A Victory is Confirmed

I hope everyone who spoke at the last Harbor Area Planning Commission meeting received the same documentation I received today.

It is concerning the approval of the motion and action to place the [Q] Qualified Conditions on the three lots that were zoned C1-1XL on and near the corner of 20Th Street and Walker Avenue.

Vista del Oro Neighbors Against Condos (VDONAC) is the organization which found neighbors banding together to make sure the site of the former McCowan's Market didn't become a huge project site that would have been completely out of character with the surrounding areas.

VDONAC, with the incredibly great support from Councilwoman Janice Hahn and her office were successful in having the Harbor Area Planning Commission approve a motion brought to them by Councilwoman Hahn, to approve restrictions on development on the three lots.

It all seems to have come down to the following short sentences:

[Q] QUALIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Pursuant to Section 12.32.G of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, the following limitations are hereby imposed upon the use of the subject property, subject to the "Q" Qualified classification.

1. Minimum Lot Area. The residential use of the subject property shall be limited to 1-unit per 5,000 square feet of lot area for the development of these parcels as single family dwellings.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Planning Commission took action to approve the staff report and Adopt the attached Findings.

They also Approved and Recommended that the City Council Adopt a Zone Change from C1-1XL to [Q]C1-1XL.

They Approved and Recommended that the City Council Adopt Categorical Exemptio to No. ENV-2008-359-CE dated February 26, 2008.

They also Recommended that the applicant be advised that effectuation of a zone in the [Q] Qualified Classification is specified in Section 12.32.G of the LAMC

The Harbor Area Planning Commission approved the action by a vote of 3-0 with two members absent.

The applicant still has rights to appeal, with a Final Appeal Date of April 15, 2008.

Onward We Go With NOISE!

Neighborhoods Organized and Involved to Support Education is the acronym chosen by a majority of the members of the steering committee picked as the name of the group that supports education in San Pedro, but feels that building a large school at Angel's Gate is not the best way to provide the best education for high school students in the San Pedro area.

There will be lots and lots of work to do and the Steering Committee will be out there welcoming more members to its membership and in turn, be best able to assist other members of the group in helping San Pedro provide the best possibilities for educating OUR high school students.

San Pedro High School, according to some individuals has grown in student body count to an unmanageable number of students. It should be all of our wishes to find the best way to educate not only kids attending school regularly in San Pedro, but the thousands and thousands of other LAUSD students that will come to the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center for a remarkable and strong program of studies and experiences that can be found nowhere else in the entire LAUSD system.

NOISE will have community meetings! I hope to be able to plaster the date, time, and location of the first meeting that everyone is invited to, sometime in the next two weeks.

Taking on the challenges we are all facing in our mutual quests to provide good educations to LAUSD students, takes time. I do believe however, that NOISE is moving forward with a good deal of preparation, knowledge, experiences, and guidance to provide the best associations possible to deal with the challenges.

We are going to need volunteers. We are going to need lots of volunteers. Please think about what you might be willing and able to volunteer to do to help NOISE find the best possible solutions to the problems faced with trying to educate the growing number of students that need our help.

I, along with so many others I have met in these past very few months, are trying to find alternatives to building a large school at Angel's Gate, NOT BECAUSE WE LIVE IN THE AREA.

Sure, many members of NOISE live near the proposed campus' site, but most of them also believe that just stating "no new school at Angel's Gate" is not enough! Many believe there are real, true, and viable alternatives to building such a large campus on that site.

Nobody is a bad person if they want or don't want a new high school campus built on the proposed site. Shouldn't we all take the best interests of all of the students into our plans, wishes, and opinions?

As I hope you know, the comment period for the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study for South Region High School has been extended to May 5, 2008. That should give all of us and groups we may belong to, time to draft our own set of comments to the documents.

I hope all the residents living in the Palisades Residents Association's area will attend their May 13 Annual Meeting at White Point Elementary School. Councilwoman Janice Hahn will be attending that meeting, and I think members of various LAUSD groups will attend.

This very important meeting will also include elections to the Board of the Association and possible the election of officers to serve on that Board. The Board can have as many as 17 members, so please think about helping out your own homeowners' group, if you live in their area. The group's Web site is: http://www.sanpedropalisades.org./

The Steering Committee of NOISE also has residents living in the Point Fermin Residents Association as members. The Point Fermin Residents Association will also be a very important group to help NOISE find alternatives to building such a big school on such a precious piece of property.

Further information will be coming out concerning committees, news, how you can help, and a host of other items. Please "stay tuned".

Odds and Ends 6

This edition begins with an article and some added comments dealing with Clean San Pedro and their current struggles.

The article was written by Ms. Donna Littlejohn for The Daily Breeze early last week, I believe.

My comments written for my www.pontevista.blogspot.com site, where the article and post appeared yesterday, have been edited, since yesterday to include a pledge of a contribution.

So, in essence, here are two posts, combined on this blog, dealing with Clean San Pedro.
_________________________________________

No Cash for This Trash

By Donna Littlejohn, Staff WriterArticle
Launched: 03/25/2008 10:55:36 PM PDT

It didn't take long for Steve Kleinjan's answering machine to fill up after sending out a notice early this week saying Clean San Pedro would have to suspend operations.

"My e-mail is just about filled, my phone has rung off the hook," Kleinjan said.Dedicated to combating litter and graffiti, the popular grass-roots effort he established six years ago is simply running too low on funds, Kleinjan said.

"Everyone means well and is very receptive, but it's just a matter of getting the check in the mail," Kleinjan said. "We're an independent group and normally we try to raise our own funds through fundraisers.

"Kleinjan said he hopes the suspension of activity will be temporary, noting the outpouring from community members this week since he made the announcement.

Among Clean San Pedro's staunch supporters is Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who singled the group out for citywide recognition in 2006.

"I can't imagine San Pedro without Clean San Pedro," she said. "We've really come to depend on them. They've put the pride back in San Pedro.

"Hahn is urging neighborhood councils to pitch in. She said she also is going to try to find resources within her office to help.More financial support is needed between major fundraisers, Kleinjan said, to cover ongoing expenses such as insurance and maintenance on vehicles, and buying tools and supplies.

The group also pays two part-time employees, retirees, who work 12 hours a week. They have been laid off, but Kleinjan hopes that's only temporary.

"They obviously have a serious cash flow problem," said Camilla Townsend, CEO of the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce. "They need a serious commitment that's going to be ongoing so they can really do what Clean San Pedro is all about.

The last major fundraiser for Clean San Pedro was Hot Pedro Nites, a two-day nostalgic car festival held last August. The event brought in about $20,000, but that fell far short of the group's goal of raising $80,000 to $100,000.

With the next Hot Pedro Nites not happening until July, the group has been struggling to maintain its cash flow from last summer's event.

"We're running out of those funds, so instead of doing another fundraiser in the spring, I was looking to go to neighborhood councils and things like that for funding," Kleinjan said.

Founded in 2002, Clean San Pedro Inc. uses volunteers to cruise the Pacific Avenue and Gaffey Street retail corridors throughout the week, picking up trash, painting out graffiti and making sure discarded furniture and other eyesores are hauled away.

Hometown pride fuels the endeavor."Most of the people who volunteer grew up here and have lived here their whole lives," said Kleinjan, a 1970 San Pedro High School graduate. "We have many successful business people who are now retired and donate a lot of time to this effort. It's kind of strange to see a former businessman sitting there, sweeping curbs.

"The group's annual budget is about $60,000, he said, but to do the job right, it should be closer to $150,000.

"I just couldn't continue going on as usual," he said. "These are difficult times."Townsend said her organization is exploring ways to help, including the possibility of taking over Hot Pedro Nites as a way to save Clean San Pedro administrative funds it spends to help plan and stage the event.

Help also might come from the proposed property owners' Business Improvement District, she said."This is a real grass-roots operation," Townsend said. "It's the best deal in town. The sad thing is, so often communities take programs like this for granted. They're very happy to have them, but they don't stop to think about where the funding comes from. I look at this as a wake-up call.

"HOW TO HELP
What: Clean San Pedro Inc., a six-year-old nonprofit group, is in need of more donations.
Donations: Checks can be made out and mailed to Clean San Pedro Inc., 3616 S. Walker St., San Pedro, CA 90731.
Information: www.cleansanpedro.org; 310-832-4932.
donna.littlejohn@dailybreeze.com
_____________________________________________________

O.K., let's read your excuses for not helping out this organization.

You could write that you spent the $440.00 you and your wife won at the Thunder Valley Casino on Saturday, but spent it all at another casino. We did and we didn't, so my check is ready for me to slip into the mailbox as I leave for yet another pre-surgery test.

You could write that you are on disability and can't afford the bucks. I am and you probably aren't. Next excuse.

You could write that you spend you contribution dollars on making buttons for causes you believe are important on OUR community. I do, but Clean San Pedro is a worthy cause that just might inspire me to create some new buttons that group can offer for donations.

You could write that you are a Bisno supporter and are saving to buy one of his "affordable" condos. I'm not, but I also don't think that $300,000.00 for 600 square feet in some of the worst climate in OUR community is worth it.

