Standoff At The Palos Verdes Peninsula

Attorney Vic Otten (left) and Attorney Bud Katzman take in the view from Thunder Hawk Hill photo by Rachel Gretch photo by Garin Yegparian

Activist Square Off Against Equestrian Group Circling Wagons To Protect Backroom Deal With Developer

Members of the Board of Directors of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Horseman's Association have quietly teamed up with a developer to turn some of the last remaining open space on the PV Peninsula-space that potentially contains a Native American burial ground and 3,000-yearold artifacts-into a new private golf course and expensive homes. Local activists are gearing up for a fight to keep the space open and any graves undisturbed and they need your help. Please come support the activists in their cause at the Planning Commission Meeting Monday, April 4, 2011, at 7:30 pm in the City of Rolling Hills Estates Council Chamber, 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North, Rolling Hills Estates, CA.

The project site consists of approximately 228 acres currently home to the existing Rolling Hills Country Club and the Chandler Palos Verdes Sand and Gravel Facility. If approved, the project will add 114 new homes to portions of the existing golf course and expand the golf course to an area currently used as a landfill.

The facility will be private. Of these 228 acres, the developer plans to set aside only 3.9 acres as open space. Beyond that, what will those 114 new homes do to the quality of life in the City of Rolling Hills Estates? Are the residents of a city 'incorporated in 1957 to preserve its unique rural residential atmosphere' going to benefit from the commerce and urbanization likely to accompany this development? Group of the Angeles Chapter of Sierra Club has been closely monitoring the proposed development and has taken a position against the development as outlined in the DEIR.

Environmental Impacts Associated with the Site

In the summer of 2009, the City of Rolling Hills Estates published a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and received numerous comment letters. No big surprise, really: the City's own DEIR acknowledged the potential for significant damage should the project come to fruition.

The Palos Verdes South Bay Group of the Angeles Chapter of Sierra Club submitted comments addressing problems with several sections of the DEIR including global warming, cultural resources, density, water quality and changes to the general plan.

The Palos Verdes Peninsula Horsemen's Association (PVPHA) submitted a comment letter on June 30, 2009. Two issues were of primary concern to the PVPHA. First, to accommodate the number of homes proposed, the developer wanted to remove 220 acres of the site from the horse overlay zone--an area that requires lots to be large enough to allow horse keeping. The lots Once designated to be large enough for one resident to keep horses would be divided up into smaller lots for two or three residences - thereby negating the possibility of future horse keeping in these lots.

Secondly, the developer was refusing to incorporate a trail that is part of the general plan of the city. Rolling Mills Estates originally envisioned connecting a11 neighborhoods with a trail system. In addition, the PVPHA was concerned with errors in the DEIR related to biological resources and the global warming analysis.

James Wells, PhD, PE from the environmental firm Haley & Aldrich submitted comments related to groundwater depletion and potential subsurface contamination. As large sections of the golf course will be sitting on top of a landfill, there are obvious concerns with hydrology, geology and groundwater contamination.

At the encouragement of local resident Gary Johnson who discovered a Native American site near the current golf course that dates back at least 3,000 years, Professor of Anthropology at Cal State long Beach Carl Lipo submitted comments related to the the cultural resources section of the DIER. Because human remains had previously been found at the golf course, it seems likely that The whole area was part of one large community.

The City revised and re-circulated portions of the DEIR in response to the public comments. In September 2010, the City circulated the Final EIR.

EIR's Discussion of Alternatives

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines require that an EIR describe alternatives to the project or to the location of the project site that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen on or more of the significant environmental impacts. EIRs must also include a 'no project' alternative, i.e., the developer does nothing; the area remains as it is. This EIR concluded that the 'no project' alternative was not the best alternative for the environment partly because of long-term air quality impacts related to the current use of the site as a landfill.

Significant1y,the DElR concludes that Alternative 2-Development Consistent with Existing General Plan Designations-is the environmentafly superior alternative. This alternative involves the least number of homes and residents and requires that the project remain in the horse overlay zone.

