Friday, August 01, 2008

Odds and Ends 76

In the most recent edition of San Pedro Magazine published by young Mr. Josh Stecker, a column appears authored by Ms. Yolanda Valle-Sedillo.

The title of Ms. Valle-Sedillo's column is "Ponte Vista Opponents: CAN'T WE PLAY NICE?"

On the page where the column appears there is no mention that Ms. Valle-Sedillo is a member of at least one of Bob Bisno's Advisory Boards for Ponte Vista.

Either Ms. Valle-Sedillo doesn't want you to know her affiliation with Ponte Vista or Mr. Stecker simply omitted a piece of information that many readers may have found valuable.

If Ms. Valle-Sedillo intentionally left out her close affiliation with Ponte Vista, as demonstrated by her picture and quote being found on the Ponte Vista Web site, it is just another bit of misinformation or misdirection that some Ponte Vista supporters feel they need to have.

In the column, Ms. Valle-Sedillo stated, "Ponte Vista agreed to set aside $8million to pay for ALL of the improvements recommended by the Western Avenue Task Force."

Eigther Ms. Valle-Sedillo did not read the recommendations and summary made for the Western Avenue Task Force, or she is simply using what the Ponte Vista Outreach Team mentioned to her.

In fact, the recommendations included widening Western Avenue to three lanes in both directions between 25Th Street and well beyond Palos Verdes Drive North.

Since Bob has no intention of widening all of Western Avenue, Ms. Valle-Sedillo's statement is an error of fact.

Ms. Valle-Sedillo also failed to mention that excess funds that are not obligated to mitigating traffic for the project, would be able to be spent on other traffic-related issues, but not necessarily in the San Pedro area.

Ms. Valle-Sedillo continues to use the 'talking points' about agreements signed by Bob Bisno and various unions, Eastview Little League, and other entities.

The fact Ms. Valle-Sedillo does not include is that when Mr. Bisno is challenged to answer whether any or all of those agreements would be honored if he is not given the right to build the number of units he wishes to build, would he still honor those agreements?

When I informed Ponte Vista personnel about what happened in once instance, that information should have been passed along to all Advisory Board members. Apparently information did not get to Ms. Valle-Sedillo, or she chose to ignore it.

There was an instance where and individual used a disgusting, completely inappropriate, foul, harmful, mean, bad, and completely false term, concerning some Ponte Vista supporters.

That individual was immediately rebuked in public and private, by many of us who are more
visable in the opposition to Ponte Vista, and that person has not appeared again in person or in print, concerning anything regarding Ponte Vista.

Ms. Valle-Sedillo should also know that when someone accepts food, items, gifts, or other things to encourage them to show up and support a particular side of a discussion, that can be thought of as receiving something for their participation.

Bob is offering lower prices and other benefits to those living in particular areas or having particular jobs. Folks in Rancho Palos Verdes have not been offered the same pricing advantages as Ms. Valle-Sedillo and many others have by living where she lives.

It should be interesting to read what comes out in the next issue of San Pedro Magazine.

I think Mr. Stecker has the opportunity to allow for an opposing view of the issues.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can't let this next paragraph of Ms. Valle-Sedillo's go without some fact-checking.

"Everywhere I go, people ask me why I support Ponte Vista. I think I have some real good answers; It will be union built. It will be affordable for young families and seniors. It will address the traffic issues. And it will provide a home for the Little League. And it will be beautiful."

"It will be union built". How does Ms. Valle-Sedillo know that? Even though Bob signed agreements with unions, there is absolutely no written proof that he will actually build anything at Ponte Vista.

Mr. Robert H. Bisno will have the right, one entitlements are received, to sell them off, as he wishes, without developing anything at Ponte Vista.

The above information came from Mr. Robert H. Bisno himself.

"It will be affordable for young families and seniors." Really? How do you know that for sure, Ms. Valle-Sedillo.

What is the average income of 'families' living within the Wilmington Harbor City Community Plan area, where Ponte Vista is located?

What is the average income of 'families living in the San Pedro area, also where Ponte Vista is located?

Do you know that the average income of families within both areas would not be sufficient to purchase the (currently) least proposed price for a multi-bedroom unit, at Ponte Vista.

I have the data Ms. Valle-Sedillo, do you?

Seniors may truly find Ponte Vista attractive. I have envisioned 550 senior units in my 'dream' for Ponte Vista.

I used 550 as a number of potential senior units because I do not believe that there are many seniors who could actually afford to buy and then keep paying user fees, HOA and maintenance fees associated with living at Ponte Vista.

Many seniors already live in houses that are already paid for. They should be able to use the selling price of their larger homes to move into a much smaller place at Ponte Vista.

They MIGHT even be able to take their Prop 13 advantage with them.

But if a senior sells their home they bought after Prop 13 went into affect, the new place at Ponte Vista would be taxed at its selling price. Could many seniors continue to pay property taxes on a unit that is fairly pricey?

"It will address the traffic issues". This statement is made by someone who has not studies the DEIR or the FEIR as far as traffic goes.

It also demonstrates an individuals belief that the Los Angeles Department of Transportation is a body that can be believed, as far as real traffic patterns and the future of traffic goes.

