Writing Shotgun

TOM DEAN ABANDONS PLAN FOR HOME DEPOT IN WETLANDS, WILL PAY OPPONENTS’ LEGAL FEES

Dave WielengaThu. July 31
 

Developer Tom Dean is abandoning his plan to build a Home Depot-anchored shopping center on the edge of the Los Cerritos Wetlands as part of a settlement that will also reimburse much of the legal fees incurred by the two organizations that successfully sued to stop the project.

The District Weekly learned of the settlement Thursday morning when it acquired a copy of a letter written by Los Cerritos Wetlands Trust (LCWLT) president Heather Altman to members of the environmental group. The LCWLT and the University Park Neighborhood Association (UPENA) are the organizations that filed the lawsuit against Dean and his Studebaker LLC.

Altman’s letter began as follows:

The Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust (LCWLT) and the University Park Estates Neighborhood Association (UPENA) have agreed to a settlement that will result in the return of a significant amount of the legal fees paid on behalf of the LCWLT/UPENA in the lawsuit against Studebaker LLC (i.e. the Home Depot Project). As part of the agreement, Studebaker LLC will be dismissing their appeal of Judge Torribio’s decision to de-certify the City’s Environmental Impact Report and vacate all permit approvals.

The settlement seems to put an end to an expensive and ill-conceived attempt by the City of Long Beach to abet Dean’s efforts to put a huge retail development on the edge of the city’s most significant piece of natural open space.

On Oct. 3, 2006, the City Council rushed to approve a grossly flawed Environmental Impact Report prepared by city staff. The council members were blinded by their eagerness to reap the estimated $500,000 in annual sales—tax revenue that promoters of the Home Depot center insisted it would generate for Long Beach’s cash—strapped coffers … and maybe also the campaign contributions from Dean, a resident of Naples who is sometimes generous that way.

Councilwoman Bonnie Lowenthal—currently running for the state assembly against Republican Gabriella Holt—made the motion to approve the Home Depot, and Councilman Val Lerch quickly seconded it. They were joined by councilmembers Tonia Reyes Uranga, 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 Proposition 13.” 

But the land trust and the homeowners association sued, and Judge John A. Torribio tore the EIR to shreds in his preliminary ruling in December of 2007—and once again when he finalized that decision in February of this year. Torribio asserted the EIR “precludes informed decision making and informed public participation.”

Ouch!

Additionally, the staff of the California Coastal Commission had contributed a long and scathing report that recommended the Commission deny permission to Dean to build the project.

The current situation not only leaves Dean without his Home Depot, but also with many, many acres of now-useless-to-him wetlands, which he has been borrowing money to buy over the past five years in anticipation of further and massive development.

The true importance of stopping the Home Depot was stopping the traffic mitigation plan that came with it. Because although the successful defense of the wetlands may be the most-prominent part of this victory, it was concern over intense traffic in the area that motivated opposition from the broadest base of residents. Approval of the traffic-mitigation plan in the vicinity of Studebaker Road and Loynes Drive could have been considered as traffic mitigation for other projects, too—literally paving the way for further massive development.

For now, no.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Viewing 14 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Lord in heaven (seriously) stop the madness of building anything further on these wetlands. The rivers dump all their trash and pollution on to Long Beach and the only things that nature has provided to help cure the problem are the wetlands and their natural filtering process. I only wish we still had some wetlands on the Los Angeles river side of the city to help us out.

    There is no need for a Home Depot in this area or any further kind of retail/building. We have enough empty storefronts and possible locations for this sort of thing. Suja said the right thing except her vote (and all the others) should have been against this senseless development.
    • ^
    • v
    Dave (1): Very well-spoken comments with the exception of "Suja said the right thing". Suja received campaign contributions from Tom Dean (i.e. bribe) prior to the council vote on 10/3/06 so don't believe that Suja "has always worshipped at the altar of good planning and development, it pains me greatly" when she already had her greedy, bony hands in Dean's deep pockets.

    read Dave Wielenga's "Going Coastal" 10/3/07, vol.1 issue 26.
    • ^
    • v
    We can only hope that our city offiicials, including our council members--will start listening to what the residents want instead of those fly-by-night developers (and the ones who take campaign contributions from them) who dangle all those promises of great revenue in their eyes, then take the money and leave us with white elephant development that has destroyed our wetlands and our quality -of-life.
    • ^
    • v
    Ironically, the sooner developers and others are stopped from carrying out their wishes and dreams to build more in the wetlands, the happier they or their descendants are going to be.

