Las Lomas: Something Shady From the 661?
Now the old dead Republican Mayor is not necesarily gung ho on the Las Lomas Project (beyond my libertarian soul which cries to the ghost of Ayn Rand to end rampant collectivism. Anyway.)
Despite that, 1) what the hell is the City of Santa Clarita up to, 2) When will residents of Sylmar, Granada Hills, Porter Ranch and other communities affected by the massive development in the 661 have a voice, and 3) Why are the politicians who are screaming and yelling about Las Lomas going AWOL on Newhall Ranch?
David Hernandez has crafted the following and it provokes thought that is sure to raise the hackles of those with an agenda. For those of us who are only concerned about the impact of the project (one way or another) on the communities within the City of Los Angeles, I don't think David's points can be ignored.
It does seem to make sense to allow the Las Lomas land to be part of the City of Los Angeles and give us control of it. Why do Angelenos want to turn this part of their destiny over to County or another City which doesn't give a rat's ass about our community?
Again I myself have not taken a final position on the project (other than I question it from a logistical perspective but I like a lot of their ideas). However, no matter what, I don't trust Santa Clarita and don't want to see my friends in the North Valley being used by shady politicians from the 661. We get used enough from the shady politicians in our own city.
Can the case be made for the City of Los Angeles demanding the Los Lomas Project be under its jurisdiction?
David Hernandez writes:
The Las Lomas site sits just outside the city limits, a true fact.
The traffic conditions on the main highways leading in and out of the San Fernando Valley are at rush hour horrific, also a true fact.
What is the cause of this traffic nightmare? Could it be the Development in Newhall, Saugus, Santa Clarita, Valencia, Action, and Agua Dulce; all outside the City of Los Angeles? Did Los Angeles have any voice in these developments and the negative impacts on Los Angeles, NO!
Why are paid lobbyists representing Santa Clarita warning local community groups in the San Fernando Valley about the Las Lomas Development? Why are they warning of horrific impacts to traffic, water and the environment?
The real question is, why weren't they warning us about the other projects? How many of those projects were they or are they involved with?
If the Las Lomas project is such a dreadful development, why have those opposed to it, not made any arguments, protests, or warned us about a project ( Landmark Village development) which was just given the green light in Newhall Ranch? After all, this project is not 5, 800 homes, it is 21,000 homes!
More on the Landmark Village project: http://www.newhallranch.net/index.asp
More on Las Lomas project: http://www.laslomas.com/
How is this going to impact our current traffic and water conditions?
Why haven't the community groups in the San Fernando Valley been given the opportunity to ask questions or lodge complaints or protests since they will pay a price for more traffic and other challenges?
Because they are all outside the City of Los Angeles!
If the Las Lomas folks are willing to give the residents of City of Los Angeles the ability to ask questions and demand mitigation or even nix the project, we would be foolish not to let them.
If the Las Lomas folks want to go forward with the EIR Process, they must be required to pay for it.
Ask yourself, is it better to have a voice or not?
Is it better to have the ability to demand mitigation or not?
Is it better to have the developer pay for the EIR or not?
David Hernandez
Community Advocate
What can you do? Call your City Coucil member and demand we have a voice and a vote in this project!
P.S.
Why have all the politicians opposing Las Lomas be absent in the Newhall Ranch Development debate and its impact on the San Fernando Valley?
Despite that, 1) what the hell is the City of Santa Clarita up to, 2) When will residents of Sylmar, Granada Hills, Porter Ranch and other communities affected by the massive development in the 661 have a voice, and 3) Why are the politicians who are screaming and yelling about Las Lomas going AWOL on Newhall Ranch?
David Hernandez has crafted the following and it provokes thought that is sure to raise the hackles of those with an agenda. For those of us who are only concerned about the impact of the project (one way or another) on the communities within the City of Los Angeles, I don't think David's points can be ignored.
It does seem to make sense to allow the Las Lomas land to be part of the City of Los Angeles and give us control of it. Why do Angelenos want to turn this part of their destiny over to County or another City which doesn't give a rat's ass about our community?
Again I myself have not taken a final position on the project (other than I question it from a logistical perspective but I like a lot of their ideas). However, no matter what, I don't trust Santa Clarita and don't want to see my friends in the North Valley being used by shady politicians from the 661. We get used enough from the shady politicians in our own city.
Can the case be made for the City of Los Angeles demanding the Los Lomas Project be under its jurisdiction?
David Hernandez writes:
The Las Lomas site sits just outside the city limits, a true fact.
The traffic conditions on the main highways leading in and out of the San Fernando Valley are at rush hour horrific, also a true fact.
