Mountain View News Saturday, July 2, 2022 2 CONVERSATIONS......THE MEADOWS
Mountain View News Saturday, July 2, 2022 2 CONVERSATIONS......THE MEADOWS
CITIZENS FOR TRUTH:
THE NEVER-ENDING CITY COUNCIL MEETING
If you attended any part of last Tuesday’s City Council meeting, or watched from home,
then you know it was a very strange meeting in a very strange and unsettling year of
strange meetings. The biggest issue that City Council faces is the McMansion project of
42 inappropriately large homes on the Mater Dolorosa property, and one of the biggest
issues about the project is the lack of water, not only in Sierra Madre, but all over California.
We can’t turn on the TV, pick up a paper, without being told that there is no water to
be had – we’re in year three of another severe drought. The authorities are saying that in
the LA area we don’t have enough water to last out the summer.
So what was on the agenda Tuesday night? –
1. Presentation by PUSD Board Member Tina Fredericks and Dr Elizabeth
Blanco. Kudos to the Council members who took Ms Fredericks,
our representative but a Pasadena resident, to task, about Sierra Madre’s
“poor stepchild” status.
2. Police Department Annual Presentation
3. Fire Department Annual Presentation
4. Proclamation in Recognition of July as Park and Recreation Month
All were thorough reports with a few questions thrown in by the Council members. Did
these four presentations really need to be made at the same meeting – especially since
Mayor Goss prides himself on running a very short meeting?
Next on the Agenda (after moving the City Classification Plan and Salary Matrix to the
last item on the Agenda) were Public Hearings amending the Temporary Use Permits
of the Municipal Code, and Amending Commercial Photography and Motion Picture
Filming of the Municipal Code.
These are particularly hot button issues, which came to light when an Alverno neighbor
discovered that the latest filming company had forged 100% of the signatures that are
necessary to proceed. The answer at the suggestion of the City’s lawyer Giragosian was
to amend the code so that no signatures were needed.
The concerned neighbors took their many issues to the Planning Commission, then the
Community Services Commission, and now City Council. Their concerns were late
nights of filming, excessively loud noise and increased traffic; exacerbated by lack of cooperation
from the Alverno Staff, the City, and from the Police Department when called.
The Chairperson of the Board of Trustees said that the City is discriminating against
Alverno. He also said that one of the disgruntled neighbors “has been seen fraternizing
with a member of the City Council.” Hmm, such a familiar ring to those statements -
similar to the Mater Dolorosa Board, and their “religious discrimination” argument. Because
this was such a big issue, with lots of moving parts, City Council chose to continue
this and put it on the July 12 Agenda.
Council Member Kriebs wanted to proceed with voting on these issues, because she said
there are other issues with time limits they need to address. Might this be for the alternatives
to the petition, or was she referring to New Urban West’s Jonathan Frankel insisting
that he had a time limit for his investors in the Meadows project? We don’t know, and the
other four did not agree with rushing it through.
As the meeting was already past the five hour mark, the Council agreed to move Commissions
appointments to next on the Agenda. Several of the candidates spoke - the
Council voted.
Moving right along, next on the Agenda was the most important issue by far – the Fiscal
Year 2022/2023 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment. Many residents had
been in attendance, hoping to speak on this critical issue, but as it was 11:30 pm, everyone
in Chambers had gone home. Whatever happened to the policy implemented
several years ago to not discuss a new issue after 10:30 pm?
Next week we’ll report on this issue that is so critical for all of us. Don’t forget the July
7 Planning Commission meeting, 7 pm, of the continuation of their discussion of the
Meadows project. Plan to come early to get a seat. Happy Fourth!
TO BE FRANK......
There are a few points about the proposed
housing project and initiative at Mater Dolorosa
that need to be clarified.
First and foremost, the initiative was drafted
in direct response to the Meadows Project
because that project is excessive on multiple
levels, in terms of likely water usage during
and after construction, wildfire danger, and
its failure to adhere to the general plan and municipal code. The initiative is a good
compromise, as it allows for development of the Mater Dolorosa property without over-
development. Currently the Mater Dolorosa property is one of the only large properties
that is not protected by a zoning designation of Open Space or Hillside Residential. And
while, of course, the Retreat Center has property rights, that doesn’t mean they can build
whatever they want. Like all Sierra Madre residents, we have property rights, too. But,
given the size of our lots, we would never be able to get the permits to build massive
houses on the small lots that New Urban West is proposing to build and to stack - side
by side in the Meadows development. We simply can’t fathom why Mater Dolorosa and
New Urban West should be able to exceed the maximum allowable floor area for a given
lot size by up to 215%. The petition was circulated to put the initiative on the ballot for
Sierra Madre residents to vote on whether Mater Dolorosa should follow the same zoning
regulations as the rest of us do.
Second, good neighbors behave the opposite of Mater Dolorosa. Good neighbors don’t
ask for special privileges, they tell the truth and don’t cast aspersions. They abide by the
rules, and they don’t threaten lawsuits if things don’t go their way.
Third, during the June 14 city council meeting, there were several comments about what
could and could not be done under the initiative with the Retreat Center having nonconforming
use status. The Passionists can continue doing everything they have been
doing. Changing to residential hillside zoning does not infringe on their religious freedom
or their ability to complete their mission. They can install solar panels. They can
remodel in any way they want. As would be needed for any remodel, they would need
a permit; they would obtain a minor conditional use permit under the non-conforming
uses ordinance.
Look at the Kensington after Measure V passed. The owner worked with the City to
make this the best product you see, and the voters heartily endorsed it. This can happen
too - if Mater Dolorosa wants to expand and build something.
There was a statement in the Mountain Views News by John Doyle stating that putting
the petition on the ballot would cost $50,000. We don't know where Mr. Doyle came up
with that figure and acknowledge that it didn’t come from an informed city source. City
Clerk Aguilar was contacted regarding what the actual cost would be and she responded
that she is unable to provide the cost of just the initiative as invoices sent by the County
for elections are not itemized.
In conclusion, threatening lawsuits is not neighborly, and no one should be subjected
to any more bullying, misinformation, or fear-mongering. The initiative deserves to be
discussed and voted on by Sierra Madre residents based on its merits. It’s what civil discourse
and democracy are all about.
Catch breaking news at:
mtnviewsnews.com
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
|