    It is only a matter of time - which with every update on climate change seems to be shortening - before Greenland's glaciers have either melted or floated off onto the sea. That will raise sea levels by 25 feet or so, enough to permanently submerge all the local wetlands in question - along with various neighborhoods, e. g., Naples, Belmont Shore, the Port, and low-lying lands along both the rivers.

    And don't forget that accelerated climate change is precisely what is being promoted heavily by the policies of the city of Long Beach and its favored enterprises (notably Port, Boeing, Airport), whose business it is to promote and rely heavily on massive transport fueled by carbon combustion (either the dirty cancer-causing kind or the presumably future 'green port' kind: the greenhouse and climate-change effects will be much the same either way).

    The very fact that a large oceanside city with everything to lose from climate change is de facto so massively pushing for it, will have global repercussions on what will in fact be done (or rather, not done) effectively to stop it. Given present policies, submerged wetlands and a lot more is literally a slam-dunk bet for the future of Long Beach. SEA-DIP, the city's southeastern area plan (now in the works for revision) is aptly named.
    • ^
    • v
    LBD (3): Rather than just “hope that our city officials, including our council members–will start listening to what the residents want” we should all be insisting upon it!

    Our government is just that: “ours” and we too often forget that very basic fact. Our government is intended to be a tool to suit “our” needs, a means to advance “our” priorities and to be an extension of the sort of society that a majority of “us” most desire.

    Those who serve us in elected office in this city do so because a majority of the voters put them there. Most of those so serving want to continue to do so. Make it known, very clearly, that they will not get what they want unless their constituents start getting what they want (whatever the majority of constituents decide that’s to be).

    Those elected officials are likewise responsible for appointing and approving managers to run the various Departments and Boards and Commissions that help keep our government and, thus, our city, moving in the direction we, the electorate, most desire. Make it clear to our elected officials that unless they appoint managers and Boards and Commissions that further the will of the majority then said majority will, likewise, find elected officials who will do so.

    If you truly feel that “fly-by-night developers” are supplanting the will of a majority of the people in Long Beach then gather up said majority, get them organized and then make your voices heard to those who have been elected and appointed to represent you!

    March that majority down to the next Council Meeting and fill the Chambers to standing room-only. There are 200 seats in the Council Chambers and some 220,000 registered voters in the city…do the math. Are we, so lost that we cannot gather less than one tenth of one percent of ourselves in one place at one time to assure that our city is being run as a majority of us desire? If so, LBD, then your problem should not be with our elected officials but, rather, with those who elected them!

    Once at Council, plop a 2000 page document containing each signature of that majority in front of every single Council member so that they can know, without doubt, that if they do not begin to heed the will of the majority in this city and to start governing accordingly, then that majority will find someone else-or several “someone elses”- who will.

    Flood their voicemail boxes and cram their snail and email boxes to overflowing with clear instructions from the majority concerning how they are expected to conduct the city’s business on our behalf.

    To achieve a government that is truly representative is not difficult, LBD, all that is required is an informed, involved and *active* electorate.

    So stop just “hoping”…and start getting busy!
    • ^
    • v
    Can't I even get agreement to fund feasibility studies for this? Where are the Boosters when you need them...
    I’ve been stumped for some time as to why all the folks wanting more tax revenue and development have not undertaken to get the harbor area enclosed by the breakwater filled in so the oil island personnel could drive to work and as well create several square miles of newly developable land. The folks who want open ocean at our doorstep would have it as well…even if it starts as a coastline of steep rock, some innovative barriers could encourage the natural deposition of beachhead over the years. Somewhere within that vast expanse of new property, of course, a site for Acre’s next storefront will be situated. All those Belmont Shore folks would have a claim to actually being the Gateway to the New South Beach. This project should be covered by the necessarily relaxed coastal regs being currently promoted. It's all win-win-win. You’ve just got to think outside the box a little. Save the breakwater and bring surfing back to LB. You’re welcome.
    • ^
    • v
    Don't be fooled...this isn't the end of development on the wetlands...if they can pave over Playa Vista, the developers will figure out a way to get this too...unless, of course, the price of oil goes up and drilling becomes feasible...nah, that'd never happen.

