Playa Vista Phase Two Should Not Be Approved

By James R. Smith

Sustainable development is needed in the coastal zone, not a mega- development set on top of liquidfaction zone, causing more traffic and more pollution.

Dec. 16, 2003

Comments on Playa Vista Phase Two Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") Case No. ENV-2002-6129-EIR

Playa Vista Phase II should not be approved. The damage it will cause to the environment cannot be mitigated.

THE WORST LOCATION

Perhaps no location could be worse suited for the Playa Vista Phase II development than the Ballona Gap, "an ancient floodplain." Lurking directly beneath the surface, scientists conjecture, may be the Compton- Los Alamitos Fault. In addition, according to the Report, "The City of Los Angeles General Plan Safety Element indicates that the Playa Vista area is subject to potential liquefaction and the Proposed Project site is within an official Liquefaction Zone" (Page 183, Village at Playa Vista Draft EIR, August 2003).

The Report also acknowledges that the proposed project is in an area of poor air quality, with elevated air pollution levels, but draws no negative conclusions about adding a development that will dump additional large amounts of pollutants into our air.

The Report also glosses over the amount of water pollution that the project will produce and that will detrimentally affect the Santa Monica Bay as well as the Bellflower Aquitard, Ballona Aquifer, and the Silverado Aquifer which lie beneath the project site. The state of California has already given an "impaired" rating to the Bay, Ballona Creek Estuary, and Ballona Wetlands.

TRAFFIC

The most immediate visible impact of the project, should it go forward, will be to traffic congestion. The Report acknowledges what residents of the area already know, that many of the intersections are at present near gridlock. Lincoln Blvd. is a prime example of a street that is already over capacity for much of the day. Even streets that have better ratings, such as Abbot Kinney Blvd., are chocked with commuter traffic. An honest appraisal of the traffic impact of Playa Vista II will show that the project would have a devastating impact on westside streets and freeways. Such an independent study should be conducted without delay, in order to allow a realistic evaluation of this project.

Playa Vista lies close to California's fragile coastline. Even without this project, the coast is besieged by irresponsible developers who neglect any thought of the impact of their developments on the precious environmental resources that are our legacy to future generations. It is important that the coast be protected from such irresponsible projects such as Playa Vista, not just for those who live nearby, but for all Californians. In the past, the coast has served as a relatively pollution- free area to which residents of the inner city could escape. Playa Vista, and similar if smaller developments, is changing that dynamic. The coast is becoming clogged with traffic, mini-malls and cookie-cutter development projects who's sole purpose is making profits for their developers.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

It is time that the state of California and local governments approve only sustainable developments and say no to irresponsible developments that destroy our future. We should also adopt a holistic approach to development that demands that regional solutions to problems such as traffic and pollution be addressed as part of the approval - or disapproval - process, in addition to more local concerns such as zoning. This is the essence of "planning," which the EIR attempts to downplay or ignore.

If reducing traffic and pollution along the coast are not part of the discussion about Playa Vista Phase II, there cannot be a claim that there really is a planning process. Instead, we are simply allowing random development. We should say as much.

In sum, the coastal area should be a mixture of human activity and nature. Public space should be at least as important as private development. Green space, in the form of large and small parks, wetlands, undeveloped bluffs and nature preserves should be given consideration in all development decisions. Playa Vista I, with its closely packed buildings, indicates that the developers do not understand this concept, regardless of their public relations campaign.

HOUSING

At the same time, the coast should not be a playground just for the wealthy. Affordable housing and strong rent control should be a part of any environmental analysis. The level and percentage of affordability requirements at Playa Vista and other coastal developments should be in proportion to income levels in the metropolitan area. Anything less will continue the trend toward the coast becoming an enclave for the well- to-do. In this regard, Playa Vista Phase II is part of this problem. Real affordable housing, as well as cooperative housing ownership, should be considerations that are incorporated into Playa Vista Phase II and other development projects.

The first step to sustainable development along our coast should be a moratorium on all new construction that worsens the current traffic and pollution problems. Rail transit along major coastal corridors, such as Lincoln and Sepulveda Blvds., and to and from the coast from inland areas are the kinds of development projects we should be considering. When mass transit is in place that is capable of handling the majority of trips, increased density will be possible, particularly along these transit corridors. Meanwhile, a moratorium would ensure that mass transit rail lines are built sooner, rather than later. In addition, bike and pedestrian- only zones in some of our coastal cities, including Venice, are the kind of "zoning" possibilities we should be considering.

THE SOCIAL COSTS OF PLAYA VISTA II

The only aspect of the Playa Vista project that is private is the massive profit that will be reaped by the developers. Meanwhile, the social costs of the project will be left to the taxpayers, beginning with millions of dollars in roadway "improvements" required to accommodate Playa Vista traffic.

Other social costs include public health expenses due to increased incidents of emphysema, other heart and lung diseases and cancer engendered by increased pollution, as well as mental health problems worsened by road rage and frustration with overcrowded streets. Pedestrian and bicyclist causalities are sure to increase because of increased auto usage. And in the long run, the public will be saddled with massive repair of ecological damage caused by constructing this project in the delicate Ballona Gap.

While the developers of Playa Vista may claim that their property rights allow them to go forward with this project, they are wrong. In crowded urban areas, individual property rights must be used in socially productive ways, and with the agreement of the community. To advocate unrestricted, or barely restricted, property rights is like advocating the free speech right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. We all live in crowed theaters, called the Los Angeles basin and the California coast. The Playa Vista Phase II project will cause irreparable harm to our crowded theaters, and must be denied if we are to have a sustainable legacy to hand down to our children and grandchildren.

#