Thursday, October 12, 2006

The Big Questions

I started a new Google Group several days ago with the first topic being, "The Big Questions."
I haven't seen any traffic with the group so I thought I would post the questions on this blog and see if that might stir up comments, discussions and visits to the Group page.

You are perfectly welcome to comment to this post with your answers. Please be respectful so I don't have to "moderate" the comments and limit everyone's chance to share their views.

And again, without further "adon't", "The Big Questions."

Should Mr. Bob Bisno be allowed to build 2,300 condominiums on 61.53 acres of land in northwest San Pedro?
If so, why?
If not, why not?

Should the Los Angeles Unified School District be allowed to use the right of eminent domain to acquire 15.03 acres of land now owned my Mr. Bisno to build a 2,025 seat senior high school?
If so, why?
If not, why not?

Should the L.A.U.S.D. work with Mr. Bisno to build a school suitable for both parties?

Should Mr. Bisno fight any and all attempts to place any school on property he now owns?

Would you be willing to start or join a group that supports or opposes Mr. Bisno and/or L.A.U.S.D.?

Do you feel that no matter what the public wishes, they have no real say in the final outcome of the site?
If so, why?
If not, why not?

If you said yes to the previous question, what would it take to convince you otherwise?
How might we all help to try to convince you otherwise?

These are the big questions and they should be the first discussed and debated.
I am on Ms. Janice Hahn's Community Advisory Committee and will not offer very strong opinions concerning these questions for the time being. This is a learning process for me and my fellow committee members. Answers to the questions I have posed will give us better insight to what the public, the folks we represent, think about the projects.

When the time comes for me to address the answers to the questions I have written, then I will.
I do not work for Mr. Bisno or the Bisno Development Corporation. I am not employed by any group within L.A.U.S.D. I am a private citizen and a resident of Rancho Palos Verdes, Ca.

Be well, and happy writing!

3 comments:

HarborHead said...

"Should Mr. Bob Bisno be allowed to build 2,300 condominiums on 61.53 acres of land in northwest San Pedro?"

No.

"If so, why?
If not, why not?"

NW San Pedro has been infested over the last 40 years with suburban sprawl. Intelligent people are finally waking up to the wastefulness of such sprawl (in terms of car trips, energy and resource usage, etc). With fossil fuels getting scarcer, global warming getting worse, and the last open space being paved over at an alarming rate, it's time to draw the line at any more sprawl.

"Should the Los Angeles Unified School District be allowed to use the right of eminent domain to acquire 15.03 acres of land now owned my Mr. Bisno to build a 2,025 seat senior high school?"

Undecided.

"If so, why?
If not, why not?"

I don't oppose the principle of school districts using ED to build schools, that's how it's been done for ages. But is there really a need for a new high school? Contrary to popular opinion, enrollment in LAUSD is actually going down. And if there is a need for a school, is that piece of property the best place for it? I'm not convinced in either case that the answer is yes.

"Should the L.A.U.S.D. work with Mr. Bisno to build a school suitable for both parties?"

As stated above, I am not convinced that a new school is needed in that spot. But if it were needed, why the heck should it be built to suit Robert Bisno?

"Should Mr. Bisno fight any and all attempts to place any school on property he now owns?"

To this question as stated, I would say no. But see above.

"Would you be willing to start or join a group that supports or opposes Mr. Bisno"

It's possible I would join one, but only if it came from an anti-sprawl principle. I would definitely NOT join one if it advocated, or were willing to settle for, R-1 type sprawl in place of Bisno type sprawl.

"and/or L.A.U.S.D.?"

No. It's just not an issue I'm passionate about.

"Do you feel that no matter what the public wishes, they have no real say in the final outcome of the site?"

Yes.

"If so, why?
If not, why not?"

San Pedro is part of Los Angeles, and Los Angeles politicians work for developers, not the public.

Can the public force some changes onto a developer's proposal, usually superficial ones? Yes...but if a developer wants to build in Los Angeles, he will be allowed to build. Period.

"If you said yes to the previous question, what would it take to convince you otherwise?"

A surgical operation removing the parts of my brain responsible for observation and long term memory.

"How might we all help to try to convince you otherwise?"

Apart from said surgery, to convince me otherwise, you would have to show me that the entire political structure of Los Angeles had somehow changed radically over the last 24 hours, with new political officeholders and appointees who have never taken campaign contributions from developers.

Anonymous said...

there should be no 2,300 unit ponte vista unless a dedicated light-rail line serving san pedro is installed, and a multi-level parking lot is placed in downtown pedro.

http://harborline.blogspot.com/

M Richards said...

To anonymous.
Great comment. I linked my blog to your blog and sent an email.
Thanks.
MW