    Somethin's up here....
    • ^
    • v
    I hope the developers will now realize that our prostitutes the City Council have no comprehension of what is legal or what their voters will tolerate. Those donation-hungry career politicians will continue trying to sell out our city, but the guys with development schemes are now smart enough to know we will not stand for it in Long Beach. Thank you Gabelich, Shipskie and O'Donell for your integrity. And shame on the others who tried to put a damn Home Depot in between several Home Depots, Lowes and Ace Hardwares, against the wishes of the neighborhoods and the wetland preservation group. We have enough discount lumber, and enough local politicians for sale to the highest bidder. We need less traffic; and Long Beach is a real city - we deserve our own tiny Bolsa Chica type park and more parks in general. That will draw more dollars to our city that discount hardware!
    • ^
    • v
    Awesome news! Maybe we can finally get them to designate the area as a nature reserve. Dare to dream dare to dream.
    • ^
    • v
    Hey how about resurrecting les robbins fantastic idea of an alcohol-fueled sport center, but now where the tanks lie? And clear out franks next-door ghetto headache and send them there instead.
    Now who would disagree with that?
    • ^
    • v
    I love Bob Hope, too, now that he's dead.
    • ^
    • v
    NOTE TO TOM DEAN:
    Gracious and smart move!!!A Home Depot(aka de-facto quasi homeless center)
    was a poor fit from the get go including from economic standpoint.Even when
    economy rebounds-and rebound it will(it always does) there are more attractive
    revenue generators which can be realized for that area-with proper planning.
    TO WIT:
    l.Traffic and the infrastructure to deal with such- MUST be dealt with first.Thus
    work together with City,County,State to have an off ramp built
    to service the area east of Studebaker in conjunction with upgrading of the
    other access routes.See what Universal Studios and the MTA have done with
    the Hollywood Freeway.

    2.Using the Hyatt in Huntington Beach as a model consider that as the center
    piece-over looking the Wetlands.

    3.Working with DBAW develop lucrative(has decent ROI-per people who deal
    in such)attractive dry boat storage as well as wet launch area into the S.G.
    river via the existing cooling channels with cut through at jetty's mid point to
    open sea.The State will confirm for you an unrelenting demand for such
    facilities.Developers up and down the coast are developing such attractive up
    scale facilities-in up scale communities.Traffic impact is low-that could be
    put in place first----think long run.

    Remember:It has been said:There is nothing more difficult to take in hand,
    more perilous to conduct,more uncertain as to outcome,than to
    take the lead in a new order of things.
    • ^
    • v
    Suja's vote wasn't just based on Dean's direct contribution. Dean was represented by the PR firm owned by Mike Murchison. A promise was made to Suja by Murchison that he would lead the committee to retire her council debt. After her vote in favor, Murchison did in fact raise $30,000 for her to retire her debt.
    • ^
    • v
    Good job Dave !!

    You and LB Report, played an important role in exposing many aspects of this grossly unpopular, poorly thought out, dumb idea. Thanks!

    From day one, The Press Telegram made the wrong call, sold out, and took another big step, for many of us, towards fatally lost credibility, and extinction. Their less than 17% reader penetration is no mystery....if they would only do the right thing and be fair and balanced........Oh ya, their 'couldn't build a dog house'' editors still ignorantly imply that.... the Judge was also wrong , putting 10,000 more cars an hour down deadly Loynes in fine, that Dean still somehow deserves 10's of Millions in free money with valuable, ill fitting , un fairly up zoned Commercial entitlements, and that somehow, rebuiding a little piece of that rusty, smelly, noisey, dirty smoking plant, will 'clean up' the area. And of course, that a parcel, with ocean on 2 sides, on the original head waters of the estuary, connected to the Wetlands ecologically, is irrelevant to it's health and restoration.

    Uh huh, right, dream on. Replace the screening trees Dean killed without a Coastal or Local Permit, which were designed to hide the tanks, if you really want to clean a little piece of it up. We need to discuss relocating, or modernizing all of AES first, and at least finally ending the wrongfully grandfathered operation of several very dirty generators abandoned as obsolete for decades, before AES tookover..

    Our media expert, (who worked on the Pentagon Papers) called PT owner Singleton, a friend, early in this debate to ask for fairness, and less bias. He was told that they had to support their big advertiser Home Depot at all costs, win, lose or draw, and the facts be damned. Stupidly, the also ignored the scathing lawsuit against Dean and the City, by AES. How sad and telling. We are so gald that you and the LB Report so often voice the true facts, objectively.