You could write that you have given so much to OUR community that you feel you should be compared to John Olguin. You certainly can't and neither can I, ever. But I have a real belief that John will be walking the few blocks from his house to the Walker Avenue address to drop off a donation.

You could write some excuse that we can all shed a tear at, but please don't. I don't have a reasonable, realistic, responsible, or respectful excuse for not contributing to Clean San Pedro until now, and you surely don't either, I firmly bet.

So let's just get to the mission at hand. Get out those checkbooks, make motions in your organizations to donate, have a rummage sale with proceeds going to this worthy group, and don't do anything that will cause Clean San Pedro to have to pick up after you!

Hey Bob, your blight is a nuisance we have to live with. How about thinking about the community you supposedly believe you know what is best for, and give a chunk of change to Clean San Pedro. They can't clean up your mess, unless you hire them, but they can help keep San Pedro cleaner than you patch of.......whatever.

Hey OUR community, let's make the next Hot Pedro Nites the best ever!
- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Bob Bisno Pledges $25K

This is good.

Bob Bisno is reported in an article in the Thursday Daily Breeze, to be pledging to provide $25,000 to Clean San Pedro.

I hope other developers in San Pedro also help get this valuable group back on track to help clean up areas near their developments.

I for one, didn't pledge a dime. I simply wrote out my check, addressed my envelope, put a stamp on it, and dropped it into the mail.

There was no need to have an article in a newspaper written about my donation.

Let's hope to read or learn that organizations and groups all around OUR community come through with needed funds to get Clean San Pedro back up and running without worries of this type of thing happening again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I am so very proud of the great San Pedrans being involved in helping their own neighborhoods and the neighborhoods of others, I am confident that OUR community will do what is just, what is correct, and what is long term, for Clean San Pedro and OUR community's benefit.
__________________________________________________

On the Ponte Vista issue, silence may be golden or pyrite. At least some of us can claim that the L.A. Planning Department is finding ways to cover themselves no matter what they issue as to what can be built at Ponte Vista at San Pedro.

Mayor V. and his immediate followers are still trying to find ways to get developments on track quicker and with fewer City hindrances.

One issue that may be looming in the future is whether current Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky wants to run for Mayor of L.A.

Supervisor Yaroslavsky is an outspoken opponent to over development and someone who just may be a candidate voters in Los Angeles should support, for the sake of everyone who doesn't have the word "Developer" attached to their name.
____________________________________________________

Some members of Vista del Oro Neighbors Against Condos may still be on pins and needles until the City Council votes to approve the Q Qualification Condition onto three lots, currently zoned C1-1XL at and near the corner of 20Th Street and Walker Avenue. I am not one of them.

I truly believe Councilwoman Janice Hahn will ask other members of the L.A. City Council to vote with her in keeping condos or apartments out of the neighborhood made up of so many single-family homes.
_____________________________________________________

Now to news concerning a proposed new high school campus in San Pedro.

The comment period to the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study has been extended to May 5, 2008. If you are dealing with comments, then this is important for you to know.

If you aren't, then it is not an issue.

I guess "N.O.I.S.E." has been proclaimed the acronym and name that the new committee fighting to keep South Region High School No. 15 (SRHS 15) out of the Angel's Gate area has adopted.

Neighbors Organized and Incorporated to Stop Encroachment seems to be what the acronym spells out. If anyone hates the name and acronym, I guess I'll take the heat.

I don't want a new campus to encroach on the programs and environment of the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center, and the approximately 14,000 LAUSD students that will be able to use is over the next few years.

I am also guilty of not finding any real way, short of taking one or two homes on 30Th Street, to allow for any viable access to the Outdoor Education Center and a new campus.

The more I read "1,215" as the number of seats proposed for SRHS 15, the angrier I seem to get.

Even when the State of California low-balls the number of students who attended S.P.H.S. in the 2006-2007 school year, per classroom, that total is still more than the proposed number of seats each classroom at SRHS 15 would have.

Any real illusion that "only 810 or up to 1,215" students might attend classes at any new campus in San Pedro, is just that; an illusion.

For reasonable and effective planning, shouldn't LAUSD state the more likely number of students that would attend any new campus? Simply stating that "45 classrooms" will have "1,215 seats" means that the maximum number of seats per each and every classroom is 27.

Does anyone in their correct mind, anywhere in L.A.U.S.D. have the ability to look at folks with a straight face and state, for fact, that each class would only have 27 students?

Even with my L.A.U.S.D. education, I can spot a math problem when I see it!
________________________________________________

It seems we all may need to start a watch and make new lists of businesses going out of business in OUR community.

We may have to help our favorite businesses we enjoy having, stay afloat in the months and years to come, perhaps.

_______________________________________________

On a happier note to many in OUR community, especially Terri, have you been by the corner of Capitol and Gaffey recently?

The walls of the new Target are standing tall, but not painted yet. It looks like the big store is taking real shape and can be imagined opening in San Pedro.

Yes, traffic will suck far more than what Ponte Vista could bring to us, but adding Ponte Vista's massive 1,950-units into a potion of commotion would make things that much worse.

Will Marshall's and Ross on Western stay in business after Target opens?

Will a new bus line take shoppers directly to the front door of the new Target?

Will San Pedrans get hired to work in a Target in San Pedro?

This is a "stay tuned" type of things.
______________________________________________

Signs of the (Hard) Times to Come?

Both businesses were open today, Wednesday March 26, 2008.

Actually, the owner of this Marie Calendar's is going to move the business to downtown San Pedro, most probably where Papadakis Taverna once enjoyed a loyal following.

The owner of Planet Kids is ready to "retire", according to a family member. The family may keep the building and use it for another business.

Back in the Real World and Another Blog

I'm back in the real world and ready, willing, able, and looking forward with my second date with my surgeon, this time to get a titanium hip.

Thunder Valley Casino, Lincoln, California. Route 65, north of I-80 towards Lake Tahoe from Sacramento. Please visit it. Terri and I went in with $30.00 and left, after buying lunch for the two of us and Terri's sister and Julie's husband, with $440.00!

After spending a wonderful evening wedding reception in the bustling metropolis of Loma Rica, California and a long weekend in the area surrounding the megalopolis of Soulsbyville, California, it's time to get back to the real world, which is very active in OUR community.

I was given advice to take a look at another blog. This blog, "The Under Dog For Kids" looks to be very well written and does take students and kids in OUR community as being very important.

I am going to place a recent post from that blog on this blog because I feel it is important to learn what others are thinking and how others feel quite strongly about OUR students.

The blog is: www.theunderdogforkids.blogspot.com

Weighing In On Angel’s Gate as A High School; The Question We Should Really Be Asking Ourselves is Not Why…We Should Be Asking Why Not? A Prominent Educational Facility Could Be Built Here; It Just Needs Wings To Fly & the Residents to Tell the School District How to Do It
By Diana L. Chapman

I watched four high school students bravely get up and talk about the torturous learning environment they are currently living in at San Pedro High School.

Despite the hoards of resident’s complaints against the proposed building of a new high school at Angel’s Gate, the students stepped forward asking desperately for the 800 to 1,200 seat high school to proceed on the 28 acre site.

“Yes, we need to save the foxes and work on the noise pollution,” one 12th grade girl told the crowd in regards to their complaints. “But we really need more room. It’s like we are playing football everyday. It’s so crowded, it’s hard to get to class on time.

”Classes are so overbooked at their current school, the students said, some kids stand during the entire class or are crammed right up to the teacher’s desk. Going into the hallways is like heading onto the freeway at 3 o’clock in the afternoon to face a gushing onslaught of traffic. And education is spiraling downward because the teachers can’t teach in classrooms that are jammed like sardine cans with students.

This explains right away to me why we have a 50 percent dropout rate in Los Angeles Unified. The kids begged for help, but some of the residents failed to use their ears. One man told the students to climb aboard and join the real world. Los Angeles, he said, is overcrowded “so get use to it.” Residents clapped at that. It seems nowhere in San Pedro will our community accept the building of a desperately needed new high school. That must speak loudly to our kids about how our community feels toward them. The students who spoke at the Los Angeles Unified School meeting held at Dana Middle School March 13 won’t stand to gain anything; the school won’t be built until 2012.

They are thinking about the future.

Perhaps we should too.

I would ask you now to take the time to pause, step out of your box and imagine the tremendous educational opportunities that could be at Angel’s Gate. For just a moment, stop worrying about the traffic, the den of foxes, the concern a high school would mar the tranquility of the site -- a location which overlooks the Pacific Ocean and is constantly beaten by pulsating winds. Think instead for a moment at what a remarkable educational facility Angels’ Gate could become – which will only happen if residents force the issue.

Currently, Angel’s Gate hosts a plethora of underused possibilities – all of which should absolutely be integrated into the proposed high school’s regime. If a high school becomes the inner-hub of the area, think of the potential. Students could study marine biology at the Mammal Marine Care Center and help feed fish to the rescued sea lions. They can learn firsthand about World War II and what it meant to California at the Fort MacArthur Museum and visit the underground bunkers that still exist there today. They can learn from a slew of amazing artists at the Cultural Arts Center. Students can learn how to save birds and study the impact oil has when its washed into the sea at the International Bird Rescue Center.Everyone of these facilities is located at the site.