Secret Meetings and Backroom Deals

Starting in October 2010, a couple of members of the BOD of the PVPHA began working with the project manager, Mike Cope, on environmental mitigation measures. The PVPMA represented to Mr Cope that it is the primary voice of the equestrian comnmunity on the peninsula. Mr. Cope and apparently the Chandler family, who have deep roots in the communty, seemed willing to work with the equestrians. On March 8. 2011 a Joint Adjourned Park & Activities Commission and Special Equestrian Committee Workshop was held. At the workshop, a presentation was given by the PVPHA and the jroject applicant Mike Cope regarding equestrian mitigation measures related to Proposed Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club Project. During the presentation, the public informed that: 1. The projeét applicant has committed to spending up $i,000,000 to improve existing equestrian facilities in the City Rolling Hills Estates in exchange for support of the project by the equestrian community. The project applicant however is only willing to spend money on improving equestrian facilities if the City matches the costs associated withhe projects. 2 Funding for the equuestrian projects by the developer would start once all the approvals for the project were granted. 3. The PVPHA presented a list of 6 items that the project,appiicant is considering. These projects include improvements to existing equestrian facilities including Ernia Howett Park, Chandler Park and existing trail rehab. These items were developed by the PVPHA board with little, if any, input from the public. 4. The City has issued a policy statement that it will earmark $1,000,000 in Quimby funds to match funds put up by the public. 5. The costs being spent by the project applicant on architects, contractors and other professionals to evaluate the feasibility of the six proposed projects, is coming out of the $1,000,000 commitment.

Problems with the Proposed Deal

The major problem with the proposed deal is that it only ben- efits some equestrians-in fact, many members of the equestrian community do not support the proposed mitigation measures. While the PVPHA has stated that some of the money'wiU be spent on improvipg existing traiL rehab, it has refused to stateiiow much the mitigation money will be spent on trails. In addition, it seems unlikely that there will be any money left over for the trails because of the cost to build the equestrian facilities. For exam- ple, the costs associated with the improvement to Ernie Howlett Riding Arena alone are esti- mated at $1,157,146, Moreover, because of engingeer difftcul- ties associated with building on on a landfill, the cost is likely to be far higher.

The PVPHA only represents a small percentage of people that myriad of trails on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. As the environmental impacts associated with this project are huge, any mitigation should benefit the whole community as a whole.

As mentioned above, the EIR concludes that Alternative 2-DeveLopment Consistent with Existing General Plan Designations-is the environtally superior alternative. This is what the vast majority of equestrians-including the - PVPHA- stated that they wanted in their comment letters to the DElR.

Shold Principle Give Way to Pragmatism?

The Palos Verdes Peninsula does not need another private golf course or 114 new million-dollar homes. This is especially true in Rolling Hills Estates where the city has a true country feel about it. Nonetheless, the developer has indicated a willingness to work with the community to lessen the environmental impacts associated with the project. While it remains to be seen how much the developer is willing to compromise on certain aspects of the project, the envionmentalists should not close the door on discussions related to supporting the project under the right circumstances.

What is clear. however, is that the environmentalists will not allow a small group of equestri- ans to determine what is best for an entire community.

Next Steps in Project Approval

The next phase of the approval process for the project is pub- lic hearings before the Planning Commission in April 2011. If the project is approved by the Planning Commission, it will go before the City Council. Assuming the project is ultimate- ly approved those opposed to the project will have the option to file a legal challenge under CEQA.

What You Can Do

Help the environmentalists show tbe Planning Commission that their concerns have merit- and vocal support. Please attend the public hearings and voice your opinion: The next hear- ing is on April 4, 2011 at 7:30 PM at Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission in the City of Rolling Hills Council Chamber, 4045 Palos Drive North. Rolling Hills Estates, CA.

Documents related to the project can be found at the City of Rolling Hills Estates website. If you want to be kept informed on future public hearings on this project, send your contact information to: vic@ottenandjoyce .