What is the cause of this traffic nightmare? Could it be the Development in Newhall, Saugus, Santa Clarita, Valencia, Action, and Agua Dulce; all outside the City of Los Angeles? Did Los Angeles have any voice in these developments and the negative impacts on Los Angeles, NO!
Why are paid lobbyists representing Santa Clarita warning local community groups in the San Fernando Valley about the Las Lomas Development? Why are they warning of horrific impacts to traffic, water and the environment?
The real question is, why weren't they warning us about the other projects? How many of those projects were they or are they involved with?
If the Las Lomas project is such a dreadful development, why have those opposed to it, not made any arguments, protests, or warned us about a project ( Landmark Village development) which was just given the green light in Newhall Ranch? After all, this project is not 5, 800 homes, it is 21,000 homes!
More on the Landmark Village project: http://www.newhallranch.net/index.asp
More on Las Lomas project: http://www.laslomas.com/
How is this going to impact our current traffic and water conditions?
Why haven't the community groups in the San Fernando Valley been given the opportunity to ask questions or lodge complaints or protests since they will pay a price for more traffic and other challenges?
Because they are all outside the City of Los Angeles!
If the Las Lomas folks are willing to give the residents of City of Los Angeles the ability to ask questions and demand mitigation or even nix the project, we would be foolish not to let them.
If the Las Lomas folks want to go forward with the EIR Process, they must be required to pay for it.
Ask yourself, is it better to have a voice or not?
Is it better to have the ability to demand mitigation or not?
Is it better to have the developer pay for the EIR or not?
David Hernandez
Community Advocate
What can you do? Call your City Coucil member and demand we have a voice and a vote in this project!
P.S.
Why have all the politicians opposing Las Lomas be absent in the Newhall Ranch Development debate and its impact on the San Fernando Valley?
Labels: las lomas, santa clarita
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 2/14/2008 04:11:00 PM
18 Comments:
That's a good point. Annex it to the city and for sure Smith, Wendy, LaBonge, etc. can put an end to it no matter what the mustached midget says. (And LA can collect the property tax too)
Think of it Home Depot was in the county and LA could end it by annexing it. For sure the Sunland people would do that. would you trust Glendale to handle it for you? I doubt it.
This long post proves that ZD jhas addled your brain.
These are some questions to ask Smith but presumably the difference with Newhall Ranch is, this project wants and needs L A's water. Where did Newhall get its water?
All may be moot for now if you look at today's Daily News: the Palmers only own half this land, just have a lease to buy the rest, which belongs to an elderly disabled couple who are not being allowed to even speak to the media, based on some alleged legal agreements with the Palmers.
Smith is quoted saying the Palmers may be trying to swindle an elderly disabled couple out of their land.
Going through all this public furor if they don't even own the land makes the developers look shady as hell. The whole thing sounds odd.
On the other hand that could be short penised Mitchell created spin coming from Greig.
Hooray for Greig Smith.... When Alex Padilla was on the council, he said he would never let this project move ahead as long as he remained in office. Then, Alarcon comes in and while on the one hand he says he opposes Las Lomas, on the other hand he is doing everything possible to set it up to be jammed down residents' throats. This is a lousy deal for L.A., a really lousy deal.
The Newhall ranch development was approved about 3 to 4 years ago. The EIR has already been approved. The landmark project is a phase of the Newhall Ranch Project. The County doesn't think that the City of LA is impacted and that is why the City has not had a voice in reviewing the Newhall Ranch Project.
Las Lomas is located in the middle of the 5 and the 14 and will further screw up the traffic in this area. They need to build a couple of extra lanes on the freeway to get rid of the impact that they will cause. I think that if they don't do this they should not be allowed to build. They need to add at least one lane in each direction to the 5 and the 14, only this will help the traffic.
If they are not willing to do this upfront, from the very start then they should not be allowed to even start their application because they are not serious.
I may not always agree with Smith but someone has to protect us from this developer. No one cares about this area. If this was Ahamanson Ranch twenty movies stars would be march up and down Balboa demanding that they not kill 2000 oak trees, but since it is not in the right part of the Valley no one cares.
I hope that Council gets these assurances about the freeway before entering any agreement to do the EIR and annexing the land and letting them take our water.
Yea but if the City takes control of the land then don't you have more control than if Santa Clarita and LA County take control?
Jealous Dummy said..."This long post proves that ZD jhas addled your brain."
YOU DID IT AGAIN LOSER. Poppin off at the mouth without reading. (NOT MY POST!) But try and use it as a chance to criticize me. At least your agenda isn't completely transparent.
today on the blog we've covered cunts, boobs and penises.
Dear Mayor Sam,
If you want the accurate truth about Las Lomas, contact Kim Thompson, she has been working on opposing it for the last 10 years.
