Thursday, March 26, 2009

Ballona Restoration "Stakeholders" Meeting is Planned in April

-
Could the Ballona Wetlands Still Face Bulldozers?


By Rex Frankel
originally printed in the Culver City News, March 26, 2009

Numerous local residents fought for up to 30 years to save the westside’s Ballona Wetlands from the bulldozers of a developer. They won in 2003. So it was a shock to many when they learned last year that under the new owner, the State of California, the bulldozers and heavy equipment could return.

At issue here is what’s the best use of tax dollars: buying up more open spaces next to the wetlands or spending millions of dollars to fix the wetlands, which many who worked to save it say doesn’t need fixing.

The plan unveiled last September by the State’s managers of the land would have spent at least $209 million to dig out and remove most of the earth and trees and plants in the property in order to turn it into largely an inland arm of the ocean. That plan raised a howl from nature-lovers almost immediately and this forced the State’s bureaucracy to back off in January of 2009 and unveil a new plan. They are now promising to bring the public back into the planning process at a meeting this April to decide the future of the largest remaining coastal wetlands in Los Angeles County. (to see the State’s website, go to http://ballonarestoration.org)

The Ballona Wetlands Ecological Preserve is around a square mile in size and sits between the communities of Marina Del Rey, Playa del Rey, Westchester and Del Rey in what was once the floodplain of Ballona Creek. While a lot of the natural wonders of this land may not be visible when you are driving through it on Lincoln or Culver Blvd., a short walk on its trails may lead to a field of colorful wildflowers, a thicket of willow trees, mounds of minty smelling sagebrush and critters like lizards, frogs, jackrabbits and birds ranging from tiny to 4 feet tall.

Whether it was the State’s budget crisis or the threat of lawsuits and political battles that made State officials change their minds, for the next few years, at least, little is going to change at the beloved Ballona Wetlands.

What had seemed like a project on the fast train has been slowed way down by the State's budget crisis, but also by the community's response to the mega-dredging plan. Last month, Dr. Shelley Luce, the director of the State’s Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission and a key player in the project unveiled a new plan that preserved more of the higher elevation habitat, the upland/grassland/sagebrush area, especially the zone east of Lincoln Blvd.

There was "definitely a consensus that more uplands were needed", she said in an interview last month. Uplands are considered by scientists to be an essential part of wetlands as they provide the dry nesting areas for the wildlife which then hunts for food in the wetter lands. In response to the concerns of many that the State had unilaterally made a final decision, Luce said that even the latest plan unveiled in January is still "a work in progress". In fact, while it may not have been communicated clearly to the public last September, Dr. Luce says that it was always the State's intention that the plans were going to be modified after further review by the public. When the plan was first unveiled at a public meeting at Loyola Marymount University last September, critics immediately cried foul. “You don’t even know what is on the land,” said local wildlife photographer Jonathan Coffin, who has a website on flickr.com called “stonebird” with shots of birds, plants and animals that have been missed in the State’s official lists of likely occupants of the wetlands. In response to this, Luce agreed that "What is missing is a comprehensive survey of what is on the land".


WHAT’S ON THE LAND

In a noisy and busy urban environment like Los Angeles, there were many reasons to save this last intact piece of nature. Some come here to watch 350 types of birds. Some come to hike in a quiet refuge from the loud city. Others need a place to walk their dogs or ride their mountain bikes.

But the Ballona wetlands are a lot different than when man first arrived here. Instead of a delta-like region with many channels and sand bars and islands, full of the rainfall draining from Hollywood to the coast, Ballona today is much drier and the main source of water comes from the sky, a spring in the hillside near Loyola Marymount University, and from the ocean through a few remaining channels that were once part of the larger Centinela Creek.

During the last century when Los Angeles was paved over into a 100 mile metropolis, wetlands and creeks were dumped with trash and disparaged as “waste” lands and a nuisance and breeding ground for mosquitos. Beginning around 1905, the community of Venice was reclaimed from the north Ballona wetlands and a system of canals were dug to carry away water and also provide a lagoon for small boats called gondolas, much like the city of Venice in Italy. In the 1930’s the federal government sought to make the surrounding low-lying areas safe from flooding, and so they largely dried up the remaining Ballona Wetlands by confining Ballona Creek to a concrete channel running through the middle of the marsh and heading straight to the ocean. In the late 1950’s, another section of the wetlands was dug out into a yacht harbor and named Marina Del Rey. Construction of the Marina also brought a lot of damage to the wetland to the south as it was overrun with heavy equipment and used as a dumping ground for excess mud dug from the harbor channel. By the late 1970’s, only about 1/3rd of the original wetlands remained unpaved and it was in the hands of one owner, the estate of the quirky billionaire Howard Hughes, who in the 1940’s had bought up much of the wetlands plus dry land in the floodplain to the east for his company, Hughes Aircraft.

