News of the Arroyo


Title:

Victory on the Hill

Subtitle:

Elephant Hill residents win a new environmental review of planned

Date:

2007-07-05

Summary:

July 5, 2007 - Here's the story of the long back to protect open space in El Sereno.

Author:

MINDY FARABEE

Publication:

LA City Beat

Content:

Elva Yañez isn\'t quite ready to call it divine intervention, but the
timing, she says, is interesting. \"Everything started to turn around
on Good Friday, 2006,\" she notes.

It was that day last April when a backhoe plowing through Elephant
Hill – a rare open parcel of 110 undeveloped acres located in the
densely packed northeast Los Angeles community of El Sereno – stumbled
badly on a subterranean water table and slipped into a sinkhole. It
reportedly took two cranes to pry it out, and, while it sat stewing in
its own juices, Yañez, a nearby resident and executive director of the
Audubon Center in Highland Park, quickly snapped a photo of the mired
equipment and began circulating it as tangible proof of what local
residents had been saying for 14 years – that this is an inappropriate
place to build 24 luxury homes.

Residents have been fighting the proposed development since the 1990s,
concerned about things like congestion and soil instability, and they
claim it was originally approved under a flawed, and now outdated,
1993 environmental impact report (EIR). It took 14 years for city hall
to concede the residents had a point, but, on June 20, the Los Angeles
city council voted to require Monterey Hills Investors to conduct a
supplemental EIR. That\'s more than one small victory for one isolated
group of homeowners trying to preserve a little peace and quiet,
advocates say. It\'s a historic move, bringing new oversight to one of
the poorest and most poorly built-out parts of town, while activists
across L.A. hail it as evidence that city government is at last
reconsidering its notoriously pro-developer stance.

\"It\'s a watershed moment,\" says Tim Grabiel, an attorney for the
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which, along with the Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy (SMMC), bolstered El Sereno\'s grassroots
movement with legal assistance and institutional backing. \"In the
past, it wouldn\'t have happened. Hopefully, it will be a stepping
stone toward a more environmentally friendly city.\"

According to councilmember Huizar, whose 14th District is home to
Elephant Hill, that\'s exactly what\'s going on. \"Today\'s city council
is one of the greenest, most environmentally sensitive councils in
quite some time,\" says Huizar, adding that he and his colleagues are
turning their sights not only to EIR issues, but also more
environmentally sound construction practices and greener philosophies
for future land-use patterns. And the dogged persistence of El Sereno
residents has affected their thinking.

\"When you have a community that\'s so united, so single-minded, there
must be something to it,\" says Casey Reagan, a 45-year El Sereno
resident who has spent the past few years walking door to door to
organize local opposition. \"Even if we\'re a bunch of loons, listen to us.\"

To do that, however, the city had to fight the urge to listen to
itself. Earlier this year, Councilmember Huizar introduced a motion in
the Planning and Land Use Management Committee (PLUM), asking
pertinent city departments to conduct a thorough study determining
whether a supplemental EIR was needed. Joined by a wary city
attorney\'s office, the cautious conclusion was \"no.\" Huizar pushed to
do it anyway. \"In this case, I kinda have to go with my conscience,\"
he said before introducing the motion on the council floor.

Activists are applauding his leadership. A relatively recent addition
to city hall, Huizar in no small part owes his job to
environmentalists like Yañez who exacted from their would-be
councilmember promises to carefully monitor development throughout
northeast L.A., especially in its iconic hillsides. Around 10,000
people have been shoehorned into each of its roughly 23 square miles
amid a lot of haphazardly planned infrastructure, which suffers from a
shortage of green space and parks. Advocacy organizations say children
in the area carry the city\'s highest rates of obesity. \"There\'s a
running joke that to be able to find green space [in northeast Los
Angeles], you have to be buried in Evergreen Cemetery,\" says Grabiel.

Connecting those kinds of dots has given rise to a burgeoning
ecological awareness with strong social-justice overtones, and the
fight over Elephant Hill serves as a rallying cry. That has led to a
rethinking of policy decisions, including an interim control ordinance
to slow down development in its hillsides, and the SMMC\'s formation of
an official northeast open space acquisition plan. Huizar\'s now
putting together a similar task force to study El Sereno specifically,
as well as a forum to educate residents about state laws regulating
development. In light of geological instabilities – the kind that
result in sinkholes and possible liquefaction – which critics charge
weren\'t properly assessed in initial environmental reviews, residents
here are arguing for a citywide moratorium on the current policy of
allowing developers to conduct their own EIRs. Councilmember Ed Reyes,
meanwhile, has pledged a soon-to-be-introduced motion refining how the
city looks at the cumulative impact of ever-increasing construction.

\"Elephant Hill was always a catalyst for something bigger, because it
was so egregious,\" says Yañez. \"The city gave them an inch, and they
took nine acres.\"

That may have proved their undoing. In 2004, when the clock almost ran
out on Elephant Hill\'s EIR, Monterey Hills Partners, the property\'s
previous developer, sued the cities of Los Angeles and Pasadena in
order to complete approval of its project, thereby slamming the door
on a last opportunity to stop the construction. At the time, now-mayor
Antonio Villaraigosa represented the district, and he and Reyes, a
fellow Eastsider, were the only two councilmembers willing to buck the
prevailing wisdom and stand with the community. In the intervening
three years, however, expanded tract maps began to surface, showing
that approximately 22 additional adjoining lots had been purchased.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act, it wouldn\'t be legal
for an approved project to just add on later without further review,
as the cumulative impact of a given proposal must be acknowledged from
its inception. In a spirited back-and-forth between Councilmember Tom
LaBonge and developer representative Ben Reznik, future adjacent
development was acknowledged, although only to be constructed after
moving through a separate approval process. According to SMMC math,
that would result in a minimum 600 percent increase in the project\'s
footprint.

\"There is no worse case of piecemealing [a project],\" testified Paul
Edelman, SMMC deputy director for natural resources and planning.
\"It\'s like dealing drugs in front of the police station.\"

Just before the councilmembers voted, eight to two, to require a
supplemental review, LaBonge offered the developer one last chance to
voluntarily perform it.

No thanks, replied Reznik, who also said that his boss \"will have no
choice but to go to court.\"

Rather than ignite another round of legal strong-arming, residents
point out that the involved parties should take note of $400 million
in Proposition 84 money that will soon become available for
municipalities to purchase urban parks. But, if worse comes to worst,
\"the city made a sound decision and a legally defensible decision,\"
says Grabiel.

07-05-07

http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=5778&IssueNum=213

Url:


Back