Marymount College needs its Expansion Project approved because it needs to increase the College's market position. More about this further down this post.
I don't think I got the above statement close enough to be a quote, but that is one thing Dr. Brophy stated and showed on a very quickly changing Power Point slide during his comments before four members of the Planning Commission.
Dr. Brophy is the current President of Marymount College in Rancho Palos Verdes. His comment was just one of an amazing number of comments I heard coming from all sides of the issues related to the Marymount College Expansion Project.
The Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission was continuing its hearing on the proposed project that will bring massive changes to the campus, if all the proposed items are approved.
The Commission normally has seven members dealing with planning issues, but three of the members have apparently recused themselves, with the latest Commissioner recusing himself at the beginning of the meeting.
The meeting began with two items unrelated to the Marymount Expansion project, but both of them revealed something many would find remarkable.
If you live in a 'regular' city the issues of where to cut branches on a neighbor's tree would not be anything worth bringing up to any size group.
This is NOT the case is Rancho Palos Verdes.
The Planning Commission spent about 20 minutes dealing with staff reports, illustrations, photos, and comments dealing with the very strict view ordinance that Rancho Palos Verdes has.
Folks in 'regular' cities would probably watch each other as heads exploded all around and laughter is replaced by screams of, "get on with it!!!"
In the end, I think the matter was tabled until more information about what should be cut from the tree between 15 feet from the ground and about 17 feet from the ground.
As I was pouring my brains back into my skull, the matter of a permit to add a pool, spa, and deck area next to a 8,500 square foot house was being considered.
The problem seems to have been with a 2% difference in the footprint of the improvements to the land and how much the shared driveway brought to the discussions.
Again, my head exploded, but I scooped up the matter and shoved it back in while the Commissioners dealt with the applicant's issue.
When the four Commissioners who remained to deal with the Marymount issue got ready, the evening's festivities got under way.
It looked like the Commission was going to try to tackle only several of the remaining issues regarding their attempts to either certify the Final Environmental Impact Report or vote is down. This is something that looks like it will take another two months or so to get final resolution from the Planning Commission, so time still keeps ticking along.
The Monday meeting seems to have dealt with grading issues, setback issues, some parking issues, and the Athletic Building. Some other issues regarding sign placement was also on the docket.
But what seemed to become the most important issue to discuss and debate was the proposed screen/fencing (netting) around the large athletic field.
Keeping balls off of Palos Verdes Drive East is a real safety issue and it is going to be important.
Whatever anyone wishes to call it, some of the netting will be permanently placed and some of it will be able to be raised and lowered.
A comment made by a College representative was that the netting would provide 80% of its area able to be seen through.
Many questions were asked about where the netting would be higher than in other areas and there were quite a few questions and comments about the section of netting that could be raised to a height of 20 feet off the ground and lowered when the fields are not in use.
Comments, questions, and speculative answers were offered throughout the evening regarding the temporary raising of the netting and what the other heights for netting around the field might be.
NOBODY, I mean ZERO folks seemed bothered that the poles for any and all the netting would be permanent and would not go up or down. HELLO!
Folks were so worried about what the netting would do to their views they didn't seem to consider that the netting cannot be supported by hooks and wires attached to clouds.
Folks, the poles that the netting will be attached to will obstruct views all around about 3/4 of the circumference of the large field. It is still kind of tough to look through steel poles unless you were born on the planet Krypton.
The College wants a variance to build a residence hall about 450 feet from the closest parking space to it. The code indicates that the distance must be no longer than 150 feet in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes.
The hall in question is named Residence Hall No. 1 for the purposes of identification.
Much was made about the concept that students could walk to Hall No. 1 by going through Hall No. 2 that would be located within the 150 foot limit.
Codes will be codes though and Hall No 1 would not meet the code for its "Primary Entrance".
There were comments and questions about that by the public and Commissioners to members of the staff of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Nobody commented though that going from the parking lot to the "Primary Entrance" of Hall No. 1 would require students to walk outside a distance longer than a football field.
How many of you would want to have that walk carrying books, bags, and food while it is raining or cold or foggy?
The College stated a plan to deal with how far Residence Hall No 1 would be from the parking lot.
They came up with the concept that only freshmen would live in Residence Hall No. 1 and freshmen would not be allowed to have cars on campus.
This plan was only a thought and is not in any formal proposal that the College would be mandated to stick by.
So, if you attend Marymount as a freshman and live on campus, when you return for your second year you would be housed in the other Residence Hall.
Wait a minute! Residence Halls. Many Colleges supplement their income by welcoming groups of students with Summer programs that have visiting students reside in on-campus Residence Halls during the period when regular students would not be attending college.
Nobody brought this up during the meeting.
If Marymount got Residence Halls and you believe what is written at the top of this post, might Marymount Administrators use the Summer to bring in groups that they could house on-campus and provide some type of classes or other instruction?
Cheerleader camp? What about Band camp? Anybody consider the distracting nature of having several hundred cheerleaders and drill team members doing their thing on the large athletic field? I doubt that the netting would hide the views from the local high school boys that would park along P.V. Drive East to ogle.
What about a wonderful, residential Band camp? Just imagine the revenue that Marymount might receive by having a great summer music program on campus. Noise? Oops, I don't think anyone though of that.
According to the R.P.V. Staff Report and just about every other report about Residence Halls, they would be built on fill dirt.
There is an issue concerning an extreme grade area in the area where the Residence Halls are proposed. The way that the College wishes to get around that is to use the cut and fill methods to eliminate the extreme grade condition.