In short, this could be one of the best, hands-on academic facilities in all of Los Angeles. An educator told me once that it was a shame we tried to do everything in a classroom; the real learning, he said, happens out in the field. Here is a place where all kinds of study and research could be adopted. Students also could volunteer at many of these remarkable resources and keep them alive and running for generations to come. We can complain about the den of foxes at Angel’s Gate being in danger because of the construction and the marine mammals ears popping due to jackhammers and the traffic that could pour into the campus. These are critical issues that need to be addressed.

Yes, the district needs to protect the foxes and might have to build a preserve for them on the site, which would provide students with yet another educational opportunity.The residents’ contend that vehicles should not be allowed to access the school using Alma Street -- an argument that should be adhered to due to the already existing number of accidents on the narrow residential street. The residents know them all. They've been counting.Community members want more than the proposed 113 parking spaces. That too makes sense, because the neighbors don’t want – and should not have to deal with -- an overflow of cars parking on their streets.

Another man feared juvenile destruction that can sometimes accompany neighborhoods set near schools. The district needs to find away to provide the security the neighbors seek.LAUSD School Board Member Richard Vladovic told the crowd that he would pull together a team of educators to design this school. I propose that he not just use educators, but include residents and community leaders who understand what Angel’s Gate can provide for students, but also buff down the severe impact a high school could have if its not built keeping the neighborhood in mind.

All I am asking right now is that residents think about it. Think about the potential and the much greater chance we – as a community will have – to churn out kids who will care about their environment, protect and rescue wildlife, understand the atrocities of World War II and the way it played out here in California and explore the arts with true artists working right next door.Here, we will be molding well-rounded, future citizens. If we do not do this, as Richard Vladovic has indicated, our high school – San Pedro High – will go year round.

Then think about this; This means 1,000 kids will be streaming through our streets – without adult guidance because many parents will be working -- all day long. They will receive a lesser education, according to the school board member, because studies have shown year round schooling is not nearly as successful as traditional year round.

And then think about this: What will all that mean for the future of all of San Pedro? Rather than send the kids packing with shoes to the streets, I'd much rather give the kids wings they need to learn to soar the sky at Angel's Gate. Then perhaps, we will truly be making good citizens.
___________________________________________________

I can certainly agree with much of what Ms. Chapman writes. I do think however, that most folks in OUR community, including Ms. Chapman don't see what may actually become the jewel of educational experiences at the site.

If and when the Point Fermin Outdoor Education is redeveloped, and it could be as early as Summer, 2009, it and nothing else would become the largest, most popular, best used, and by far, the greatest educational experience that the most number of LAUSD students could attend.

Ms. Chapman is very correct in her observations about the great qualities the site has to offer. Having the Marine Mammal Rescue Center and the International Bird Rescue Center within a short stroll of the classrooms and dormitories of the Outdoor Educational Center can only enhance the experiences of the 5Th graders attending either the 3-night or 4-night programs of the Outdoor Education Center that are planned to give every 5Th grader in the LAUSD system a chance to learn, explore, create, gather, educate, share, and live a great outdoor experience on the hills overlooking their blue Pacific Ocean.

Friends, I am a fan of the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center. I think we will all receive the biggest bang for our education dollars by allowing students from all over the district a chance to learn about what so many of us still take for granted.

I continue to strongly feel that placing a large new campus directly next to the Outdoor Education Center will cause environmental difficulties for the students, faculty, and staff at the Outdoor Education Center.

If it comes time, on a cloudless night, for 5Th graders to take a peek at the constellations, what might they truly see if lights from athletic fields offer glare over views?

When listening for the sounds made by peafowl or other birds, will attendees hear more tones and noises coming from a high school campus?

If an experience scouring an open field is sought, might it be blocked by a fence surrounding classrooms?

I contend that the "Big Elephant in the Room" is not nearby neighbors decrying having a large school in their backyards, it is a much more joyful giant education center that will bring so many students into the area and provide for them an experience that may last throughout their entire education process.

Sure, there are negative reasons I feel a new campus should not be built at "Angel's Gate". But it is the one overriding positive set of possibilities that also make me believe that South Region High School No.15 (SRHS 15) does not belong right next to the Point Fermin Education Center.
----------------------------------------------------------------

So, let's think about alternatives to building SRHS 15 at Angel's Gate.

It's time to really think, "outside the box" on this one because so many people will consider only limited alternatives and not wish to expand their ideas past what "bureaucrats" think are only possible.

For your consideration: How about a new building at S.P.H.S.? O.K, O.K. I know you are going to squeal that the campus is already overcrowded. That MAY be true, but may not be true, either.

I have an idea to build more classrooms or multi-purpose rooms, or whatever can be used, in a multi-purpose, multi-story building that will not displace one single building at S.P.H.S., right now!
With this new building, seen above, new lockers can span hallways on several floors. There could be giant open areas on any floor, or classrooms of various sizes.

The new building would not be too close to the new gymnasium and could even support a covered bridge to the existing Administration Building. The new building takes up ZERO on-campus parking spaces and could be built for a fraction of the cost of building a whole entire new campus.

Students could use part of one floor as a large study-hall/lunchroom/meeting facility. There could be added storage on the lowest floor which would be partially placed within the hillside that is currently there.

The hallways could be large enough to allow many students to pass through. It would keep all classes, faculty, administration, nurses, and others on one campus, rather than having them travel to any satellite campus.

A new building in connection with changes in the daily schedules of students would allow for no year-round need and provide safety and shelter for more students.

This alternative is just one of many, members of OUR community can envision. We are a talented and intelligent community. We are creative and we can solve problems. We can be the heroes our students seek. All we have to do is dream.

Let's keep the discussions going. Let's openly share ideas. Let's question "authority" and come up with novel ways to support our students.

Let's keep our fingers crossed that the Planning Department comes up with a reasonable, realistic, responsible, and respectful plan for Ponte Vista.

Let's fun Clean San Pedro!

Odds and Ends 5

This was a very good week for forces opposed to weapons of mass development, no matter where it is being proposed.

Could it be an overall change in the nature of how elected officials and appointed individuals look at the continuing surge of over developments in the greater L.A. area?

Could it be that more folks have not only come to believe, but are now practicing the slogan; "Enough is enough"?

Big news was made in our area, and big news was made on a really humongous weapon of mass development, just at the top of the San Fernando Valley.

Los Lomas, the development calling for over 5,500 dwellings to be built on hillside property at the Interchange of the I5 and 14 Freeways, was stopped dead in its tracks actually during the study processes.

In a 10-5 decision, the Los Angeles City Council voted to have the Planning Department halt studies on the massive over development.

Councilwoman Janice Hahn was very much on the correct side of this issue and she deserves thanks from all of us and from others fearing over developments that would crush the quality of their lives.
_________________________________________________

San Pedro and members of OUR community were handed a disive victory Tuesday, when the Harbor Area Planning voted to restrict three lots currently zoned C1-1XL, from becoming the site of a condominium or apartment complex.
In the photo above, we see the standing room only crowd opposed to having anything other than single-family, detached houses built on the corner of 20Th Street and Walker Avenue.

Councilwoman Janice Hahn is seen addressing Planning Commission members with her support for their adoption of a motion Ms. Hahn submitted to restrict the types of dwellings that could be built on the site of the former McCowan's Market.

Here is another photo of some of the crowd behind to very hard working women who both did an extraordinary set of feats to allow for a successful outcome from the members of the Planning Commission.

Barbara Dragich on the left, was our commanding leader of the Vista del Oro's fight against over development at 20Th and Walker. Next to her with one hand on the yard sign that is still seen at so many residences, is Councilwoman Janice Hahn's whose staff aided her immeasurably in finding the way to stop a weapon of mass development.
________________________________________________

On the South Region High School No. 15 issue, I wanted to publish names, addresses, Email addresses, and phone numbers of individuals who should be made quite aware of the feeling and comments San Pedrans have against having such a large high school placed where it simply doesn't belong.

The following are some of the folks who may need reminding that all students are important and that alternatives to placing such a large site at Angel's Gate, cannot be beneficial to the vast number of LAUSD students, their parents, faculties, and staffs.

Los Angeles Unified School District
BOARD OF EDUCATION
333 South Beaudry Avenue, 24th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: 213-241-6389 General Fax Numbers for all Board Members: 213-241-8953 or 213-481-9023
DR. RICHARD VLADOVIC
Dist. 7
richard.vladovic@lausd.net
213-241-6385Fax: 213-241-8452
Carolyn Mau
Administrative Assistant
carolyn.mau@lausd.net
213-241-6385
David Kooper
Chief of Staff
david.kooper@lausd.net
213-241-6099
Cynthee Cortes
Director of Community and Parent Engagement
cynthee.cortes@lausd.net
213-241-4897
Lyle Tooks
South Area Director
lyle.tooks@lausd.net
213-241-5693
J. Maxie Hemmans
Special Assistant
mhemma1@lausd.net
213-241-6385
Geralyn Buscaino
Harbor Area Director
geralyn.buscaino@lausd.net
213-241-6010

Councilwoman Janice Hahn, 15Th District
200 N. Spring StreetRoom 435Los Angeles, CA 90012Phone: (213)-473-7015Fax: (213)-626-5431

councilmember.hahn@lacity.org

Facility Services Division
rod.hamilton@lausd.net
This division selects the sites for proposed schools, alternatives to the preferred sites and through this division, new schools are built.

