Mountain View News Saturday, April 23, 2022
2 CONVERSATIONS.......THE MEADOWS
Mountain View News Saturday, April 23, 2022
2 CONVERSATIONS.......THE MEADOWS
all suffered the “heartbreaking” decision to
close and sell, due to the declining number
of new priests coming into the order and the
costs of caring for an older population of clergy
whose average age is 78.
Presently, the Passionists Holy Cross Province
has only four operating Retreat Centers in the
US including our Mater Dolorosa in Sierra
Madre. Throughout the country, Passionist
Retreat Cen-ters and Monasteries have closed
their doors, been torn down or sold for other
purposes.
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER
Zoning is not whimsical. It is based on years of
hard work by Sierra Madre citizens, staff and officials
to carefully create the Sierra Madre of the
future. When adopted by the City Council in
THAN WORDS
As objections arise in the community about New
2016, the General Plan established significant
Urban West and its investor-supported plans to
goals, objectives and policies to implement its
build a 42 unit tract housing project below the
vision for the community. Now, less than four
Retreat Center, concerns are being raised by the
years later, New Urban West and its investors
Passionists that opposing this project will impact
seek to disregard this plan and its current in-
their ability to expand the Retreat Center and
stitutional zoning and replace it with their own
their religious mission.
spe-cial vision of Sierra Madre outlined in its
Taking a closer look, we learn that the property is
‘Specific Plan’. Many in Sierra Madre feel this
currently zoned institutional and has been since
‘vision’ is inconsistent with the plan we drew up
1996, when the General Plan was updated to re-
for our future and feel Hillside Residential zonflect
its then-current use. Hearing no ob-jection
ing accu-rately implements the objectives and
from Mater Dolorosa within the 90 day period
policies of the General Plan. This parcel of land,
required by law, the General Plan was adopted.
adja-cent to the mountains is a Wildlife Urban
Interface, a Very High Fire Severity Zone and,
Under its present institutional zoning, Mater Do
critical-ly, is located on the last open alluvial fan
lorosa can expand the Retreat Center or build an
bordering the San Gabriel Mountains. It should
additional religious institution to expand their
be protected by the SAME Hillside restrictions
mission. But they have chosen not to do that –
and hillside residential zoning that the City has
instead choosing to build a 42 unit tract housing
ap-plied to ALL other large parcels that are adja
development with no religious purpose.
cent to the Mountains. And like all those other
During the time of its institutional zoning, there
rezoned properties, any existing use when they
were no attempts to expand the building and its
were rezoned would become - UNDER OUR
mission beyond the existing facilities. Realisti-
ORDINANCES - a nonconforming use.
cally, there was no need as the Retreat Center has
Hillside Residential Zoning would fairly apply to
almost 90 single and double rooms plus confer-
the Mater Dolorosa parcel the same protec-tions
ence rooms, a library, breakout rooms, a Chapel
that our City (and many other Hillside commu
and a kitchen capable of feeding over 100 guests
nities) has enacted to preserve the land and pro
3 meals a day.
tect it from excessive overdevelopment.
Prior to that, it had been zoned Residential for
Their practice of religion as they have for decades
many years with no plans to build housing for
can continue. Despite their website FAQs indicat
any purpose. Two large buildings were on the
ing they had no plans to build, the 70,000 sqft/90
grounds: the Monastery Building (built in 1929)
bedroom building can be renovated as necessary
and the Retreat Center (built in 1950 and last ex-
to expand their mission and their kitchen. They
panded in 1985, almost forty years ago).
can subdivide and sell any part of the parcel for
When the Monastery building was damaged by
hillside residential development. Any part they
an earthquake in June 1991, they could have re-
choose to keep and use for religious purposes
built it and continued its religious use. But they
can be used as it is now - for retreats - and for
chose not to do that - instead demolishing the
a food ministry like the one they did during the
building in 1992, leaving only the Retreat Cen
pandemic. A win-win for everyone.
ter. Perhaps they could clearly see the future and
Realistically, Retreat Centers don’t have much of
the diminishing need for facilities like this going
a future and it would be foolhardy to believe that
forward. And this trend continues to this day.
our Mater Dolorosa, a special, unique - almost
Young men and women are increasingly not in-
magical place filled with nature’s beauty - will
terested in pursuing this way of life and there are
be around for another hundred years, especially
not enough of them to support the aging Fathers.
after a dense housing development removes the
Interestingly, the Mater Dolorosa Retreat Center
trees, destroys the habitat of the wildlife, and
and the property are owned by the Passionists
ruins the peaceful tranquillity that visitors have
of Chicago. They are one of many Passionist
enjoyed for many dec-ades.
groups selling off land, retreat centers and mon-
It is far more likely that the Retreat Center on 23
astery property throughout the country. Unfor
acres will be put up for sale. And if the ‘Specific
tunately, it is not a growing industry.
