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 HernandezCommunity 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