You may also wish to contact the Palisades Residents Association, in whose area, the proposed new campus is located in. The Web site for the Association is:
http://www.sanpedropalisades.org./
______________________________________________

On the Ponte Vista issue, there is not much to report other than according to the L.A. Times article appearing beginning on Page 1, that Ponte Vista now becomes the largest proposed over development the City of L.A.'s Department of Planning is still dealing with.

Perhaps the Rudderless Steering Committee of R Neighborhoods Are 1 might wish to work with Councilwoman Janice Hahn's office to see if the Ponte Vista at San Pedro project can be shot dead in its tracks, like that which happened in the Las Lomas issue.

There is no reason to hold out hope that Bob will suddenly come to his senses and create a realistic, reasonable, responsible and respectful set of alternatives to building 1,950 condos._
________________________________________________

Many members of OUR community are either supportive of or opposed to having a new cruise ship terminal built at "Kaiser Point" in the outer L.A. Harbor.

The Port of L.A. is second only to LAUSD in their inability to listen to or deal with regular citizens, I feel. This is not to state that I oppose the new cruise ship terminal.

I need to see what mitigation folks who live, work, and/or travel in the areas between Berth 93, where the existing cruise ship terminal will remain, and the new proposed cruise ship terminal that will be able to handle the largest cruise ships or ocean liners, sometimes two at a time.

We need to make sure that the Port of L.A. crosses all their "i's" and dots all their "t's" and that they will help anyone and everyone who becomes hampered by such a massive terminal so far out in the harbor, at almost the end of the peninsula.
__________________________________________________

Now I most willingly share with readers a letter to the editor in the Thursday March 20 edition of The Daily Breeze, form Ms. Rebecca Rannells:

School will impact traffic
As a former president of the San Pedro Palisades Homeowners Association and longtime resident active on traffic issues, I am deeply troubled by the Los Angeles Unified School District's cursory assessment of the traffic impact the proposed South Regional High School No. 15 will have on the surrounding community.

Specifically, in its study "Notice of Preparation and Initial Study, South Regional High School No. 15, March 2008," the district states on page 57, "Roadways in the Project area such as Alma Street are two-lane collector streets. These roadways would not pose a safety hazard to pedestrians."

Are they serious? Have they walked south down Alma Street from 25th to 37th Street and then to Paseo? If they had, they would have noted that there are no sidewalks down a large portion of their trip, causing them to walk in the street over portions that happen to be blind curves to oncoming, often speeding, drivers.

In addition, if they should be so foolhardy as to attempt to cross Paseo del Mar, a busy secondary highway, say on their way to catch the closest public transportation, they would do so without the benefit of crosswalk or any other safety device.

I have been battling for better safety along Paseo del Mar from Pacific Avenue to Western Avenue for nearly 20 years. The community has come up with a plan to improve safety along this dangerous roadway, but due to a lack of political will, it has never been implemented.

While I have been frustrated at this lack of progress, at least I know I have tried to improve the situation.

If the leadership of the LAUSD and our local politicians allow this high school to be built, they will knowingly make our dangerous traffic here critically worse. I trust they will be willing to bear the personal burden when the next traffic fatality occurs due to their negligence. I do not wish this to happen but I am afraid it will.

- REBECCA RANNELLS
San Pedro
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

After attending a meeting with such a fantastic turnout, dealing with the SRHS 15 issue, reading this letter during my time with my Cheerios, put a great cap on a wonderful 18-hour period for me.
___________________________________________________

I wish I could end this "Odds and Ends" on a good note, but I have just been made aware of a serious problem San Pedrans need to come together to fix....if it still can be.

Look for a distressing article in the Daily Breeze concerning Clean San Pedro.

If it is not too late, and I don't know if it is, please visit:
http://www.cleansanpedro.org/

I hope beyond hope it is not too late. I must admit, with some shame, that I have not donated to this worthy cause.

I am just waiting to read that I can partially redeem myself, in the very near future.

With the pride I have seen in San Pedrans dealing with issues like Ponte Vista, the McCowan's site redevelopment, the proposed new high school at Angel's Gate, the great works on the Angel's Gate Master Plan, the fine work by the volunteers of all three Neighborhood Councils, the Harbor Interfaith Shelter, and so many other groups, we have let slip out of our grasp one organization that deals with every other of the mentioned groups in one way or another by keeping San Pedro and the areas near the issues mentioned cleaner than if Clean San Pedro had not been there.

I have seen members of OUR community ready, willing, and able to step up when called upon. It is time all of us, in every group to step up to try and save this organization that make all of us better looking and easier to live with.

I just sincerely hope it is not too late.

An Amazing Turnout!

Neighbors turned out in a very spectacular number to learn more about the South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15) issue and how they could comment on the Initial Study.

Over 100 names were collected at the meeting that demonstrated to me that their are some pretty fantastic San Pedrans, just like the great members of Vista del Oro Neighbors Against Condos (VDONAC) demonstrated their strength and won a dramatic victory just one day earlier.

I was more than extremely impressed by the questions that came for a great number of folks very concerned about the proposed new campus at what we know as "Angel's Gate."

Every single question was dead on and every one could now be put as part of the comments to the Initial Study, that is going on.

I can't say whether I am more proud of the VDONAC folks or the group that met tonight. What I can freely admit with pride is, San Pedrans are very special and all of them deserve praise and honor for the issues they are tackling, AND the way they are tackling them!

The fight to keep SRHS 15 from being a too large campus at Angel's Gate is just beginning.

The group that met tonight learned what the history of the proposed project is, how they may be impacted by a new campus built at the site, how important it is that everyone create a set of comments to the Initial Study based on their own observations and their own experiences living where they do.

Some factors the group was more than very concerned about were:

Alma Street cannot support ANOTHER high school on it.

The importance of and the impact to the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center.

The fact that the air quality at the proposed site has tested WORSE than the majority of the site of the existing high school.

The noise factor as it relates to the Alma canyon and the winds.

The glare from windows in 52 foot tall buildings.

The fact that the average student count per class, at the proposed campus is nowhere near the actual average student per classroom count now seen at San Pedro High School.

The attitude of bureaucrats at LAUSD, especially within the Facilities Services Division.

The fact that there is not one clear voice within LAUSD that explains all of the details in a way that isn't contradicted by others within LAUSD.

The fact that there may be money to build a new campus, but no money to maintain it.

The concept that any new campus would NOT lower class sizes at either campus.

I wish that tonight's meeting had been videotaped. had it been, more San Pedrans could have seen some of the best that is "San Pedro" and how the group thought about the students and thought and talked about alternatives to building a new large campus at Angel's Gate.

The folks who attended the meeting can now make even better comments to the Initial Study because they openly shared issues and experiences with others. They also shared with everyone their knowledge of the area, its history, is resources, and its beauty.

The good folks also know very well that they are starting a long, uphill battle.

Like the great folks living in Vista del Oro, the great neighbors and friends living in The Palisades know that they now have to fight to maintain the quality of life they have worked so hard to attain, and now have to work even harder, to keep.

Another Weapon of Mass Development Bites the Dust!

The following piece of news is from The Daily News.

LA says 'NO' to Las Lomas development
By Kerry Cavanaugh Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 03/19/2008 01:21:21 PM PDT

The Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday to stop processing Las Lomas' application to build a 5,553-home mini-city, essentially killing the development project. The council voted 10-5 in favor of Councilman Greig Smith's proposal to block the project.

Council members Richard Alarcon, Jose Huizar, Bernard Parks, Ed Reyes and Herb Wesson cast the no votes.

After the hearing, Smith said he was ecstatic over the decision.

"This was critically important at this moment in time for the city of L.A. that we say, No. We can not afford overdevelopment and this is overdevelopment."

A longtime Las Lomas opponent, Smith had crafted the strategy and pushed his colleagues to stop the project, despite warnings from the City Attorney's office that doing so could prompt a lawsuit that the city would lose.

Ultimately, council members overruled the City Attorney's advice.

Councilman Richard Alarcon had echoed the City Attorney's concerns and he said he was disappointed the council would open the city to such a legal risk.

Las Lomas Land Co. President Dan S. Palmer, Jr. would not comment on a possible lawsuit, but said he was disappointed.

"We're going to look at all the options," Palmer said. "Las Lomas is a fine project providing many benefits to the community and we remain committed to it."
______________________________________________________

The proposed weapon was going to be in the north end of the San Fernando Valley near the interchange of the I5 and 14 Freeways.

It was and is still a huge monster that needs to be fought, even in the probable upcoming lawsuits.

VDONAC Equals Victory!

Vista del Oro Neighbors Against Condos (VDONAC) won a major victory against an overdeveloper when the Harbor Area Planning Commission voted 3-0 to support a motion brought forward by Councilwoman Janice Hahn, which places a restriction on what can be built on three lots that formerly was the site of the McCowan's Market.