By the 1980’s, development plans for a project called “Playa Vista” were floated proposing to pave over 90% of Hughes’ land and carve out another yacht harbor, adding a golf course and 13,000 condominiums and numerous high-rise office buildings and a massive shopping center. After over 20 years of lawsuits by environmental groups over traffic jams and wildlife loss, including the political intrigue of one of L.A.’s most powerful politicians, the City Council’s president Pat Russell, getting voted out of office by angry constituents in 1987, the public now owns 600 acres, which is around 2/3rds of the former Hughes property.

The State spent a total of $225 million to buy this land with the first part of 73 acres acquired in 1988 and the rest in 2003.


WHAT TO DO WITH IT?

So what do you do with this land that is loved by birdwatchers and hikers, bikers and little leaguers?

In the opinion of the new managers of the wetlands at the State’s Coastal Conservancy and Department of Fish and Game, using massive earth-moving equipment and carving or “dredging” (as it’s called) out an almost all water “estuary” is the right way to go. At a cost of at least $209 million from taxpayers, their plan unveiled last fall would have converted the property into nearly all wetlands. The property now is around half salt and freshwater wetlands and half drier “uplands”, which are home to the wildflowers, sagebrush and hiking trails,.

Seeing this plan, 3 groups that had previously fought with each other over the development plans, with opposing strategies, such as “should we work with the developer?” or “should we sue them?”, all agreed that the State plan was too much. All of these former adversaries, which are the Friends of Ballona Wetlands, the Ballona Ecosystem Education Project, and the Balllona Institute agreed that the uplands and hiking trails were valuable and should not be eliminated.

As John Hodder, a biologist who has worked on wetland and upland habitat restoration projects and heads a group called California Wetland Research, explained, there are two ways to go when doing a restoration. The way which was chosen by the State planners is for maximum “biological productivity” and as the thinking goes, the wetter the habitat, the more life that can grow there. This approach favors ocean life and the wide numbers of animals that live there. The other approach is “maximum biodiversity” in which the existing three types of natural habitats at Ballona, all of which are rare in Los Angeles, would be preserved and enhanced. This would maintain the wide range of both common and endangered wildlife and plants in the saltmarsh, which are distinct from the freshwater marsh and distinct from the uplands, too.

Kathy Knight believes that “we should do nothing but pull weeds for the next hundred years.” Knight is a board member of the Ballona Ecosystem Education Project, which filed an unsuccessful lawsuit over the 1st part of the Playa Vista development plans in 1993 and halted the second and final portion in 2007. Knight agrees with Betsy Landis, a leader in the L.A. chapter of the California Native Plant Society, who wrote in their newsletter, “Let Ballona back in to flush the marsh area, but do no dredging. The best answer—let Nature do the work.”

An opposite opinion is held by Dr. Shelley Luce of the Bay Restoration Commission, who formerly worked as a marine biologist for the Heal the Bay group. As a member of a science advisory committee for the wetland project who was appointed by the State project managers, Luce strongly favored the plan unveiled last fall. Luce feels that “50 years of vegetation” that grew up after the construction of Marina Del Rey on the north portion of the remaining wetlands can be removed since the State’s plan would replace it with something more like what was historically there.

Choosing to be historically accurate and removing much of what is there now, however, really upsets those who like Ballona exactly as it is. Marcia Hanscom with the Ballona Institute thinks that if taxpayers provide the money, the priority should be to buy up other parcels of natural open space on the periphery of the wetlands. She points to two parcels totaling 5 acres near the original mouth of Ballona Creek at the ocean in Playa del Rey that are targeted by their owners for condominium development. Her group, as well as another called the Ballona Network have a list of smaller parcels on all sides of the State preserve that they feel would make excellent additions. After the State committee made its final recommendation in last September, Hanscom wrote in an email to activists “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.”