Plan’ proposed by NUW is approved, it will pave
Retreat Centers, summer retreat camps, Pas-
the way and set the precedent for another high
sionist headquarters in Massachusetts, Missouri,
density development with another ‘Specific Pan’
Kansas, Kentucky, Chicago, Cincinnati, Iowa....
to be built on the rest of the property.
GET THE FACTS NOT
THE HYPE
It is worth expanding on commentar-
This has been expressly stated now at least half a
ies from the last few weeks about distilling the
dozen times and backed up with evidence.
truth from both sides on the Meadows project.
If you have been following the discussion I think
Continuing with PSM they said they “promised
you can pull out one key theme. There is a clear
residents to be fact finders in our fair town” and
difference between just expressing an opinion
also claimed that the developer was spreading
and those that are backed up with facts support-
misinformation. They said, “The petition will
ing the conclusions.
not hurt the Passionist Fathers, who will still be
able to … use their property for any religious
Let’s look at Preserve Sierra Madre’s (PSM) April
purpose.” That’s a nice opinion, but it isn’t backed
9th article where they discussed Measure V. This
up by the facts. If they have a religious purpose
measure was not spot-zoning, targeting a single
that includes expanding their development or
property for an overly restrictive zoning change
changing the use of a building then they can’t do
which would make all existing development non-
it! In Sierra Madre Neighbors for Fairness’ edito
conforming and any future expansion illegal. It
rial on the same page, we cited both the initiative
was applica-ble to the downtown area and placed
and relevant federal law to show how the zoning
limits on building heights and density. They
change would violate the rights of the Passion-
also mentioned that the opposition spent a large
ists. Again, this is the difference be-tween shar
amount of money in their fight. That is the case,
ing an opinion and sharing facts. Their opinion
but it is not a sound ar-gument that spending
is wrong.
more money means one's position is wrong. This
sort of attack is a fallacious argument attacking
PSM went on to say “All it will do is change the
the person and not their position.
designation from Institutional Zone to Hillside
Man-agement Zone, like the majority of other
One thing that does seem to have been learned
properties along the hillside.” It is a fact that the
from the Measure V fight is in reference to PSM’s
initiative will change the zoning. It is not a fact
crit-icism of things like this: “Dire consequences
that there are no consequences to the zoning
if you signed the petition… pictures of apart-
change or that an insti-tutional property should
ment buildings in back yards.” Oddly enough,
be zoned the same as residential properties. For
Protect Sierra Madre - Stop the Housing Project
weeks now we and others have been spelling out
(STOP) has been doing the same thing. They
exactly how the zoning change will violate the
have been making exaggerated claims (virtually
Passionists’ rights as a religious institution, and
all dispelled by the EIR) and showing pictures of
we have been backing it up with facts. We have
developments that have considerably higher den-
yet to see it shown that the facts or conclusions
sity than the proposed project. They have been
drawn from them are wrong.
called out on this numerous times and continue
these misrepresentations. Let’s see if they are us-
Are you starting to understand what is happen
ing the same misleading pictures on Saturday at
ing here? We keep showing how the initiative will
the Earth Day festivities.
vio-late the religious rights of the Passionists and
the other side keeps ignoring it. This has to be a
Even this last week STOP continued spreading
PR nightmare for the proponents of the initiative
misinformation in an email where they said,
if they must continually obfuscate what is hap
“Again, our petition does not stop development
pening and ignore the facts.
entirely nor does it limit in any way the current
services that the on-site Passionist fathers pro-
Opposing the initiative is not about supporting
vide, though New Urban West is spinning to
the housing project, it is about supporting the
scare residents with that fabrication.” Where has
rights of the Monastery. We unashamedly sup-
anyone opposing the initiative made those spe
port property rights in Sierra Madre in the name
cific claims? This is just a strawman. Why won’t
of fairness and we do so with the Monastery’s and
they address the fact that their initiative will stop
the developer’s support. For more information
all FUTURE institutional devel-opment of the
vis-it www.sierramadreneighborsforfairness.org
Passionists, thus violating their religious rights?
WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN THE CITY BUT NOT
SURE HOW? APPLY TO JOIN A COMMISSION!
The City is expected to have vacancies on our commissions soon so
you can get a head start by applying now.
Applications and more information can be found here: cityofsierramadre.
com/cityhall/commissions
Planning Commission has one (1) expected vacancy.
Community Services Commission has one (1) expected vacancy.
Library Board of Trustees has two (2) anticipated vacancies.
Natural Resources Commission has one current vacancy and one anticipated vacancy for a total of
two (2) vacancies.
Interested? Go To: https://www.cityofsierramadre.com/cityhall/commissions
MONASTERY MINUTE:
By Robert Gjerde
HOW WILL THE MEADOWS PROJECT PROTECT THE HILLSIDES?
One of Sierra Madre’s greatest resources is its mountains. There has been a lot of discussion about
making sure the Meadows project protects the hillsides. The reali-ty is that it won’t directly protect
the hillsides because the homes, which will be 500 feet to the south of the hills, will not be in the
hillside area. The 45 acres of the Monastery lot is one of the few remaining large buildable lots in the
city. Only the 10 acres to the north is in the hills.
The grade below that section quick-
ly drops off to less than 15%, which
Sierra Madre calls Slope Category
1, and is where the vast majority
of homes in the city are built. To
be fair, the “hillside environment”
doesn’t only consist of hillsides.
The city’s zoning code also men-
tions protecting prominent hill-
side features like swales, canyons,
knolls, ridgelines, and rock out-
crops, none of which exist in the
area where homes are proposed.
For comparison, we can look to the
R-1 zoned homes directly west that
are built on the same slope with the
same type of cut and fill grading
that the project would have.
It should be mentioned that as
part of the Memorandum of Un-
derstanding it was agreed that lots
owned by the Monastery further to
the north will be given to the city
and placed in conservancy.
Why this is important and how it
should be done to meet the goals
and objectives of the city’s General Plan is still being discussed.
Regarding the highly controversial Monastery project (a/k/a The Meadows), there's so
much misinformation out there - what to believe? We'd like to set the record straight...Anti
Catholic? Trying to limit the Mater Dolorosa property rights and stifle their ability to do
their good works? All because of a petition to give us residents a vote of what happens in
our town rather than leave it up to five members of City Council who don't seem to hear
anything that is said.
What the petition that is being circulated by the Protect Sierra Madre group will do is give
residents a vote in November, (when we vote for three City Council members as well as state
and national mid-terms). The vote is to hold the owners of the Monastery property, the
Passionist Fathers in Chicago to the same zoning laws as the rest of us. Every large property
north of Grand View is in the Hillside Management Zone, limit-ing placing very large
homes crammed together. This will also limit the very real dam-age of cutting down over
100 trees.
New Urban West representative Jonathan Frankel told the Planning Commission that they
plan to plant 500 saplings, including many cypress and deodar trees. We know we are in a
severe drought, and we know that these saplings will take substantial water for their roots
to take hold -water that we don't have according to our own City Manag-er. These trees
are highly flammable, according to a local fauna expert, being planted in the high fire zone.
What the initiative will not do - limit the Mater Dolorosa Fathers' good works. Not only
have they not added on to their current building, but they tore down one after the 1991
earthquake, over the objections of many protestors. We know young men are not join-ing
the priesthood, Retreat Centers have been closed throughout the US. Restric-tive? How
will this hinder what they are already doing - feeding the hungry, renting out their property
for a Retreat.
Anti Catholic? How about anti Sierra Madre? If you attended or watched the Planning
Commission meeting on April 7, you saw all the green shirted people in the audience supporting
the Meadows project. Sadly, over 50% of those people had received a post card at
their Hastings Ranch home, were fed dinner at the Only Place in Town, before taking up the
majority of seats, including two rows of "reserved" seats.
This project controversy will heat up as the Planning Commission and City Council study
the facts. Let's us stick to the facts as well!
Citizens for the Truth
Mountain Views News 80 W Sierra Madre Blvd. No. 327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Office: 626.355.2737 Fax: 626.609.3285
Email: editor@mtnviewsnews.com Website: www.mtnviewsnews.com
|