The three members of the Planning Commission were greeted by a standing room only gathering of concerned San Pedro residents who are determined to keep the three lots, currently zoned C1-1XL from having condominium or apartments units built on them.

Approximately 20 residents provided comments to the Planning Commission members and the rest of the audience as to why the three lots should only have single-family, detached houses built on them, one per lot.

The motion brought forth by Councilwoman Hahn was to place a Q Qualification Condition on three lots currently zoned as commercial lots.The developer of the site, Mike Rosenthal tore down a much beloved and historical market he bought in 2007 and attempted to build between 15-19 units on the three, combined lots.

With the Q Qualification Condition now voted to be placed on the three lots, the developer is restricted to building residential units the conform to R1 standards which is one-single-family, detached dwelling per each lot of not less than 5,000 square feet.In testimony given before the Planning Commission, Ms Betsy Weisman of the L.A. City Planning Department was asked by one commissioner if the Q Qualification Condition was common in other cities or unique to Los Angeles.

Ms. Weisman stated that this particular restriction is very unique to Los Angeles and most other cities, to her knowledge, have that exact type of restriction.

Councilwoman Janice Hahn attended the meeting and gave her remarks in great support for the motion brought forth to place the Q Qualification Condition on the three lots.

Mr. Rosenthal, who is already in the process of building 3-single-family, detached houses on the three lots already zoned for that type of residential building, will not have the opportunity to build three more of the types of houses that are found the neighborhood.

The Q Qualification Condition places a restriction so that only residential houses that conform to the majority of the houses in the surrounding, may be built.The zone change will take the three lots currently zoned C1-1Xl and change them to QC1-1Xl.
_________________________________________________

Perhaps this change in allowing overdevelopment to spread into a largely R1 neighborhood, may have impacts on the Ponte Vista issue as well.

Ms. Elise Swanson, the Vice President in charge of the Ponte Vista Outreach Team was joined by two of her associates, at the Planning Commission meeting.

What might this denial of potential overdevelopment in one neighborhood, have on what the Planning Department and even the Planning Commission may now look at?

In the Vista del Oro neighborhood of San Pedro, attempting to build up to twenty units in a neighborhood of single-family homes, is a weapon of mass development, no matter that it was on a much smaller scale than what OUR community is facing with Ponte Vista at San Pedro.
____________________________________________________

Personally, I would like to first thank Barbara Dragich and her husband, Nick. They were the "Generals" in the central command of this fight. They both took on an issue they has very little knowledge of how to fight, and they rose to the occasion beyond imagination.

They are true San Pedrans and a great credit to all of us.

Ms. Michele Burk handled many details as a superior facilitator that she is. While continuing her services to OUR community as a Board Member of the San Pedro Pirate Lady Boosters, she took on many tasks with very little notice and help VDONAC immeasurably.

Next I need to put a great shout out to Councilwoman Janice Hahn and her fantastic staff, When presented by a flood of phone calls, Emails, and snail mails from her constituents, concerning the matter, she and her staff made quick work of researching the Q Qualification Condition and how it could be placed on the lots on the corner of 20Th Street and Walker Avenue.

Ms. Hahn brought forth a motion to go before the Planning Commission, and we are all grateful for he swift and decisive actions.

Next, it's the neighbors and the neighborhood which deserves a big hand. I doubt if there has ever been an issue that brought so many San Pedrans so quickly together with a common purpose to safe the quality of life in, at least, part of San Pedro.

I also want to give credit to the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council which sprang into action immediately upon hearing of the plight the stakeholders were being confronted with.

A special shout out needs to go to Ms. Linda Marincovich, the chair of the Planning Committee for the Neighborhood Council. Linda dove into assisting anyone and everyone, taking her time to learn what VDONAC needed and making sure they were supported 100%.

It's San Pedro and San Pedrans at their finest! They encountered a developer who considered his profits before his citizenship, I feel, and the folks living in the area gave him a big check to the backboards.Everyone in OUR community can feel pride in the accomplishments of the members of VDONAC and their supporters. They showed what is best in OUR community, and again and again, it's the people in OUR community that are simply the best!__________________________________________________

Unfortunately the work of many concerned San Pedrans is far from being over. Weapons of mass development still loom on our horizon. Whether it is the proposed overdevelopment of Ponte Vista, the plight Palisades residents are facing with the fact that a school that is too large is proposed for their neighborhood, or whether we all have to do battle with the Port of L.A. and their mission of building a new cruise ship terminal at Kaiser Point, overdevelopments and weapons of mass developments need to be challenged no matter where they are.

The Vista del Oro Neighborhood can finally have a more peaceful night.

We all won this time.

SP Downtown Subs Owner Calling it Quits After 6 Years

The following article appeared in the March 16 edition of The Daily Breeze.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

SP Downtown Subs owner calling it quits after 6 years
By Donna Littlejohn Staff Writer
Article Launched: 03/15/2008 11:06:43 PM PDT

Mike Caccavalla, owner of Downtown Subs and More, says he's closing the San Pedro shop after this weekend. He said he and his wife, Sylvia, will focus on their other downtown business, Boca Activewear.

Downtown Subs and More, a popular home-grown sandwich shop in San Pedro, will close after this weekend, owner Mike Caccavalla said.

Caccavalla opened the shop at 362 W. Sixth St. on Feb. 2, 2002. Besides providing a quick lunch stop for shoppers and workers on the run, the restaurant has carved a niche for itself by catering many local events, from Shakespeare by the Sea performances to fundraisers for the International Bird Rescue Research Center. Other clients have included UCLA and the Port of Los Angeles.

An undisclosed buyer is negotiating to open a sit-down restaurant in the downtown space, Caccavalla said.

While citing personal reasons - he said he could count the number of vacation days he's taken on one hand in the six years since the shop opened - Caccavalla said finances also played a role.
"We all know it's going to take another six years to get downtown going," he said. "It's on the right track, but I don't have another six years to devote to this."

The business is holding its own, though, he said.

"It's easier to get rid of a restaurant when it's doing good than when it's doing bad," he said.
Andrew Silber, owner of the Whale and Ale Pub in downtown, said he's sorry to see the shop close.

"It's part of the fabric of downtown, but hopefully someone else will do a similar job," Silber said.
Warren Gunter owns the property.

"We're not leaving with our tail between our legs," Caccavalla said. "It's been a fun ride."

Caccavalla said he and his wife, Sylvia, will focus all their energies on the family's other downtown San Pedro business, Boca Activewear at 360 W. Sixth St. That business was started 12 years ago.

"The idea we had when we opened (Downtown Subs and More) was to have excellent food at a reasonable price," he said. "We did exactly what we said we wanted to do."

Several small shops have opened in downtown San Pedro over the past year, with owners counting on the new lofts and other developments and improvements to bring the area up.

The slow pace of downtown revitalization is making it harder on small-business owners, Silber said.

"If revitalization were moving quickly and efficiently, most of these businesses would be thriving and not looking for a buyer," he said. "It all plays a role."

Caccavalla, who serves on two downtown advisory panels and was an honorary mayor candidate in San Pedro in 2005, believes the area has a bright future. That revitalization is taking longer than anticipated is not a surprise, he said.

"From what I understand, except for tearing down Beacon Street, everything here has taken forever," he said. "It took them 35 years to get a building between Sixth and Seventh on Centre Street.

"Overall, downtown is coming up, it looks nicer than it used to look."
donna.littlejohn@dailybreeze.com
________________________________________________________

Mike is a great San Pedran! He is that even though he was born and raised on the incorrect side of the country where the ocean comes to shore from the wrong direction.

Well it's not his fault where he was born so we really shouldn't hold it against him.

Mike, his wife, and their daughter are absolutely wonderful people.

Mr. C. is one of the most giving individuals I know. He is one of the folks in my "Be More Like John Olguin" posts on my Ponte Vista blog.

Sure I will miss my roast beef sandwiches at Downtown Subs and More, but I will sure be happier greeting Mike when he looks like he hasn't slept any nights during June and July.

Mike is what is best about OUR community. But we all know and highly appreciate that he is not alone in his giving to OUR community.

Mike's dad Joe, was the co-ordinator for the first Tri-Arts Festival in downtown San Pedro. I hope that continues later this year. With Joe, you can see where Mike learned to give to others.

Now I need to admit here that Joe is also a supporter of Bob Bisno's weapon of mass development, but Joe is a wonderful individual who I happen to disagree with, concerning Ponte Vista.

And with Mike, the great guy that he is, tried his best to stay out of that particular fray.

Yes we lose Downtown Subs and More. Maybe we will get a second Boca Activewear someplace in Rancho Palos Verdes. That may take time, but Mike and his family are always more than welcome to open up a new site closer to Western.

Thank you Mike. You done good. Keep on doing what you are so very good at. You can be an extremely good role model of service to others, that we can all learn from.

Now please Mike, how about stocking more XXL shirts for guys like me that need them?

Latest Meeting Regarding Proposed New School

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Scoping Meeting was held for the proposed South Region High School No. 15 (SRHS 15) project.