As local activists frame it, the choice is between adding more currently threatened open spaces to L.A.’s meager supply of green spaces, versus spending the money re-arranging land that is already saved for which no consensus has been reached on what is the best way to do it. Or as activist Kathy Knight says, “The wetlands will always be here—what’s the rush?”

-----------------------
Rex Frankel writes about various public policy issues at http://rexfrankel.com, and about the Ballona issue at http://ballona-news.blogspot.com .

Monday, March 16, 2009

Sea-Level Rise may save our wetlands yet...

-
Could Playa Vista Become an Island? Local Area is under Heavy Risk of Future Flooding; State-Funded Study Projects 4 & 1/2 Foot Rise in Sea Level by Year 2100


first reported 3/12/2009

http://www.pacinst.org/reports/sea_level_rise/exec_sum.pdf


funded by the California Energy Commission, the California Environmental Protection Agency, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, California Department of Transportation, and the California Ocean Protection Council

Over the past century, sea level has risen nearly eight inches along the California coast, and general circulation model scenarios suggest very substantial increases in sea level as a significant impact of climate change over the coming century. This study includes a detailed analysis of the current population, infrastructure, and property at risk from projected sea‐level rise if no actions are taken to protect the coast, and the cost of building structural measures to reduce that risk. We find the following:

• Under medium to medium‐high greenhouse‐gas emissions scenarios, mean sea level along the California coast is projected to rise from 1.0 to 1.4 meters (m) by the year 2100. A series of maps for the entire coast of California demonstrating the extent of the areas at risk are posted at http://pacinst.org/reports/sea_level_rise

• A 1.4 meter sea‐level rise will put 480,000 people at risk of a 100‐year flood event, given today’s population. Populations in San Mateo and Orange Counties are especially vulnerable. In each, an estimated 110,000 people are at risk. Large numbers of residents (66,000) in Alameda County are also at risk.


To read the report:

http://www.pacinst.org/reports/sea_level_rise/maps/

(click on map to enlarge)

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-global-warming-searise12-2009mar12,0,2741152.story

The group floated several radical proposals: limit coastal development in areas at risk from sea rise; consider phased abandonment of certain areas; halt federally subsidized insurance for property likely to be inundated; and require coastal structures to be built to adapt to climate change...

Ice sheet melting has since accelerated. Dan Cayan, a researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and a lead scientist on the state's action plan, said the 55-inch estimate in the report is "probably conservative. . . . As temperature climbs, melting is going to proceed at a greater pace. It is not necessarily going to proceed linearly, in the same proportion as it did in the past, because melting begets more melting."

Friday, February 20, 2009

State's scary plan for Ballona is not set in stone

-
The Ballona Restoration Plan is still "a work in progress"
...

by Rex Frankel

2/20/2009--I had the pleasure to meet on Feb. 17th with Dr. Shelley Luce, who is executive director of the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission. She served on the Science Advisory Panel for the Ballona Wetlands restoration project and is one of two local public employees along with Sean Bergquist that are based here and who work extensively on the restoration of our 600 acre Ballona Wetlands State Preserve. The Commission's offices are at Loyola Marymount University located on the bluffs in Westchester, as opposed to the State agency overseeing the show, the Coastal Conservancy, which is based in Oakland.

I met with Dr. Luce to explain my organization's objections to the State plan unveiled last September that would have dredged out nearly the entire 600 acres and converted it into mostly open water, as opposed to the current delicate mix of three habitat zones and hiking trails.

What had seemed like a project on the fast train has been slowed way down by the State's budget crisis, but also by the community's response to the mega-dredging plan. Last month, Dr. Luce unveiled a new plan that preserved more of the higher elevation habitat, the upland/grassland/sagebrush area, especially the zone east of Lincoln Blvd.

There was "definitely a consensus that more uplands were needed", she told me. In response to the concerns of many that the State had unilaterally made a final decision, Luce said that even the latest plan unveiled last month is still "a work in progress". In fact, while it may not have been communicated clearly to us last September, Dr. Luce says that it was always the State's intention that the plans were going to be modified after further review by the public.

We both agreed that the public meetings to involve the community back into the planning process need to resume. I see the end of local public meetings as when the whole process went awry. During 2007 and 2008, these meetings which were originally every 1 or 2 months soon became every six months. The Science Advisory Committee which ultimately made their final decision last September to endorse the mega-dredging plan had several 7 hour meetings in Costa Mesa, 30 miles away, and public comment was limited to the end of these long meetings. Whether this was intentional or due to budget cuts, the outcome didn't make any longtime Ballona activists happy.