    So, despite it all,the community owes AES Intl. many thanks for working with us, listening, and filing their CEQA concerns in earnest, against these 'Know it all' Know little Brokers, and their influence selling former Planning Commissioners, and less principled lobbyists. Much of our victory, was won by them, and part of their concern was in trying to be a good neighbor. We will not forget this when considering your new lease, permit needs or SCAQ or FERC requests.

    Now , for related issues. The District, all of it's cool Staff, and our friends out there, need to please consider trying to help us with phase 2. Highly placed rumors have it that Dean and 'squirming not to register' Murchison, and friends, will try again. We have Phase 2,3 and 4 already mapped out. Stay tuned and engaged. Neighborhoods First !...and... Wetlands at all costs!.

    Many of us contend that Edison should have never sold that parcel to a roll up artist, a supposedly highly leveraged flipper, and that it should and must remain cheap, heavily soiled, but presently safe and stable Industrial land. It was Master Planned, and should continue in a manner fitting with the Powerplant and all installed uses. AES and the profitable remaining tank farm operators , Pacific Pipeline, have stated they never even had notice, let alone a chance to buy the parcel, and could use it.

    Dean payed a measely 2..5 Mil, approximately a mere $150,000 an Acre !, with ocean on 2 sides !, We need to urge him to sell it to either of them at or around cost, and write off his losses. For all the hassle he has caused, and hubrous and wild ego he has displayed, he deserves to sell it for a big loss. We'll see. DeLong won't be there for ever and he has not been much help? Many of feel he has significantly exacerbated the problem?

    Now, we want to believe that our Mayor is an honest man, but Foster ran Edison at the time of the sale, and received lots of checks from Dean and his friends while campaigning, and thus has a Major Conflict of Interest. When will he recuse himself?

    It is time for him to Ethically disqualify himself, and listen to the people, rather than several of his close friends( who have at times harmed him in a way). He can, and should help us reach a global settlement in the Public Interest. He needs to appoint a neutral arbiter, as he promised he would do while campaigning, with respect to this lot, and all of the Wetlands recently purchased by Dean, Berger,etc.. He should also demand DeLong recuse himself too, as we will. The Major proponents of this mess, ran and funded his committee to elect.

    So now for the latest outrage, We are hearing from high up, that Dean and friends stand to make a huge profit upon selling the Wetlands under the terms of this Nov.8 Property Tax Bond Measure ? Should it pass? No way, we need to fight this, and we will. Stay tuned and help us ask questions too?

    Besides, the Port gave us the WORST AIR IN AMERICA, and they need to FINALLY use port mitigation credit money in our town to fund Wetlands acquisition HERE for once, not up and down the coast as usual !!. LA/LB ports could, with Political Momentum, and a few amended rules, easily buy this land at a FAIR price. It would be great PR, a step towards lessening pollution, a means of long overdue reparations, and the 'right thing'..
    .
    Also, if new law demands that 20% of our energy is soon to be mandated from renewable sources , we , as a community must continue to study serious changes at this AES plant and elsewhere. We have asked for study and consideration of solar panels, tide gates, turbines and more, many times. Let's restart the debate and discussion.. This has been studied for decades, let's all work together.
    AES is up for an attempt to repermit soon, we, the community, are the primary concern, Dean is secondary, so he and his friends need not hurry on this parcel, unless they are prepared for a lot more waiting and acrimony.

    On the DeLong 'Star Chamber' SEADIP redo farce, they barely reached 1,000 people in a town of over a half million, and made a lot of other mistakes too. We'll save most of them for Court, but recall over 5,600 residents signed a petition requesting that the legitimate work, the 2004 -06 Los Cerritos Wetlands Study Group SEADIP Update, be enacted. 2,500 more joined the Home Depot opposition file. The Community desires LESS density than the original SEADIP zoning, not more.

    Thanks to so many who helped. We are rested, funded and ready for the next rounds. We predicted at least 9, so please stay with us for round 2.

    Someday the corner of PCH and 2nd, could look like the recently restored Wetlands at PCH and Warner. We are many, they are few , we are on the side of good, nature and a sustainable future. They, are slow learners say some. For sure, greed, is often their weakness., We'll see? It is never too late to do the right thing?
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus
 

© 2007-2008 Seven Days Publishing LLC.