I would like to thank Dr. Richard Vladovic for consulting with Mr. John Anderson to extend the comment period to the Initial Study. Instead of the comment period ending on April 7, the period was increased to 60 days and now the end of the comment period has been moved to May 7, 2008.

This extension will allow the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council, in who area, the proposed new campus' site is located, sufficient time to have the Council's Board members learn about the Initial Study and hopefully, create and approve comments to the Initial Study.

It also allows more time for other organizations, associations, groups, and individuals to go through the Initial Study and provide comments to it.

The Scoping meeting was conducted to allow public comments on what should be studied for the Draft Environmental Impact Report, how significant items in the study should be rated, and what more could be studied, apart or in addition to what the Initial Study incorporated.

Comments concerning items to be studied were, for the most part, on point. Individuals spoke about what environmental factors should be studied and how in depth all studies should be.

There were many comments concerning the noise associated with a new campus, complete with outdoor recreational and athletic facilities and how noise travels across the Alma canyon and over the area.

I remember standing outside my grandparents home on Emily Street and being able to plainly hear children outside at White Point Elementary School.

Noise does travel differently in that area, in ways it doesn't normally travel in other areas of San Pedro and onshore winds bring added noises from farther distances than in other areas of San Pedro.

There were also comments about studying all lighting issues for the proposed campus, as it relates to the surrounding environment of homes, the Point Fermin Outdoor Experience Center, and other areas in the vicinity.

The environmental issue that building a new campus would not lower student sizes in classrooms at San Pedro High School and it was confirmed, yet again, that a new campus would not lower class size.

Traffic and access to the proposed site was clearly most on the minds of the audience and also so many of the speakers. We found this out by the clapping heard when poor access and traffic issues were commented on.

A resident who lives at the intersection of Alma and 37Th Street commented that her garage door has been replaced 17 times because of vehicles failing to make the turn off of Alma Street and on to 37Th Street. She also stated that there have been at least 6 injury collisions by vehicles slamming into her home.

Mr. Anderson, who fielded all environmental questions gave about the best answers he could, at this time. I was impressed because so many members of the public made comments and asked questions that Mr. Anderson could answer or take note of, for further study.

Dr. Vladovic, the area's Board of Education member was able to provide comments concerning the current and near future state of funding within LAUSD. Dr. Vladovic provided good comments about how important it is to find more room for students in San Pedro, especially the public high school.

There was also comments made and directed to Mr. Rod Hamilton of the Facilities Division of LAUSD. He is a manager who is on the construction end of the processes and works with the CEQA studies, too.

It was very unfortunate, however to be the bearer of bad news to some current San Pedro High School students who commented on how a new campus would lower class size at San Pedro High School. With Dr. Vladovic's confirmation, I had to comment that building any new high school campus in San Pedro would NOT lower class size at the main campus.

At best, a new campus would lower, for a period of time perhaps, the total student population at the main San Pedro High School campus. Unfortunately, it comes down to infrastructure issues at San Pedro High School and the campus' inability to provide decent sized hallways, cafeteria space, and other facilities used in common with all students. This is just my opinion, but I saw heads nodding approval of my comments concerning infrastructure by some folks in a position to know.

The evening's meeting left me where I started; I still feel that a new campus is probably needed in San Pedro, but not at what is commonly called, Angel's Gate.

We'll press on with constructive comments to the Initial Study, for the most part.

Thankfully, there was hardly any arguing between folks presenting the information and folks who commented on some very difficult issues.

No bruises were seen on anyone leaving the meeting site. That made the night a success.

Odds and Ends 4

Starting this evening and until at least March 18, many, many concerned neighbors are going to deal with two very important meetings.

This evening, beginning at 6:00 PM at Dana Middle School auditorium, the Scoping Meeting for the proposed new high school at what many of us call "Angel's Gate" will be conducted.

This meeting is extremely important because it allows residents and groups to learn more about the Initial Study, make first comments on the Initial Study, and have question and answers flying all about, with LAUSD officials and representatives of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which will continue studying whether any new school can be built at the site and also consider alternatives.

On the afternoon of Tuesday March 18, at the Harbor Area Planning Commission hearing room, the issue of restricting the developer of the area at the intersection of 20Th Street and Walker Avenue will be held. The building restriction would allow for only single-family, detached dwellings to be built, one-per-5,000 square foot lot, on three lots currently zoned C1-1XL, which is commercial zoning.

I strongly believe that each group dealing with issues in their own neighborhoods demonstrate the best of San Pedrans in their attempts to maintain the quality of life in San Pedro that they have worked very hard to earn and keep.
_________________________________________________________

On the Ponte Vista at San Pedro issue,

We sit.
We wait.
We contimplate.
________________________________________________________

On the former McCowan's site issues, I have already mentioned the Planning Commission meeting.

Vista del Oro Neighbors Against Condos (VONDAC) is looking to pack the hearing room with opponents to any idea of building condos or apartments on the three lots, currently zoned C1-1XL.

Written comments and oral comments are appreciated.

The developer, Mike Rosenthal, seems to change his mind fairly easily and he has threatened to sue the City of L.A. if he is forced to deal with restrictions that would not allow him to build condos or apartments on the three, currently commercial, lots.

I have posted information about the upcoming meeting elsewhere on this blog.

VONDAC has the support of Councilwoman Janice Hahn and that support is appreciated.
_________________________________________________________

On the new high school campus issue, the very important meeting tonight has already been mentioned.

There are many facts about all of the issues surrounding attempts to build South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15) in the area commonly called "Angel's Gate".

The Initial Study has been published and the 30-day comment period for the documents commenced on March 7 and will end at the close of business on April 7.

A committee has been formed by opponents to having SRHS 15 built on the "preferred site" and its extreme proximity to the Point Fermin Outdoor Experience Center concerns many individuals who support the Center's objectives that, after redevelopment, will allow approximately 14,000 more students from at least 129 more schools, to utilize the programs and services of the Center, which has been in operation for many years.

Alma Street! It already has one high school that impacts it. The use of Alma Street as a route for ingress or egress to any new campus must not happen.

I am still continuing to believe that a new campus PROBABLY is needed, but I have added a second site-killing issue to the one I first stated. The two site-killers are;

The Alma Street gate must not be used for any new high school campus!

No new high school campus can be built directly next to the Point Fermin Outdoor Experience Center! The Center may have its redevelopment complete by Summer, 2009 and funding have been obtained.

Building a new campus anywhere in San Pedro will not satisfy one of the six objectives for building it in the first place. According to very reliable sources, there will be NO CLASS SIZE REDUCTION at San Pedro High School, if and when any new campus is built.

A new campus may be built to relieve overcrowding of the campus of San Pedro High School and not individual classes. It can be said that it is more of an infrastructure issue, than a true class size reduction issue, I feel.
_______________________________________________________

We have seen more condominium projects in San Pedro turn into lease-to-own or simply apartment units, with this current economic problem that may extend for some time.

I haven't viewed any window treatments closed at Seaport Homes on Western Avenue. That may indicate that nobody has moved in yet.
______________________________________________________

My First Impressions on the SRHS 15 Initial Study

I saved, printed, and read through the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study for the proposed South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15).

Here are some of my findings, impressions and opinions.

The document's "Project Description" and "Project Components" for the Proposed Facilities include 45 classrooms and other facilities contained in two-to three-story buildings approximately 52 feet high.

"45 classrooms" is what the three-academy would be and not the "proposed" two-academy campus both Dr. Vladovic and Mr. Rod Hamilton have been telling us would initially be built.

Further down on Page 7 of the document in the Student Capacity and Schedule section, is the following; "The proposed Project would provide 1,215 two-semester seats for ninth through twelfth grades and would operate with approximately 100 full- and part-time faculty and staff."

Now if anyone can read "810-seats" in that prior paragraph, please allow me to catch and eat a bug!

Also mentioned in the "Project Description" sections are statements about "Nighttime field lighting would be provided." There may also be Adult School activities and Summer School at the proposed campus.

Going back in the study to Page 5 and the Project Objectives, is one of six objectives, and here it is; "Relieve classroom overcrowding and restore pre-2002 classroom size norms at existing schools within the South Region Planning Area, specifically at San Pedro High School.

What strikes me about this objective is that we have already been told that student to teacher ratios will not go down, but they will stay the same or increase!

In essence, the 45 new classrooms at the proposed new campus will simply move 45 rooms full of students from one place to another and allow both campuses to increase in student size. How does this equate to one of the six objectives for building the new campus in the first place?

The Initial Study and Notice of Preparation allows for 30-days of comment period for the documents. What if fails to do is state, in writing, when that 30-day period begins or began.

The title page of the documents stated a publishing date of "March, 2008". The "Environmental Determination" which is the document that instructs that an "Environmental Impact Report is required", was signed on March 4, 2008.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Scoping meeting is scheduled for March 13, 2008. How many days do all of us have to write and send in comments?

I found the documents completely lacking on any environmental impact issue regarding placing a senior high school directly next door to an operating "Beyond the Bell" Point Fermin Outdoor Experience Center?