We had a long talk about sources of water for the restoration, whether from the ocean or from the ocean and Ballona Creek. I suggested that we need a "modular" approach to planning the restoration, since it may be many years before the urban street runoff pollution in Ballona Creek is cleaned-up, and therefore, any plan that includes breaching the levees and letting the Creek back into the rest of the wetlands could have the negative effect of polluting the wetlands. That's why I favor bringing water back into the wetlands directly from the ocean. If someday we can clean up Ballona Creek than we can re-connect the creek and the wetlands. But basing the future of our wetland preserve on some other project that may or may not also happen could make us wait many years until anything changes at Ballona. Now, while some locals would rather that nothing changes at the wetlands unless it is done by hand or with shovels, (a position that is equally justifiable) I could support bringing some more water into our wetlands.

In response to the calls of many, especially local Ballona wildlife tracker/photographer Jonathon Coffin, Luce agreed that "What is missing is a comprehensive survey of what is on the land".

I agree with the calls of many that there is no rush to restore our Ballona wetlands. The maxim of "do no harm" needs to be followed here. We need to restore Ballona solely for what is best for all the wildlife of Ballona and all the respectful users of this land.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

more corporate welfare for Playa Vista?

-
Playa Vista Seeks $300 Million "Gift" from the People of Los Angeles via Massive Increase in What they're Allowed Build.

They seek OK for their Last Phase--the same project we overturned in 2007.

--Meanwhile, L.A. Residents Face the First Mandatory Water Restrictions in 20 Years

"Under the plan adopted in principle by the governing board of the L.A. Department of Water and Power, homes and businesses would pay a penalty rate -- nearly double normal prices -- for any water they use in excess of a reduced monthly allowance."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090218/ts_nm/us_water_california
---------------------


PLAYA VISTA: Concerns are reviewed a year after work on community was stopped when first study found flaws.

2/17/2009, Daily Breeze
http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_11719782
By Kristin S. Agostoni, Staff Writer

More than a year after a court ruling halted Playa Vista's second phase, developers of the master-planned community are hoping a new environmental study will move the project closer toward completion.

Since an appellate court ruled in September 2007 that an analysis for the so-called Village contained flaws, the land targeted for shops, homes and offices off Jefferson Boulevard has sat dormant and mostly vacant.

The grading is nearly complete and half of the roads have been put into place, but the court issued a stop-work order until a handful of disputed land-use issues were reviewed.

Now those issues are being hashed out in a revised environmental impact report that will trigger a new collection of city approvals.

Residents have until March 16 to submit comments on the "recirculated" EIR, which analyzes a development identical to the earlier one - with 2,600 homes, 175,000 square feet of office space, 150,000 square feet of retail and 40,000 square feet of community uses.

"We're moving forward with the plan that was approved by the City Council for The Village," said Playa Vista spokesman Steve Sugerman, adding that officials and residents are anxious to move on. "The court was pretty specific that all of the other areas (of the original EIR) were fine," he said.

The battle over The Village began not long after the council approved the project in September 2004.

Opponents, including the city of Santa Monica, the Surfrider Foundation, representatives of the Tongva/Gabrieleno Indians and groups dedicated to preserving the nearby Ballona Wetlands, said in two separate lawsuits that the environmental impact report was flawed.

In January 2006, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge had ruled that the city and Playa Vista provided the public and decision-makers with adequate information.

But the appellate court, which consolidated the cases and reviewed more than two dozen issues raised by opponents, singled out three "deficiencies."

The judges questioned the analysis of the project's effects on the Hyperion wastewater treatment plant, the treatment of human remains and artifacts dating back 3,500 years, and whether the city accurately described permitted land uses for the site.

On the latter issue, the court ruled that the EIR did not acknowledge that the proposed retail complex would "dramatically increase the amount of development permissible" on the property spanning 111 acres. Therefore, Playa Vista is required to seek a collection of land-use amendments.

Rex Frankel of the Ballona Ecosystem Education Project, one of the groups that sued, said he was pleased to see the new report acknowledge that the proposed land uses go beyond what is permitted - 108,050 square feet of office and light industrial space.