David Hernandez is working on behalf of Palmer and VICA and of course will spin info on the side of Las Lomas developers, who only care about $'s, not how the project affects quality of life issues for community members.
People need to hear the other side of why Las Lomas needs to be stopped,ie immense increase in traffic, over-taxed finances, infrastructure such as police, fire, roads, schools, loss of water (we are already in big trouble here which means possible rationing this summer),loss of "Rim of the Valley,"
the removal of hundreds of trees, most importantly "it's the location... location... location....," which is not contigeous with the city of L.A. and would need a huge bridge built to connect to us. It also requires the leveling of a mountain on an earthquake fault taking out over 2 million cubic yards of dirt. By the way, Bridges came down over the freeways in that area during the Sylmar
and Northridge earthquakes. Also the tunnel was shut down very recently because of an accident resulting with a fire in the tunnel, causing a nighmare traffic jam in surrounding communities for days while it was under repair. It will cost Los Angles more than it will ever benefit financially.
Supposedly, unknown to most City Councilmembers, the Planning Dept. had been working on that project, that is not even in the city, costing tax payers thousands of dollars without any instruction or word that the city would agree to annex it. We need to find out whose authority allowed that to happen. Is that a standard SOP? Did anyone ever wonder why the Planning Dept. never seemed to have enough staff and why it takes an unrealistic amount of time for community plans to be updated? Could it be that City Planners have been tied up taking care of something other than our city's legitimate business?
The city of Santa Clarita confirmed that they do not want to annex the now very questionable "Las Lomas", but prefer to have the property remain in the county where it is zoned for a sensible 250 homes.
Speaking of L.A. having more control over Las Lomas. Very seldom does the city see a project it doesn't like particulary if it means $'s in it's pocket. SB 1818 is a prime example, since they tend to go overboard or past the edge on everything that is required for whatever purpose.
I suggest everyone that is interested in Las Lomas, to study the map of the area and see why communities in it's sphere of influence think it is a very bad idea. I also suggest everyone read the "Commulative Affect Regulations" under CEQA, study the project without comparisons to other proposed projects, just on it's individual merits, without outside influence, before making a decision to support or reject the project.
"The Newhall ranch development was approved about 3 to 4 years ago. The EIR has already been approved. The landmark project is a phase of the Newhall Ranch Project. The County doesn't think that the City of LA is impacted and that is why the City has not had a voice in reviewing the Newhall Ranch Project."
that's pretty funny.
20,000+ homes,and nobody living there will head south and work or shop in LA city?
9:51 am, Santa Clarita is a major community in L.A. County. Just because their businesses are not apparent from the freeway, does not mean they don't exist, as has been previously indicated by supporters of Las Lomas.
Major corporations have left Los Angeles and moved there as they continue to open up new commercial and industrial sections. Take a look at the traffic going into the Santa Clarita area from Los Angeles. The drive time for people who live in the S.F. Valley and work in Santa Clarita is continuing to increase because of the traffic. So, Santa Clarita actually is offering opportunities for businesses.
Actually, L.A. is competing with Santa Clarita for new business and yet some persons in L.A. complain that Santa Clarita isn't doing enough to bring in business that will keep their residents working in Santa Clarita. You can't have it both ways L.A.!
The city of Santa Clarita has officially and very publicly gone on record as being strongly opposed to the project. And Santa Clarita is located in the portion of L.A. County represented by Supv. Mike Antonovich, who is also opposed to the project.
So, you are arguing that annexing the land to the city of Los Angeles will "protect" the city from Santa Clarita and the county!? Duh......
Does the word "Collusion" ring a bell here? All the high paid lobbyists, VICA, former and current elected officials who support and advocate for this environmentally disastrous project, are well aware that Palmer is swindling this old couple. but they don't give a shit because the bottom line is money! and more Money! They are a bunch of whores selling their soul to the highest bidder.
AMEN, you got it right!
Hedda Hopper I can tell you about one of your suggestions privately.
Anyway, Santa Clarita or Pasadena fights for its community. Why don't we fight for ours?
I don't trust Antonovich or the City of Santa Clarita. There are likely developers lined up for that land tied into them.
The best thing would be for LA to take it. Greig Smith, Wendy Greuel, etc. are already opposed to Las Lomas and won't let it happen.
And if they build 250 homes, LA should get the tax money not Santa Clarita when they annex it.
Don't be so trustful of the County or Santa Clarita. Name one thing they've done for your community.
They care no more about you than Palmer does.
Oh one other thing - Santa Clarita has an issue about the City of LA's border touching their's. I don't know what it is, if they think it affects property values or what. But in fact they'd go for 5000 homes at Las Lomas if it kept LA at bay.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home