That facility, if its redevelopment is completed, with allow for approximately 14,000 more students from approximately 129 MORE schools to use the facility, rather than its current usage.

To omit studying the affects of placing a active senior high school next to the Point Fermin Outdoor Experience Center demonstrates to me, a lack of consideration and due diligence on the part of the authors of the Initial Study.

Section 4P of the Initial Study, which is the Transportation/Traffic section is certainly the most under-anticipated section, in my opinion.

Section 4P, subsection b. asks; "Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

The author suggest that that section will have "No Impact" and maybe for a very good reason.

Alma Street may not fall into the category of roads or highways designated for levels of service standards.

Gaffey Street would certainly fall into the category, but it appears the authors forgot about that road in their Initial Study.

Section 4P, subsection a. asks; "Would the project cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?

I feel the "Potentially Significant Impact" given initially on this issue is too low. I feel it should have been rated; "A significant unavoidable impact that would cause a substantial adverse effect on the environment and no feasible mitigation measures would be available to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level."

Here are the routes I have heard about, to get to and from the school.

The first I am listing is the dumbest, in my humble opinion. I heard that some official in LAUSD thinks using the access to Joan Milke Flores Park, on Paseo del Mar, may be the route.

Of course second, and a non-starter is Alma Street. Anyone with any knowledge of San Pedro knows we can't have ANOTHER campus using Alma Street.

The third choices are to use routes from Gaffey Street, via roads owned and maintained by the Department of Parks and Recreation.

The road most often mentioned of this group is Barlow Saxton Road which intersects with Gaffey Street with 32Nd. Street on the east side. This road is too steep, narrow and hazardous for buses, would require a traffic signal very close to the much-more-used intersection of Gaffey at 30Th Street, and ends up intersection with the existing Point Fermin Outdoor Experience Center.

Opening gates at Meyler or Cabrillo where they intersect with 36Th Street should not be used as an option because it would have vehicle traffic traveling on campus grounds to the parking lot(s) slated to be on the north side of the campus(es).

Our taxes cannot take the liability of having vehicles hit pedestrians while on campus(es).

I needed to use "lot(s)" and "campus(es) to denote not one facility, but two that need proper points of entrances and exists. Please remember that right next door to the proposed new campus is the Outdoor Experience Center that needs its own parking lots and would be near the access at Cabrillo and 36Th Street.

And another little issue about the southern gates being used for vehicles is that there would almost certainly be a requirement to place at least one signalized intersection on Paseo del Mar.

The last alternative to placing an entrance to the high school is probably the most controversial and has actually been thought of by folks within LAUSD.

If you place a signal at 30Th Street and Gaffey, then traffic can move along 30Th Street.

30Th Street has curves, but it is wider than Alma and allows for better pedestrian traffic than Alma does.

But here is the kicker.

To utilize 30Th Street as the primary route to both the proposed new campus and the existing Outdoor Experience Center, at least one existing home may have to be bought by LAUSD, using the right of eminent domain to condemn the property and use that area for an access road to both facilities.

Nobody likes this idea at all. Unfortunately, it is probably the safest for pedestrians who will have to park or walk along 30Th Street. It also would relieve increased congestion on Alma in the "Esses" which is the really curvy part I liked to speed down on my bike and in my V.W. when I was young.

Another issue that should be studied, is placing a pedestrian-only access gate on the 36th Street side. It will place more student and recreation parking on the southern side of the campus. I don't really like this idea much, either.

Eighteen areas of study are listed in the Initial Study. Of those, ten have portions of them that are listed as having "Potentially Significant Impacts" on the environment.

I encourage all interested individual and groups to download the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study for South Region High School No. 15, by clicking on the title of this post, or:

http://www.laschools.org/project-status/attach/56.40092/SRHS15IS-NOPFINAL.pdf

Residents Denounce New High School at Angel's Gate

Approximately 60 residents attended the Palisades Residents Association's regular March meeting and were extremely critical of the Los Angeles Unified School District's (LAUSD) plan to build a new campus for senior high school students on property the district owns at Angel's Gate.


Leaders of the brand new committee joining to fight plans for South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15) were very happily surprised to see so many residents join this first real meeting to discuss the new school.


SRHS 15 is currently planned to have two academies of 405 students each, with an additional academy planned when new propositions are approved of by voters.


A representative of LAUSD Board of Education member, Dr. Richard Vladovic also attended and offered Dr. Vladovic's concepts for the new campus. The aide had almost the entire meeting participants asking many questions and the aide was open to providing answers, seeking comments and addressing concerns residents have.



But it was very obvious from the beginning of the meeting in a packed room that had residents stand and even standing in the hall, that nobody supported the current plans.



The group asked many intelligent questions and was very upset with the outreach staff of LAUSD and their continued failure to notify area residents about meetings and other information, concerning SRHS 15.


Several members in attendance also asked whether alternative sites have been studied. Leaders stated that the upcoming meeting to be conducted on Thursday March 13, at Dana Middle School Auditorium, beginning at 6:00 PM, was the place to ask LAUSD leaders and officials questions they seek answers to.


Leaders informed the gathering that the March 13 meeting was extremely critical because it was the scoping meeting for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) officials to determine and announce what environmental studies would be conducted on the Angel's Gate site and any and all alternative sites that can be considered for the new campus.


This meeting is where the public has a chance to steer the CEQA studies by providing official with written and oral comments.


Providing this meeting with written reasons, questions, comments, alternative ideas, and study related facts, gives the public the ability to have input on the upcoming environmental studies.


The written and oral comments can also state the level of study the public believes each issue should be given.


Here are some examples of issues the public may wish to have addressed, beginning at the March 13 meeting:


Using Alma Street as the main access to the campus.

How the Outdoor Experience Center will impact the new campus.

How the new campus will affect educational and environmental impacts on the Outdoor Experience Center.

How lighting, noise, and other types of pollution will affect the local residents.

Whether the new campus should be built somewhere else.

Whether the new campus should be built at all.

The affect a new campus might have on the habitat of animals in the area, including the two foxes that have been seen in the area.

The affects increased traffic on Gaffey and other area streets will have on the neighborhoods in the area.

How off-campus parking needs to be mitigated.

How the construction traffic and local environment near the construction site would be impacted.

Are there any endangered species living in the area?

Whether the soils and water table might be affected.

How traffic around the new campus might affect traffic of other schools.

The study of all ingress and egress points for any new campus must be studied.

Whether a traffic mitigation would be something being done with Alma Street.

Would a traffic signal system be needed along Gaffey near 30Th Street?

Would a traffic signal system be needed at some point on Paseo del Mar?



Just about anything within reason, could and probably should be studied.



The meeting on March 13 is probably the most important first meeting to attend, give written comments, and possibly oral comments. It is certainly a good time to address questions to officials of LAUSD, especially Mr. Rod Hamiliton of the Facilities Division, Dr. Richard Vladovic a member of the Board of Education, and if Councilwoman Janice Hahn is in attendance, you may wish to ask her point blank, if she favors an 810-1,215-seat high school campus, at Angel's Gate.



During the debates over whether a 2,025-seat school should be built in northwest San Pedro, Councilwoman Hahn stated that she favored small learning environments of between 500-550 seats each, dispersed throughout the community.


But this is only the beginning! The Palisades Residents Association's next meeting on May 13, 2008 at White Point Elementary School IS a very important one, all on its own


Mr. Rod Hamiliton of the Facilities Division has been invited to speak and take questions from Resident Association members, on a much smaller scale than the March 13 meeting.


I believe that even Dr. Vladovic, our local Board of Education Member could attend.


Rod Hamilton and Dr. Vladovic have different opinions about the plans for the new campus. However, neither one of them have the official say as to what types of instructions or academies would actually be at any new campus in the area.


The local area superintendent has the final say as to the uses of any new campus in the area.


This post is another start at providing information. There are several other avenues to use to find more information. Here are some sites you might wish to bookmark, along with this one please:


http://www.sanpedropalisades.org./


http://www.sanpedronewsonline.blogspot.com/


http://rneighborhoodsare1.org/

http://www.cspnc.com/index.php

As important as these first sites are, having the Email address for the group that oppose any new high school from being built at Angel's Gate is something you may also want to save:

NoHighSchool15@cox.net

In the coming days, this blog will put together a basic fact sheet for both opponents and supporters to view, concerning having SRHS 15 built at Angel's Gate.

Reading previous posts on this blog may also give you some more ideas and facts about the proposed new campus.

A Correction and Some Other Stuff

In an earlier post regarding the proposed South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15) I commented that building the new campus may or would reduce class sizes at San Pedro High School's main campus.

That was an error.

Building SRHS 15 will NOT necessarily reduce class sizes at the main campus and if the two academies LAUSD Board Member, Dr. Richard Vladovic wishes to see moved from the main campus to the new campus. Class sizes in those academies would actually go up, due to the fact that neither one of them currently instructs 405 students, which is the projected seat number of each academy at the end of the initial build out of SRHS 15.

I apologize to everyone who believed that building SRHS 15 would actually improve the student to teacher ratio, at either the main campus or the "annex" which SRHS 15 has been dubbed by some people within LAUSD.

