Writing Shotgun

COUNCIL’S BAD JUDGEMENT IN HOME DEPOT PROJECT PAYS OFF, KINDA

Dave WielengaTue. May 13
 

The City Council’s overzealous approval in 2006 of a backassward environmental impact report (EIR) for a proposed Home Depot design center on the edge of the Los Cerritos Wetlands–a document that was ultimately rejected for its many inadequacies by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge in February of this year–may have saved Long Beach from another retail development fiasco.

Home Depot, Inc., announced early this month that it will close 15 existing stores and will reduce the number of planned new stores for the next three years. The home-improvement chain is being battered by the slumping housing market.

Had the City Council demanded a proper EIR from the developers of the proposed Home Depot design center, that project might have gone through–and in light of recent developments, fallen through. That would have left Long Beach with another spanking-new waterfront retail ghost town–something like a smaller, eastside version of the 369,000-square-foot downtown echo chamber known as The Pike at Rainbow Harbor.

Thank goodness, then, that the City Council rushed to approve the Home Depot project promoted by developer Tom Dean on Oct 3, 2006. The councilmembers were blinded by their eagerness to reap the $500,000 in annual sales-tax revenue that the shopping center was estimated to generate for Long Beach’s cash-strapped coffers…and maybe also the campaign contributions from the Dean, who is sometimes generous that way.

Councilwoman Bonnie Lowenthal–currently running for the state assembly–made the motion to approve the Home Depot, and Councilman Val Lerch quickly seconded it. They were joined by councilmembers Tonia Reyes Uranga–currently running against Lowenthal for that state assembly seat–Gary DeLong, Laura Richardson and Suja Lowenthal. Dissenters were Rae Gabelich, Patrick O’Donnell and Gerrie Schipske.

“As someone who has always worshiped at the altar of good planning and development, it pains me greatly,” Suja Lowenthal said that night. “But I am balancing what I know about land use in a perfect world with the realities of municipal financing. While this is in no way optimal, it is a reality left by Prop. 13.” 

However, the ultimate reality was that the EIR was so in-no-way-optimal that Judge John A. Torribio tore the thing to shreds in his preliminary ruling in December of 2007, then again when he finalized that decision in February of 2008. Torribio asserted the EIR “precludes informed decision making and informed public participation.”

And again, thank God for that, because the best-informed opinion about Home Depot–or the home-improvement superstore business in general–isn’t very good these days. Financial experts almost universally cheered Home Depot’s decision to close those 15 stores and curtail the opening of others. 

“We applaud these moves, given an industry we believe is nearing saturation, with a scarcity of attractive new locations,” Standard & Poor’s Equity analyst Michael Souers said in a research note.

“Demand will remain somewhat depressed for the next several years, especially in the U.S.,” said Zahid Siddique, a building products analyst with Gabelli & Co. “I don’t think there’s really any incremental benefit from opening these new stores.”

In a related development, a spokesman for Dean and the Home Depot project indicates that they are going to take run at re-doing that EIR. So the council will have another shot at screwing it up again–and if Long Beach’s luck holds, it’ll do just that. 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Viewing 25 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    "Dave Wielenga told me something about Long Beach that I never forgot: Long Beach is a city intent on killing its own soul, though fortunately it can’t ever do it right."
    • ^
    • v
    worship an alter of good planning and development? What about the wrecking ball shes about to take to acres of books?
    • ^
    • v
    If Home Depot decided not to proceed with a store in San Francisco, where disposable incomes are significantly higher than Long Beach, what makes your city planners believe they're still interested in pursuing this project?
    • ^
    • v
    When these hacks start talking about "realities of municipal financing" they really mean "how are we going to loot" enough resources from taxpayers to pay for the gross mismanagement of current assets and the absurd salary and retirement packages they routinely grant to their friends and supporters who feed from the public trough. If they have to demolish the entire downtown and every culturally significant building and business to do it--well, that's just business. Whenever I think I could not hold these scumbags in greater contempt they exceed my lowest expectations.
    • ^
    • v
    Let's look at what it takes to get something approved by the City Council:

    "Friends To Write-In Jackie Kell For Council" $350 Thomas Dean
    Lerch, Val "Committee to Re-Elect Val Lerch" $350 Thomas Dean
    Blair, Becky "BECKY BLAIR FOR CITY COUNCIL" $1000 Thomas F. Dean
    Lowenthal, Suja "Suja Lowenthal for City Council" $1000 Thomas F.Dean
    Foster, Robert "Friends of Bob Foster" $600 Thomas Fay Dean
    Foster, Robert "Friends of Bob Foster General" $650 Thomas Fay Dean
    DeLong, Gary "Friends of Gary DeLong $300 Tom Dean
    DeLong Gary "Friends of Gary DeLong $350 Tom Dean

    Very good friends, indeed. If he's gonna try it again, there's gonna be new names on this list. $1000 will buy you a spot at Suja's altar.
    • ^
    • v
    Let me guess, Tom Dean is a member of the long beach area chamber of whores, where business at any cost reigns supreme. Had his project gone through he probably would have received the "businessman of the year" award for increasing pollution in east long beach. Wetlands ? Birds? Ridiculous!

    A man after gordons heart.
    • ^
    • v
    John: Doesn't the whore accept the money?

