Bridge to Breakwater & Port Development News & Meetings
Well, Tomorrow night is the final scoping meeting on the Bridge to Breakwater Project. If you want to get a word in on the various proposals, that the time. Also there will be a Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council meeting this Thursday, who's primary agenda item will be discussion of the project. I'll be at both of these, schedule permitting.
In the news, the Breeze has a variety of articles of possible local interest, including the controversy regarding the proposed Burlington National Santa Fe rail terminal in Wilmington, planning for evacuation following a major disaster affecting the Port and an article about the mega-wetlands-tree-hugger alternative (which I'm highly sympathetic to) counter proposal to the "Supermax" development plan for Bridge to Breakwater.
Meeting Info
Final Scoping Meeting
Tuesday, October 11 @ 6:30 PM
@ The Los Angeles Harbor Hotel (a.k.a. the Sheraton)
Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council Meeting
Thursday, October 13 @ 6:30 PM
350 West 5th Street, 2nd Floor - In the Harry Bridges Institute
In the news, the Breeze has a variety of articles of possible local interest, including the controversy regarding the proposed Burlington National Santa Fe rail terminal in Wilmington, planning for evacuation following a major disaster affecting the Port and an article about the mega-wetlands-tree-hugger alternative (which I'm highly sympathetic to) counter proposal to the "Supermax" development plan for Bridge to Breakwater.
Meeting Info
Final Scoping Meeting
Tuesday, October 11 @ 6:30 PM
@ The Los Angeles Harbor Hotel (a.k.a. the Sheraton)
Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council Meeting
Thursday, October 13 @ 6:30 PM
350 West 5th Street, 2nd Floor - In the Harry Bridges Institute
3 Comments:
Well, the final scoping meeting was really something else. Literally. It looks like the Port, the developers, and the Chamber of Commerce finally heard the voices of protest that have been ringing so clearly at the last few meetings (particularly the one on September 15)--and instead of taking those comments on board, they (or some of them) did some frantic behind-the-scenes phone calling and emailing to get as many pro-development people as possible to pack the room and create the appearance of this "silent majority" that they've apparently decided to use as a tactic.
With a few obvious exceptions, I've never seen any of the people who made pro-development comments tonight at any of the other meetings. A few other people I talked to were stunned as well, and generally seemed to agree with me that it looked like the result of some heavy lobbying on somebody's part (but nobody could really guess exactly who). Either way, they certainly covered all the bases--we got the Mexican, the black dude, the Croatian, the old guy, and several ethnic-club types...all they forgot was the halt and the lame. I guess there weren't any surfers available at Central Casting tonight, or I'm sure we would have seen one of them as well. OK, I'm exaggerating a tiny bit, but the smell of astroturf in the room was palpable, if you know what I mean. After the meeting, somebody (not me) asked Sal Zambrano whether he knew anything about behind-the-scenes lobbying, and he denied it with a smile--rather a sheepish one, I thought.
The dog-and-pony-show aspect of it was certainly enhanced by the fact that most of the pro-development commenters left the meeting long before it was over. Or maybe that's just because they're all such solid citizens, with families to look after and decent bedtimes to adhere to, unlike those of us in the "opposition." Yeah, maybe that's it.
Anyway, I'll take what happened tonight as a clear signal that the Port, the developers, and the Chamber of Commerce took the last few public meetings--during which their pet project was witheringly denounced by one member of the public after another--as a shot across the bow, and have decided to do whatever it takes to ram this thing through with as much development as possible. The first tactic was adding the Maximum Development Alternative in order to falsely position the Proposed Plan as a "compromise" between the Max and the Reduced alternative; tonight's tactic was stacking the public meeting with members of pro-development organizations to get as many pro-Project comments on the record as they could (and at least one of them referred to the Proposed Plan as the "balanced" plan--surprise, surprise).
What they'll pull next is anybody's guess, but one thing is certain: the people who are concerned about this place being transformed into Playa Del Pedro had better start organizing. The big-money interests behind this monstrosity have already won over the leaders of some church and ethnic-club groups by dangling the promise of jobs--bright, shiny jobs!--in front of them, and the astroturfing campaign is in full swing.
Incidentally, I was sitting in the row right in front of Janice Hahn, and judging by the comments I heard her making while all of this was going on, her sympathies lie squarely with the pro-development crowd, no matter how balanced she tries to appear when addressing the matter publicly. Just in case anybody was in any doubt about that, now you know.
I have no doubt that Janice wants to see this project go forward. It would be the big feather in her cap if it moves soon. The jobs metric is what is going to sell this. Remember back when Clinton was president and all those meaningless service sector jobs were created, as the economy for the middle class continued to darken? That's the kind of recovery/development that this project will equal, on the jobs front.
It's funny, I do want to see more retail development so that Pedrans have a local place to shop, but I never thought about it as a job engine, probably because minimum wage doesn't seem like a job to me, it seems like highly disguised slavery.
I didn't get the feeling that the Chamber was out in force. The real presence I felt was the -ich and -ini networks in action. Several Chamber members left early and a lot of key Chamber or Downtown BID members were not present. I'm on the BID board and Angels Gate is a Chamber member and we were not outreached in any way about the meeting.
I was suprised to see Joe Gatlin out there pimping the maximum development plan on behalf of his organisations. It seemed like a counter move to me, as the maximum density red herring seems so under researched that it's hard for me to see someone as sharp as Joe endorse it.
Oh, I'd love to see more retail here as well, for a variety of reasons--but I'd love to see it in the existing districts and historical buildings that are designed for that purpose, many of which are empty or underutilized*. That the advocates of Del Amo by the Sea either don't understand this or don't care is so profoundly moronic and/or vicious that it...well, it makes me want to cuss at public meetings.
And you're right, the jobs (at least the permanent ones) that will be created by this project will be McJobs at best. Actually, this is something of an argument for no project at all; after all, the longshoremen, clerks, and superintendents who work at berths 84, 55, and 49 when ships are in earn a far more decent wage than the teenaged frozen-banana-servers who will work at the new businesses on those docks could ever hope to make. And although I wouldn't know, I suspect that much the same is true of the Westway terminal--not that there aren't other compelling reasons for moving that one out of there.
*I also would love to see some truly bold (as opposed to "let's build a bunch of humongous shopping centers straight out of 1969 and accuse anybody who opposes them of being stuck in the past!") moves made when it comes to getting Pedrans in and out of these districts and buildings to do their shopping: buses, light rail, bike paths and parking, and the like. Portland--not fucking Torrance, not goddamned Marina Del Rey--is the city to look to for inspiration in that regard.
Post a Comment
<< Home