There is absolutely no possible way to adequately mitigate traffic conditions of a 1,950-unit condominium project being built out along Western Avenue, on the northern end of San Pedro.

I would be more willing to accept a larger number of units than the density of R1 if a new road between Western Avenue and Gaffey Street were built, but we have gotten nowhere on that issue.

Ms. Valle-Sedillo, please do your reading and research. Please do not live by what you read or are told by those on the Outreach Team, or by information produced by supportive firms of Ponte Vista.

Ms. Valle-Sedillo, I challenge you to park somewhere along Western Avenue between Delasonde and the entrance to Ponte Vista. Face northbound when you park on any weekday in early September, between the hours of 6:30 to 8:30 AM or between 2:00 to 4:00 PM on those days.

Then, if you find that there is no traffic on Western Avenue in your opinion, please write back.

You live far away from the actual area and you really do not have to deal with the traffic issues thousands and thousands of your neighbors have to deal with in northwest San Pedro and eastern Rancho Palos Verdes.

"And it will provide a home for the Little League." Again Ms. Valle-Sedillo, how do you know that is a fact?

If, and I mean IF there is a six-acre park at the site, it will probably be deeded to the Los Angeles Department of Parks and Recreation. That way, the condo-owners would not be required to pay for the maintenance out of HOA dues and fees.

The Dept. of Parks and Rec MAY allow Eastview Little League to play on the fields, IF they pay for the right to do that.

I think if Eastview Little League were given a free pass to play on Dept. of Parks and Rec. land, there would be quite a commotion created by other leagues who have to pay to play.

It would be nice if fields were built on the site of the field that is already there and could have been used by Eastview for about two-years now.

But if Bob is not allowed to build the number of units he wants, is there a strong belief among supporters that he would provide the park out of his own goodness?

"And it will be beautiful." On this issue I have no disagreement with Ms. Valle-Sedillo if it is built looking like the Newport Bluffs apartments it was designed like.

I don't think there will be anywhere near 1,950-units approved of at Ponte Vista, so I can only hope that the designs will reflect what has already been published, with many fewer buildings.
____________________________________________________

There has been some misconception and misinformation about what Ms. Hahn and her Advisory Committee' majority opinion hold.

Ms. Hahn supports the population density equal to what R1 type density would bring to Ponte Vista without actually calling for single-family, detached housing.

The CAC also held the same recommendation.

Only R Neighborhoods Are 1 strongly suggests and calls for single-family, detached housing on lots of not less than 5,000 square feet, at the site.

What is 'R1 density'? As yet, I can't accurately give you a number.

R1 density could be the number of residents of a 429-house neighborhood. It may also be the number of residents in a 733-house neighborhood.

If density bonus population numbers are applied to Ponte Vista, then perhaps 1,080 units (my dream) might be very close to the population density of R1 with a density bonus.

What could be built at Ponte Vista with those numbers?

My guess is just about anything Bob wants, as long as the population density is equal to the approved number.

I think if 550 senior units were built that would be about 1,100 seniors.

Let's give Ponte Vista 130 large town-house, or patio-style houses at about 5 residents each and we might see about 650 residents in those units, with their added number of cars.

If my 'dream' holds for 400 regular condos, with some having three bedrooms, then I can guess about 3.5 residents per unit, or about 1,400 residents.

Adding the three types of housing together, I can imagine a population of about 3,150 people.

Now, why in the heck is that not more than enough additional people for northwest San Pedro?

However, as long as Bob continues to be unwilling to make a meaningful compromise in the number of units he wants, there is still absolutely no reason to allow him to receive any zoning changes on the property.

Bob is the applicant. It is up to him to come up with the compromises and not the community's.

He is the one wishing to come to OUR community. He is the one who should proactively bend.

If he won't, then it is quite simple: R1, NO COMPROMISE!
__________________________________________________

P'KETTI is the name of the brand new restaurant right next door to Marie Calendar's.

Their Lunch hours are between 11:00 AM and 2:30 PM and their dinner hours are from 4:30 PM to 9:00 PM as of this, their first day opened.

They sell spaghetti with sauces, and meatball, sausage, or chicken, salads and drinks. They are still too new for a menu, but their drive-thru is up and running.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It also looks like that curse of the Tasman Sea has struck again.

There is new paint on the outside of the former Tasman Sea on Western Avenue and it looks very likely that The Blue Crab has crawled away.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunken City Skateboards have left their most recent location, in Rancho Palos Verdes.





3 comments:

km said...

Bisno's promises to the community mean nothing if he, as many suspect he will, sells the property once the entitlements are approved. A new buyer would be under no obligation to provide any of the enticements Bisno has offered.

Anonymous said...

km at 12:07........then LA planners need to add a condition to their "approval" which would require a new owner to meet Bisno's obligations. If they don't impose this "condition" upon Bisno then we know LA PLANNERS are not concerned with the future impact of their current decisons.

Anonymous said...

In that same issue, on the last page, was a smiling Angie Papadakis telling us the wonderfulness that would be Ponte Vista.

Am I the only one who cannot stand the face of that woman any more? I can't even take her stupid "Angie-Grams" in the paper (I always hated them, but her recent activities have made me repulsed by them). I refuse to have anything to do with ANY Papadakis business because of her (and John). I will no longer eat at the restaurant.