct in L.A.

To massively bulldoze and dredge out 90% of this fragile nature preserve to create an almost exclusively saltwater-world-like amusement park ignores the needs of the community that has grown up around Ballona walking the trails and smelling the wildflowers. While it is essential to bring water back into the wetlands, it should not be done at the expense of our walking paths and the uplands which are the nesting areas for so many of the wetland wildlife. What might be a good plan for fish is bad for birds and lizards and butterflies. Alternative 5 is not a balanced plan but one that satisfies a very narrow interest. To preserve biological diversity and the remains of nature in L.A., we support a balanced habitat plan like in Alternatives 1 and 2.

Rex Frankel, the editor, and director of Ballona Ecosystem Education Project
-------------------

Here is an account of the Science Advisory Panel meeting by Marcia Hanscom, who directs the Ballona Institute (NOTE: I have posted Hanscom's email so our readers can hear the variety of views on this issue. While I agree that the proposal circulated by the State planning team goes too far, I can not vouch for the accuracy nor necesarily agree with how Hanscom characterizes the events of this meeting since I was not there. I have heard from some that disagree with her account of the meeting. I have asked the State and Agency officials mentioned in her message to respond, and if they do, I will post them.):

9/20/2008

Well, after the *majority* of the public (even Friends of Ballona Wetlands/Playa Vista attorneys - they are worried the birds at the freshwater marsh may not have enough upland habitat surrounding the area!) expressed grave dis-like for alternative #5, and expressed concern for the land to be PRESERVED and the wildlife RESPECTED at this Working Group meeting....The only ones who expressed strong support for this radical vision of #5 were Mark Abramson, formerly of Heal the Bay (who helped pick the Science Advisory Committee, which is mostly made up of former Rich Ambrose students - Ambrose being the one who has little clue about land and wetlands ecological processes, only marine ecology, which he focuses on without knowing the rest) and Isabelle Duvivier, who is on the payroll of the State Coastal Conservancy, so, of course, she supports what they are pushing.

The next day, after a 6-7 hour meeting of the "Science Advisory Committee" - which has long been stacked with those who John Hodder has described to well below (pro-engineering and ignorant of ecology) - voted unanimously to support Alternative #5. Sean Bergquist immediately turned to National Marine Fisheries Service rep, Bryant Chesney, with a "high 5" and a big smile for getting what they wanted, which is an extension of the Bay inland, instead of a respect of the wetlands ECOSYSTEM.There were a couple of good scientists who asked strong and valid questions, but they were pooh-poohed with non-answers by Rich Ambrose, Shelley Luce, Mary Small and Sean Bergquist, the leaders in what they are calling a "planning process." Even Michael Josselyn, who long worked for the Friends of Ballona Wetlands, said he could not support this plan without a lot of "caveats." In the end, he, Camm Swift and Wayne Ferren, while expressing grave concerns, agreed to go along, so they could stay involved with the process - which is clearly being taken over now by the Army Corps of Engineers.Bottom line? What is being touted as a more NATURAL, sinuous stream restoration, will be nothing of the kind. They will need to build curving levee WALLS around edges of their curvy, unnaturally-formed (but mimicking nature) tidal channels, and nearly all of the upland areas will be wiped out. At the end, there was a BIT of a concession made and it was said that MAYBE Area C will be "restored" to grasslands. It will still be good-bye to the Great Blue Heron as a nesting species at Ballona, good-bye to the White-tailed Kite and Northern Harrier, good-bye to California King Snake, California Ground Squirrel, Horned Lizard, and possibly even the endangered Belding's Savannah Sparrow - as the channel where they currently nest will also be dug up and re-made in the likeness of whatever these people think is best. Best for what? Seemingly it is water quality driving this project, even though we all voted and AGREED that Water Quality was NOT the consideration we wanted guiding this process, but rather ecological processes.When Rich Ambrose was asked by scientist Ken Schwartz - what will the impacts of these plans be on various species - Ambrose said "well, we don't have enough information on this. I've asked a student I have working on a list of species at Ballona, but it would just be he and I guessing" This is pathetic, both as an answer and as a huge mis- calculation and non-understanding of what is at stake here - and from the co-chair of this "Science Advisory Committee."

Roy, Edith Read, a woman from Heal the Bay, Kelly Rose (from Friends) and I were the only public members who attended this day-long SAC meeting. Sack the SAC! may be our rallying cry. The public was not allowed to talk until the very end of the meeting, well after the vote was taken. We had asked the night before to be able to speak BEFORE the vote, but we were denied by Mary Small, who is running this show for the State Coastal Conservancy.

If any of this disturbs you, I hope you will write to your Assemblymember, your State Senator, the LA City Councilmember for this area (Bill Rosendahl) and our LA Mayor, who helped buy this land to begin with. They would all be very disturbed to learn these things. And, send a copy to us, if you would.

take care, all ~~ Marcia Hanscom, Ballona Institute