I learned something new tonight, too. I had thought that moving the Science Center from its current location on Barrywood Street, in San Pedro to the Angel's Gate area, would be better for everyone.

I learned from a recognized expert that some of the things the Barrywood site allows for, surpasses what could be expected at Angel's Gate.

Things like solar power production experiments and yes, even wind experiments, if you can believe that there is better wind on Barrywood than there is at Angel's Gate, benefit from the northwest San Pedro location.

I must admit, visiting my first wife's family directly across the street from the Science Center, in a home without air conditioning, made all of us pretty uncomfortable during the summer and early fall.

But if you want heat over coolness, and stagnant air over afternoon breezes, then Barrywood is better than Angel's Gate by a long shot, I feel.

I am still holding firm with my two strong feelings; A new high school campus PROBABLY should be built in San Pedro and any use of Alma Street for access is a non-starter.

We must all continue to watch that all studies, including studies on all alternatives, be done carefully, completely, and with the best interest of the students and taxpayers as the central thought.

A Letter From Councilwoman Janice Hahn

Here is a letter from Councilwoman Janice Hahn to neighbors in OUR community.

If you have a P.C., you can right click over any part of it to enlarge it and you can left click over it to save it or print it.
On behalf if Vista del Oro Neighbors Against Condos (I am a remote-site member), we wish to thank Ms. Hahn and her staff for their care, concern, and continued involvement in this matter.

SRHS 15 Illustrations. Mission: Impossible or Just Improbable

Good day Mr. or Ms. Phelps,

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to attempt to place two construction sites in one area of land at Angel's Gate.

The first illustration is of the proposed South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15) that may be constructed at Angel's Gate, in San Pedro.

The next illustration purports to show the proposed school site superimposed over a Google Earth photo of the site, in Southern California.

The third illustration shows the Milken Outdoor Experience Center from the Final Environmental Impact Report, published in March, 2006 and it too, is superimposed over a Google Earth photo of the same area.

Now Mr. or Ms. Phelps, your mission is to do what the blogmaster of this site has not been able to do; adjust the SRHS 15 illustration to fit with the illustration of the Milken Outdoor Experience Center, into the same area of land, without losing space for either of the purposed facilities. M Richards recognizes that is may be impossible to accomplish such a task and he wants to know which of the two purposed facilities will suffer loss of space, or if both will need to share losses of valuable educational land.

Please remember Mr. or Ms. Phelps, that the Outdoor Experience Center is designed to house students, faculty, and staff on a 24-hour, 7 days per week type of educational experience and the SRHS 15 site is designed to be an annex of an existing campus, also placed along Alma Street.
As always, if you or any of your members of the I.M. force is recognized or captured by the people at LAUSD that state, without proof, that SRHS 15 WILL BE built at Angel's Gate, I will feel only a bit of sympathy for you.

You may, of course, wish this blog self destructs in five seconds, but that is not going to happen; live with it!

A New Blog is Born

Since the demise of new posts on Life on the edge and More San Pedro, a new blog has been born this morning to include items that won't be available because of the two loses in OUR community.

http://www.sanpedronewsonline.blogspot.com/ is the place to visit, bookmark, and enjoy.It is another good source for news, information, and opinion, and best of all, it isn't one of my blogs!

So please visit the new blog and please continue to visit this blog for news and views concerning Bob's weapon of mass development named Ponte Vista at San Pedro.

Tough and Ugly Questions and Probable Answers

I think we all need to take another look at the whole South Region High School #15 (SRHS 15) issue, before we run headstrong towards the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) meeting scheduled for March 13, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Dana Middle School auditorium.

I undertook too many hours in the middle of last night pondering many issues, concerning the proposed school. I feel sharing some thoughts and asking for input for readers of this blog, may help me and others to be able to answer the tough questions, that are all over this debated issue.

I still continue to write that I think San Pedro PROBABLY needs a new high school campus, but I’d certainly listen to and ponder thoughts from folks who think San Pedro needs another campus.

One thing I am now more certain than ever though, is that Alma Street will NOT be used as even a primary access to any new high school, no matter if or where they build it!

I think a bit of refreshing of what some folks propose for SRHS 15 is in order.

Any new campus, built anywhere is being considered, by many levels of administration in LAUSD as an annex to San Pedro High School. It may have a different name, but the thought is to build classrooms and SOME other amenities a distance away from San Pedro High School, but still be administered by the folks who lead and manage the largest high school in San Pedro.

It is thought that if and when classrooms are constructed, 810 students will move, WITH EXISTING TEACHING STAFF, to the new location. At this point there is apparently no active plans to allow the teaching staff in San Pedro, to grow as the number of classrooms grow.

This, dear readers, is a real conundrum for me and my ever failing algebra and math skills. If no new teachers are added, wouldn’t we just be moving problems from one place to another?

I am going to use a math problem as an example. I have no idea whether the statistics are what I imagine.

Consider the volume of the number of teachers now teaching at the San Pedro High School campus to be “1X”.

After the 45 classrooms are added, wherever, “6/7X” number of teachers stay at the giant campus.

“1/7X” of the teachers move to the new site. “6/7X” plus “1/7X used to equal “1X”, didn’t it?

If no new teachers are added to the combined faculty, then it would seem that the number of students per faculty member would either stay the same, or increase, with the increased seats being given to the large campus.

The school district is currently in a $460 MILLION DOLLAR budget crunch. On the front page of today’s Daily Breeze were articles dealing with the potential loss of teaching staff members.
If San Pedro High School loses teachers, then I would suspect that class sizes would probably increase or programs are eliminated.

But might we all just be moving problems from one place to another? If LAUSD has such a high dropout rate and test scores that drive Eastview parents to send their kids to Palos Verdes Unified School District schools rather than LAUSD high schools, how can anyone claim that adding more seats into a failing system, will actually cause a turnaround?

Let’s try and figure out what improvements were made in the dropout rate and test scores when the $2Billion Dollar+ Proposition BB allowed for schools to be built.

I don’t have any real facts on this yet, but are we now watching LAUSD call for even more schools and Proposition approvals, after that giant hunk of money was spent by the school district.

When do we say when, with our tax dollars? With the Govenator taking Proposition 98 money that should go for schools, for other uses, why should we consider that any new proposition funds be spent where we expect them to be spent?

There is another ugly issue, I’m afraid. Some members of OUR community think that “San Pedro students” should be considered more than all the rest of the students of LAUSD.

While I was a student of LAUSD, in San Pedro, do we have the right to single out our students over other students who may be in more dire straits, as far as their education goes.

I thought the portion of my property taxes that go for schooling; go to the entire district, not just Harbor Area schools. There is a high school in L.A. that has about 4,000 students, might they be in more need of relief than students in San Pedro?

And about “San Pedro students”, did you know that Dodson Middle School buses in about 600 students each and every day?

I am also still confused by this “annex” issue that puts a group of classrooms almost out of walking distance from the main campus.

Won’t seniors and juniors at the annex need to speak with the College Counselor, or other members of the administration? Have the folks pushing for the “annex” done all their due diligence concerning the movements of students, faculty, and staff during the course of any particular school day?

I feel you should know that one of the reasons SRHS 15 is currently designed to be a 810-seat school is that there is not enough money in the current budget for the school to allow for the 405-seat “Academy #3”. But be warned, as soon as money becomes available, “Academy #3” will be built.

And here is another little beauty. Some administrators in LAUSD are considering that down the road, in perhaps 10-15 years, the little annex, currently proposed for Angel’s Gate, can grow in number of seats to the range of 2,000 or so.

Now what about the Milken Outdoor Experience Center that has an approved Environmental Impact Report and is slated to be built next door to the proposed SRHS 15 site?

This education center is proposed to have up to 160 students, faculty, and staff members coming to it on Monday, and staying over until Friday afternoon, during the school year.

What about the weekend you may wonder? Up to 120 students, faculty, and staff will spend from Friday afternoon until Monday morning at the site.

The Outdoor Experience Center is designed to allow fifth grade students and their teachers, from more inner city schools than our 12 elementary schools perhaps, the chance to study science and nature, overlooking the blue Pacific.

But wait a minute! That site may not get redeveloped if the needs of “San Pedro students” trump the needs of a greater number of students and the Center could give way to that up to 2,000 seat campus already being mentioned in hushed, “don’t quote me” rooms.

It is now time to mention that San Pedro High School has only about 370 or so “permitted” students that come from other areas to attend school. The vast majority of students at S.P.H.S. do live in the area.

You also should know that if any new academy at any new campus is slated to welcome existing numbers of students in both the Law Enforcement Academy and the Marine Sciences Academy, more students can easily find seats in any 405-seat academy site.

The two programs mentioned are nowhere near a 405-seat limit, currently.

Please come prepared with written comments to the CEQA meeting.

Some folks in LAUSD are so arrogant, they not only will not listen to oral comments, but they will state as fact, things that haven’t be proven or tested yet.

Also don’t be too alarmed if some folks talk to you like you are third graders.

Just present your facts, issues, and opinions in writing, and they just MIGHT read some of it.

It’s useless and hopeless to argue with certain folks in the Facilities Division of LAUSD, just save your breath and use your passion when you put your thoughts into writing.