    So no development, still empty, polluting, seeping tanks, a space vacant of any revenue. Okay, I get it. Don't come to me to raise any taxes to pay for any new programs, police, fire, etc. Cut the staff and programs in existing city government and make due. If you do not want development, if you do not want a healthy business environment, then do not ask for expanded city programs and services but put forth the same energy you do for anti-development and business to cut spending at city hall.
    • ^
    • v
    Ah, LBRez, conveniently ignoring the fact that the open area doesn't HAVE to have a Home Depot on it.

    Like we should embrace every development with no questions because of munificence of the developer.

    Like it's some sort of manifest destiny for that parcel of land to have a parking lot slapped on it.

    Like being against a development on that spot is "against a healthy business environment." Are you running for Chamber of Commerce or just a spot on the RDA?

    Plenty of other spots that won't drastically reduce the marginalized open space and create heinous traffic issues as well.
    • ^
    • v
    LBRez,
    Yes the chamber of whores accepts the money, just like you did with your scam with the State of the City revenue, oh hypocritical one. Kudos to Foster for pulling the plug on that sleazy special-interest accomodation,
    • ^
    • v
    The site doesn't have to have a home depot on it. But please tell me what should go on that site? Be realistic, as it has to generate enough money for the property owner to cover the cost of cleaning up the degraded land.
    • ^
    • v
    We've been through this discussion before...answered that question then...the answer's still the same now.

    http://thedistrictweekly.com/daily/staff-infect...

    #17
    • ^
    • v
    Because we just have to stick something in there right. Lets take every open space we have and just stick something on it that makes the city revenue, that's what we should do.

    Where is the balance in that Suja?
    • ^
    • v
    John: Your assumption that I am a Chamber member is incorrect, I am not. Your derogatory labelling of the Chamber begs the question, are you anti-business or just anti-Chamber which supports business? Do you work? At a private business? Is it a member of a Chamber of Commerce? The anti-business environment in this city and too many of its residents is incredible, especially since so many people do draw a paycheck from private businesses.

    Andy I am not ignoring any aspect of that parcel and suggesting it has to be developed, if it is left alone so be it. In that same regard I am not ignorant of the fact that any time any development anywhere is proposed it is fought tooth and nail by a very vocal segment of our community. In your comments linked above you state "landowners should get a fair price for their property." Who determines what is a fair price? Does it include compensation for loss of revenue for not being able to develop it?

    You state that "in this case public interest should trump private rights." By saying "in this case" are you saying except in this case you are against eminent domain--which is essentially public interest over private rights? What is your basis for extending public interest over private rights in some circumstances but not others? What if the public at large decided the better interest served was something with a parking lot because it meant there were businesses supporting jobs and tax revenue for the city? Is the loudest group with the best lawyers the arbiter of the best public interest? What if a referendum said, "Develop it?" Is that public interest or just misguided voters?

    If the land owner is willing to sell the land at a "fair price" to the city or some entity that would prevent its development more power to them. But who is going to pony up the millions to buy it? Certainly not the city. Not any private entity unless they know there will be return on the investment. That leaves who?

    In the end this parcel will sit for decades more as the tanks continue to decay and the seepage continues into the area as public interest in this case fights private rights in this case and vice versa. Status quo reigns supreme as the lawyers reap the retainers and fees.
    • ^
    • v
    If that were the case, no lands would ever be kept from development and we'd all live in Irvine-by-the-sea. Amazingly, lands are bought or traded and deals get worked out. Here, Mr. Developer, have a big, fat chunk of land over here in exchange for land you'll never get to develop. See how that works?

    And if I own some property where I'm oozing toxic sludge into the area, I'm responsible for fixin' it. See how that works? Until I do, that land's not worth much unless the owner is held liable for fixin' it.
    • ^
    • v
    I prefer, just my opinion, that the land be left just as it is until such time as there are people calling the shots who demonstrate some minimum level of common sense and civic virtue. It might not hurt to also stipulate that these people be required to fully disclose all their financial information and relationships on a daily basis. There should also be stiff criminal penalties for compliance failures. Additionally, all city related personnel involved in decisions involving this land should be required to submit to regular, frequent drug testing.
    • ^
    • v
    LBRez,
    I have a great dislike and disdain for phony hypocrites, like the one who is so worried about our students having a sleazy schooolboard member but fights legislation that would reduce these same schoolchildrens risk of disease and death due to port related pollution-that can be sensibly and relatively cheaply reduced.
    Says a lot about you if this is the kind of person who you admire, or who you are.
    • ^
    • v
    You got me! A phony hypocrite, man feels good to get that off my chest, thanks.
    • ^
    • v
    I hope your chest hasn't been afflicted with a chronic illness caused by port pollution, like so many of our Long Beach schoolchildren, of whom you care so deeply about (wink wink) you phony prick.
    Remember that you planted the seeds when your union recalls you, once they fully feel the effects of your hypocritical actions.
    Only then will I say you're welcome.
    • ^
    • v
    I always like to see how long it takes before the name calling and labelling begins, never long. From some anonymous thread on a website you are able to make judgements and cast dispersions on people by reading what you want into comments and using those to fuel whatever little seed of hate you have brewing. Congratulations on a successful week, I hope you feel better about yourself. From my comments you have no idea who I am, what I support and where I am involved, you make me laugh at your ignorance of me while assuming me to be someone you want me to be.

    Have a great weekend, let's hope some other "phony prick" can brighten your weekend and having you stewing all day until late at night when you get to sign on and see what has been said.
    • ^
    • v
    Your are right, LBRez. We do not know who you are because you lack the "courage of your convictions" by not using your real name.
    • ^
    • v