Thursday, May 10, 2007

May 10 CAC meeting

Finally the guys for the Department of Transportation (DOT) were able to come back and provide some facts and figures that most folks could understand.

One of the central issues is Bob's use of the "High-rise Condominium Average" for trip generation versus the "Condominium and Town House Average" for trip generation figures.

Jay, the manager of the section doing the Ponte Vista traffic studies finally told the group that it is his opinion that, the "High-rise Condominium Average" was "questionable" as it relates to the Ponte Vista development and that the "Condominium and Town House Average" would be a better determiner of what the true daily traffic counts from Ponte Vista might actually be if Bob's current plans are approved.

Another point that should be made first is that the weekday trip generation number in the DEIR of 9,212 added vehicle trips on Western Avenue, from residents of Ponte Vista, is actually lower that the most recent traffic counts would predict it would be. The newer number of added daily trips generated by vehicles of residents of Ponte Vista, using the "High-rise Condominium Average" is now at 9,355. It is a small increase, but it is a documented increase.

Now, according to the newest predictions by the members of DOT, using the "Condominium and Town House Average, for added vehicle trips, per day, by residents of Ponte Vista, the 2 ball fields, and Mary Star traffic jumps to 12,253!

So in a sense, the DOT personnell used their opinion skills and reasoning to state they believe the 12,253 added vehicle trips per day by residents of Ponte Vista, 2 ball fields, and the Mary Star school, should be considered by the CAC when thinking about any and all recommendations.

Furthermore, the adden number creates an approximately 32% increase in projected vehicle traffic, and by the Level of Service indicators for intersections, these added trips could not possibly be mitigated by anyone, anywhere, anyhow, anytime, on Western Avenue as it now stands.

To put it bluntly, DOT's opinion is that the more reliable information predicts that Bob Bisno could not provide enough mitigation for a 2,300-unit development.

This is big news as far as DOT is concerned. Jay went public with his opinion as a manager within DOT that the figures previously used to determine trip generation were not reliable enough in this instance.

Rod Hamilton of LAUSD spoke for a bit about their plans to build an 810-seat senior high school right about where Bob wants to build his Senior Housing section.

What Rod did not say was that LAUSD was allowed by court order to proceed onto the Ponte Vista site to do sampling, but for only one day. Bob Bisno went back into court and is appealing to the state Supreme Court to have LAUSD barred from the Ponte Vista site.

It is still Bob and my belief that there is no reason to build any school on any part of the Ponte Vista site.

Rod told me they are still considering one site in Lomita and three sites in Harbor City and Harbor Gateway where residential property would not have to be taken for a school site.

Now for the big news. Yours truly got up to speak to the CAC and advised them to ask Gordon Teuber, Janice Hahn's deputy, to get the exact quote she used at the Pallisades HOA meeting.
I didn't want to tell them what Janice said, because in court it would have been heresay, but they all seemed to want me to tell them what Ms. Hahn had said, and with Gordon looking on, here is what I wrote down as what Councilwoman Janice Hahn said:

"I (Janice Hahn) have seen no reason, or have been convinced at this time, to change the current zoning of R1 at Ponte Vista."

Gordon Teuber, Janice's deputy confirmed what I told the CAC was the truth about what Janice had said.

I must admit, more than a few of us were surprised to hear what she had said to a group during a meeting. The CAC has been meeting since last August and they hadn't even really started with recommendations about the density they might consider for the Ponte Vista site. I think as I limped back to my chair you could have heard a pin drop on the carpet.

I haven't thought too much about what I or anyone else, not on the CAC should do with this new information. What should we all think about Ms. Hahn's recent comment? Does this mean the CAC has its inferred marching orders? What will supporters of Bob's current plans think about this news and how might they comment on them?

Bob has still not changed his original plans one bit, up to this point. What might it take for him to actually start talking about numbers other than 2,300 units?

Janice Hahn stated from the very beginning that she wouldn't tolerate 2,300-units at Ponte Vista. Janice Hahn created an advisory committee to help her decide what should be built at Ponte Vista. Apparently since last August, the CAC's work has aided Ms. Hahn's view that she currently has, whether they knew it or not.

I hope for lots of debate and real discussions on this new news. I feel there will be folks on both ends of the arguments that do not trust politicans and don't believe Ms. Hahn meant what she said. Still others will object to her earlier-than-expected statement. Still others will applaud her comments.

Anyway you look at it, Bob's current plans seem stuck with Bob and only some of his supporters. Even at tonight's meeting I talked to several folks wearing the yellow "I support Ponte Vista" stickers who are calling for compromise. Might their unheaded calls become even more ignored by Bob as he fights for his "too big" project?

If the groundswell for R1 keeps growing, Ponte Vista "supporters" call for compromise, Bob's intransigence continues, and Ms Hahn continues to believe what she commented on, then who needs to move? It looks like Bob had the chance to move and he decided to hold firm, probably for a bit too long.

What more will it take for Bob and his supporters to become reasonable, realistic, responsible, and respectful to OUR community? It looks like the bell has rung, and Bob Bisno, your time is up!


Anonymous said...

" approximately 32% increase in projected vehicle traffic... these added trips could not possibly be mitigated by anyone, anywhere, anyhow, anytime, on Western Avenue as it now stands.

To put it bluntly, DOT's opinion is that the more reliable information predicts that Bob Bisno could not provide enough mitigation for a 2,300-unit development."

This says it all. R-1 must be maintained.

Anonymous said...