Here is an editorial I was surprised and pleased to find in the Friday November 9, 2007 edition of The Daily Breeze.
___________________________________________
Election results yield Ponte Vista concerns
Housing development seemed to weigh on RPV and Lomita voters.
Daily Breeze editorial
Housing development seemed to weigh on RPV and Lomita voters.
In examining the results of Tuesday's local elections, one conclusion seems fairly evident: The proposed 1,950-unit Ponte Vista housing project in San Pedro looms as a potent issue for voters.
One interesting post-election analysis comes from the Web site www.pontevista.blogspot.com. The blog notes that the three winners in the City Council election in Rancho Palos Verdes had unified positions calling for continued R-1 zoning on the site. That zoning designation would likely keep the number of homes built on the site to between 430 and 700.
The three council incumbents - Tom Long, Douglas Stern and Steve Wolowicz - emerged victorious over two challengers, one of whom favored a Ponte Vista compromise that would include both single-family residences and multi-family development.
That's not to say Ponte Vista was the deciding issue in the Rancho Palos Verdes vote, but the development sits on a key Peninsula access route just outside Rancho Palos Verdes. Whatever gets built in that area will certainly have a bearing on traffic in the region.
In addition, Ponte Vista seemed to be on the minds of Lomita voters in their City Council election. Voters ousted incumbent Mark Waronek, who once did consulting work on behalf of Ponte Vista. The negative campaign waged against Waronek seemed to raise enough doubts in people's minds to elect challenger Ken Blackwood.
Like their neighbors in Rancho Palos Verdes, Lomita voters may also have worries about the project's potential effects on their city.
The election results follow the release in August of a report by a citizens advisory committee appointed by Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn. That panel opposed a 1,950-unit development, and a majority of its members favored R-1 zoning.
Certainly, the election results are not the last word on the Ponte Vista development. And granted, the countywide voter turnout on Tuesday was only 12.3 percent and may not reflect the thinking of all registered voters. (One can estimate the turnout in Rancho Palos Verdes to have been at least 22 percent.) But we suspect the numbers may cause other elected leaders to be circumspect before embracing a future political compromise for development in that area.
Certainly, the election results are not the last word on the Ponte Vista development. And granted, the countywide voter turnout on Tuesday was only 12.3 percent and may not reflect the thinking of all registered voters. (One can estimate the turnout in Rancho Palos Verdes to have been at least 22 percent.) But we suspect the numbers may cause other elected leaders to be circumspect before embracing a future political compromise for development in that area.
_____________________________________________
I wrote a comment on the newspaper's Web site that I think the number of voters in the "Eastview" area was most probably much less than the 22 percent suggested.
In the last R.P.V. City Council election, only 11% of the eligible voters bothered to cast ballots.
I do feel that voters higher on the hill and those in R.P.V. who are concerned about development at Ponte Vista and along Silver Spur Road, in Rolling Hills Estates, may have helped the fight against weapons of mass development.
It can also be suggested that supporters of Bob's current proposals will "poo-poo" the outcome of the elections in R.P.V. and Lomita, but I don't feel they want to realize that supporting such a large development in northwest San Pedro affects too many folks in all of the surrounding communities and San Pedro, and perhaps it is time for them to rethink their support for a project that is simply too large for OUR community.
2 comments:
It's a shame that the first RPV candidate to talk about the traffic issues with Ponte Vista, Paul Wright, came in fourth. The candidate most adamant about the project's impacts, Steve Wolowicz, did come in first by a good margin, but I don't remember the other two winners commenting about Ponte Vista, and Larry Clark is looking for a lobbyist position for after he is termed out.
Don Reeves definitely shot himself in the foot by supporting it, and Waronek's conflict of interest was a HUGE message!
Thanks anonymous 8:19.
Paul Wright and I are both members of the Rancho Palos Verdes Traffic Safety Commission and we both have very stong feelings and opinions about traffic and traffic safety in our city and OUR community.
Paul is also a retired member of the L.A.P.D. so I think his concerns about traffic come from a different perspective than the other candidates.
I have been able to provide R1 buttons to all three incumbents who won re-election and also to Dr. Peter Gardiner, a sitting councilmember. I have seen all four individuals wear the buttons and I have heard all of them talk about keeping Ponte Vista with its current zoning.
When L.A.U.S.D. had a meeting about building a 2,025-seat Senior High School on the Ponte Vista site, Steve Wolowicz spoke as a private citizen against putting such a large high school on Western Avenue.
With the efforts of Bob Bisno and his supporters AND the efforts of many of us who also oppose any high school at Ponte Vista, the L.A.U.S.D. blinked.
This is one area where both supporters of Bob's and opponents of Bob's plans to bring a giant weapon of mass development to OUR community, came together to fight L.A.U.S.D. I would like to feel that Steve's comments helped at least a little bit in changing the ideas about the proposed school.
MW
Post a Comment