But Frankel also said he wants the analysis to include alternative plans that would adhere to the lower zoning threshold.

A community retail center still could be built, he said, but he'd like to see consideration given to other uses for the surrounding property, such as park space or a treatment wetland.

"The city has a lot of leverage right now to decide what is appropriate on this land," Frankel said. "We should have an honest discussion in an EIR. If you tell the truth, then the public at least knows we don't have to accept this project."

As for the treatment of Indian remains in the area, it's unclear what, if anything, will come from the revised report.

The area where most of the remains were discovered is now occupied by a drainage channel that was approved as part of Playa Vista's first phase and runs behind the land reserved for The Village. And as of December, the majority of the remains unearthed from the area have been reinterred nearby.

While opponents argued Playa Vista could have shifted the course of the channel to avoid a major burial site, the revised EIR states that "impacts to archeological resources would still have occurred" in four alternatives considered and that the channel might not operate as effectively.

On the Hyperion issue, the EIR says that new data indicates "there is less demand on the city's wastewater collection and treatment system than previously projected," and that the city has conducted studies on expansion plans, if needed, after 2020.

Sugerman said officials hope the City Council will reconsider the EIR this summer, and that construction would begin in mid-2010.


FIND OUT MORE

Los Angeles city planners are accepting comments on a revised environmental impact report for The Village at Playa Vista through March 16.

Submit comments to David Somers, Los Angeles City Planning Department, Room 750, City Hall, 200 N. Spring St., Los Angeles, 90012, or e-mail david.somers@lacity.org. Reference file

No. ENV-2002-6129-EIR.

Review the report at http://cityplanning.lacity.org/ (the link is under the "environmental" section, then click on Draft EIRs), or at these libraries: Playa Vista branch, 6400 Playa Vista Drive; Westchester/Loyola Village branch, 7114 W. Manchester Ave.; and the Marina del Rey library,

4533 Admiralty Way.

To buy a copy, call 213-978-1355.




Monday, February 16, 2009

-
If You Support Unpaving Ballona Creek , its Buried Streams and Filled-In Wetlands -- Come to this Public Workshop Held by the L.A. City Sanitation Department


INVITATION FOR STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP: March 3, 2009, at Hyperion treatment Plant in Playa del Rey

TIME/DATE: March 3, 2009 from 1:00 to 3:30 pm Hyperion Treatment Plant, Conference Room 116 12000 Vista Del Mar, Playa Del Rey , CA , 90293

DEVELOPMENT OF TMDL IMPLEMENTATION PLANS IN THE BALLONA CREEK WATERSHED: WORKSHOP II

Dear Stakeholders: On behalf of the Ballona Creek watershed cities and agencies, Dr. Shahram Kharaghani (Division Manager of the Watershed Protection Division, City of Los Angeles ) would like to request your participation as a stakeholder in the second Implementation Plan Development Workshop for the Bacteria, Metals and Toxics TMDLs in the Ballona Creek watershed. These Implementation Plans will be developed over the next 2 years and have the overall goal of reducing urban runoff pollution to comply with TMDL requirements for the Ballona Creek watershed. More specific goals of the Implementation Plans are the following: . Identify pollution hot spots and prioritize the drainage areas to be addressed; and . Identify Best Management Practices for reducing pollution by urban runoff and select and verify potential locations for implementation. The TMDL Implementation Plans will be completed in 2009 (Bacteria TMDL), 2010 (Metals TMDL) or 2011 (Toxics TMDL). Several stakeholder workshops will be scheduled to support this process. The first workshop was held on November 6, 2008 and focused on the initial characterization of the Ballona Creek watershed.

This second workshop will focus on the next steps:

. BMP types and process selection
. Breakout sessions focusing on specific areas of the watershed

Your participation as a stakeholder is important to provide input to the development of the Implementation Plans.

For more information and to RSVP please contact Ida Meisami at, Ida.Meisami.Fard@lacity.org or (213) 485-3999. Please RSVP by February 19, 2009 with your name and the number of guests that will be in attendance.


THIS BALLONA NEWSPAGE IS THE PROPERTY OF Ballona Ecosystem Education Project, (BEEP), a project of MOUNT REXMORE PROGRESSIVE RESOURCE CENTER, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, AND IT IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS CONTENT. FOR BEEP'S MAIN WEBSITE, CLICK HERE: SaveAllofBallona.org