RPV Neighbors Sue City Over Church Modernization

The Daily Breeze reports:

A coalition of homeowners who oppose the planned expansion of a Catholic church in Rancho Palos Verdes has sued the city for approving the project earlier this year.

The Archdiocese of Los Angeles is also a target of the lawsuit, which alleges the city failed to comply with state environmental law by approving the expansion of St. John Fisher Catholic Church without conducting a thorough review of the project.

"We think our City Council made a very serious mistake that has a negative impact on us with respect to this project, but also on this entire community. We think (the approval) was contrary to California law and a very bad precedent," said Mark Easton, a member of the group suing the city.

I for one am disappointed that litigation has been resorted to as a tool to overturn the legitimate and well-supported planning decisions of our city.

Ponte Vista prepares to re-tool development

The Contra Costa Times reports:

With Bob Bisno out of the picture, developers of the proposed Ponte Vista housing project in San Pedro say they are ready to launch a new push to find community consensus on a revised plan.

The 1,950-home development has been in limbo since late last year when Bisno, the head of the development team, was asked to step down.

Ted Fentin of Credit Suisse, Bisno's largest investor, is taking the lead in a move to find a compromise the community will accept.

"(He) is committed to working with you in developing a revised plan," development spokeswoman Elise Swanson told members of the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council on Monday night. "There is a spirit of cooperation. We are moving forward with community outreach."

The project, likely in a revised form, is tentatively scheduled to go before the Los Angeles Planning Commission on April 9.

Trump omitted some facts

From Wednesday's Letters to the Editor, a letter from RPV Councilman Doug Stern:

Trump omitted some facts

The Daily Breeze reported that Donald Trump had sued the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, claiming that it had required too much geological review of portions of the Trump National Golf Course after the infamous 18th-hole landslide. Trump was apparently not happy with the Dec. 19 Daily Breeze article written by staff writer Nick Green, titled "Trump sues RPV for $100M." So he sent his response as a letter to the editor, chastising Green for "omitting" facts that Trump thought important. According to Trump, "As usual, your reporter, Nick Green, who is absolutely terrible, misstated the facts."

But Trump also forgot to mention a rather important fact himself.

Trump agreed (first in 2003, restated in 2004) to resolve all geologic disputes through a three-person panel of geologic experts, and to be bound by those decisions. The agreement states: "The Panel shall resolve disagreements between city's geological and geotechnical experts and the experts that are performing work on behalf of developer.

"City and developer agree not to restrict the areas that the panel may explore to make such determination and to defer to the judgment of the panel with respect to what additional geologic studies and tests, if any, should be conducted in order to permit such residential development.

"The parties hereby acknowledge that the panel is being retained to resolve differences between the respective geological/geotechnical experts retained by the parties in order to allow developer to complete the development of the project.

"City and developer hereby covenant and agree that any decisions and recommendations rendered by the panel shall be binding on both city and developer." Rancho Palos Verdes has complied with the agreement and accepted the determinations of the panel.

Yet Trump is now suing Rancho Palos Verdes and some of the geologic panel members as a result of the determinations of that agreed-upon panel of experts. He is claiming that the panel of experts that evaluated the geology, determined the necessary geologic analysis and directed that those tests be conducted required too much of him. So much for agreeing to be bound by the determinations of the panel.

- DOUGLAS W. STERN

Planners reject Ponte Vista map

Lost during yesterday's exciting and historic election news coverage was an important news story regarding the Ponte Vista development in San Pedro. I have pasted a story from the Daily Breeze below. I have deep concerns regarding this development and its impact on our city and I plan on watching the project closely.

Planners reject Ponte Vista map
By Donna Littlejohn, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 11/04/2008 09:01:42 PM PST

City planners on Tuesday denied the tract map plan for San Pedro's proposed Ponte Vista housing development, boosting opponents' hopes that the project itself will also be struck down later this month.

Two more recommendations are expected by the end of the month, including the most important one that considers the project itself.

The tract map - only a technical piece of the decision that allows the 61.5-acre property to be divided for multifamily homes - can later be approved should the city decide to greenlight the overall project.

"We still have a pending application for a plan amendment and the specific plan that will go to the (Los Angeles) Planning Commission in December," said senior planner Jim Tokunaga.

Although the denial doesn't necessarily forecast complete project rejection, Ponte Vista proponents said they are anticipating that developer Bob Bisno will ultimately downsize the project to about 1,700 units.

"We don't necessarily expect (the city) to approve the project as originally proposed," said Allan Abshez, Ponte Vista's land use attorney. "But what we're expecting is that the Planning Department will recognize the many benefits and the logic of the proposal we made."

Opponents, however, believe the tract map denial could signal the city's intent to turn down the proposal altogether when its subsequent recommendation is released, expected as early as next week. They cited sections in the opinion

that quoted from the community plan that restricts the property at 26900 S. Western Ave. to its current single-family zoning.

"No matter how you slice it, this isn't good for (Bob) Bisno," said Doug Epperhart of the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council.

"The fight's not over," said Pat Nave of the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council. "But this is good news. They found that it wasn't consistent with the general (community) plan."

Tokunaga said the tract map denial does not not necessarily mean the project will be turned down.

"If the specific plan (for Ponte Visa) is approved, then the (planning) commission could grant the appeal" of the rejection, he said.

"So there is some comfort in it (for opponents), but they shouldn't rule out" a project approval, he said.

The project is slated to go before the Harbor Area Planning Commission on Nov. 18 for comments only, although neighborhood council activists have asked the city attorney for a ruling on whether some members should recuse themselves. No decision will be made at that meeting.

The matter is then slated to go before the city's Planning Commission on Dec. 13.

Ponte Vista has been one of the most hotly debated issues in San Pedro. Originally proposed more than three years ago as a 2,300-home development, it quickly became a lightning rod for residents tired of increasing density and congestion along Western Avenue.

After a hearing in June, city planners have been preparing to make their formal staff recommendation.


What: The Harbor Area Planning Commission will hear a presentation on the Ponte Vista housing development.

When: 4:30 p.m. Nov. 18.

Where: Harbor Department Administration Building, 425 S. Palos Verdes St.

Information: 310-732-4515.