The second speaker for the College stated at the beginning of his comments that the Staff Report was incorrect in that the Residence Halls would not be built on fill.
Later during a question and answer period between that person and a member of the Planning Commission, the speaker answered a question by stating the Residence Halls would be built on fill dirt.
Now about cut and fill. It is remarkable that the College proposes to cut 51,000 cubic yards of material for their Expansion and fill 51,000 cubic yards for their expansion.
I think I need to call Ripley's.
I spoke to a representative of the College who explained to me that there would not need to be any dump trucks traveling up and down roads in R.P.V. and San Pedro because all the material cut from the site would be spread out over the site and that all the fill needed would come from the material cut from the greater site.
What I still don't know and what I don't think anyone knows right now is how much bentonite is within the soils to be cut.
Bentonite is clay formed by the alteration of minute glass particles derived from volcanic ash and cannot be used for fill, so it could be spread out over land that won't have any building on it, but it can't be used under any new buildings.
What is they find about 150 tons of bentonite? What would they use for fill when the cut amount equals the fill amount?
Might this mean that a number of trucks would need to lumber around R.P.V. and San Pedro roads to bring more fill dirt onto the site?
What about the large rocks and boulders that must not be crushed on the Marymount site. Would dump trucks be needed to move that material off the property?
How many trips might dump trucks make? What routes would they take? What jurisdictions might need to become involved (San Pedro) because of an unknown number of trucks traveling on streets that are already clogged by regular traffic?
The President of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Chamber of Commerce spoke that the group supports the Marymount Expansion Project and hopes the Final Environmental Impact Report can be certified.
This is not an unexpected thing but I have it on pretty good authority that Madam President may not like what will be coming forth.
The President stated that students attending the College would actively contribute to the local economy.
I hope that the students living on-campus, if they are, are only dropped of at Ralph's Fresh Faire, Golden Cove Shopping Center, or along the west side of Western Avenue. These sites make up the bulk of the businesses and sales tax revenue generation for the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, the host of Marymount College.
If shuttles drop off student-shoppers at Peninsula Center, the local Mall and all along Silver Spur, they will be generating sales tax revenue for the city of Rolling Hills Estates.
If the shuttle has a drop off at Park Plaza Shopping Center or downtown San Pedro, then sales tax revenue would be welcomed in the city of Los Angeles.
One of the issues I am still wondering about is what the benefits to the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes might be by having the expansion take place.
The one slide that the College uses to attempt to illustrate whatever benefits they claim local residents might enjoy flashed by so fast I couldn't see what it stated.
I don't believe that Rancho Palos Verdes would have its residents benefit by the increased property tax and business tax revenues from Marymount because as I understand it, religious organizations do not pay taxes for the most part.
Placing 255 residents on-campus where the closest fire station has an engine and small vehicle to share with the College, parts of southern Rancho Palos Verdes and all of eastern Rancho Palos Verdes means those of us who pay property taxes would be funding the infrastructure of a new housing project that would have 255 more souls needing support.
Please remember, our fire station in Miraleste has a paramedic 24/7 on its engine by NO paramedic unit stationed there.
So, on-campus housed students would need to be supported by infrastructure they don't pay for and they will spend their money mostly outside Rancho Palos Verdes.
Might you see where I am going with this?
Since the College Administration has taken the position that it will be up to the Planning Commission and/or the City Council to determine whether managed groups are able to utilize athletic facilities and other facilities at Marymount, we still don't know whether AYSO soccer might come to the campus as a benefit to the community.
I did see a quick montage of students who donate their time to groups in the greater area, but I didn't see any slides that showed student contributions to groups specifically within Rancho Palos Verdes.
I did see some great students aiding groups in San Pedro and that is wonderful.
The main opposition group to the Marymount Expansion Project is the Concerned Citizens Coalition for Marymount Expansion (CCCME).
One of the positions of CCCME apparently is that one specific Alternative to the Proposed Project's plans be implemented instead of having on-campus housing allowed.
CCCME, by at least two comments during the meeting suggested that the Palos Verdes North off-campus housing site be enlarged and that the main athletic facilities be put there.
How can I put this mildly? Are they NUTS?
I have attempted for some time to get these folks to understand that there can be no enlargement of the facilities along Palos Verdes Drive North. I am quite sure Dr. Brophy and just about everyone else concerned with Marymount have no intention of going up against the city of Los Angeles, no matter whether a negative declaration is in place or not.
If CCCME wishes to continue with their attempt to get the Planning Commission to disapprove of having on-campus housing built in favor of having the Commission approve the Alternative which calls for enlargement of the Palos Verdes North facility, we all would see a bru-ha-ha that would last far too long and would end up with Marymount losing.
Marymount already has problems in San Pedro with their Pacific Heights off-campus housing site. San Pedrans don't want it and Marymount wants to get rid of it.
But no matter what, attempts to get approval for anything new or bigger along Palos Verdes Drive North would bring in probably all three Neighborhood Councils within San Pedro and we would see Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council take the lead at fighting any and all attempts to enlarge Palos Verdes North.
Of course, there is also the Neighborhood Councils in Harbor City and the city of Lomita that would also wish to enter the fray.
If memory serves me correctly at this point, Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council alone represents about 25,000 households within its area of San Pedro.
The next post on this subject will deal more with details, revelations, questions, and arguments that should be shared. I promise that I will be less disjointed in my writing.
The next hearing by the Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission regarding the Marymount Expansion Project has been moved to Tuesday March 10, 2009.
I apologize for the ramblings of this post but I wanted to write it as soon as possible to keep it fresh. This last sentence was written at 2:29 AM on Wednesday January 28, 2009.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment