p3, v16.32 — Conversations — Mountain Views News

Conversations

Mountain Views News, Combined Edition Saturday, August 6, 2022

MVNews this week: Page 3

CONVERSATIONS....THE MEADOWS 3 Mountain Views-News Saturday, August 6, 2022 CONVERSATIONS....THE MEADOWS 3 Mountain Views-News Saturday, August 6, 2022
WHAT ARE THEY
HIDING?

It is remarkable, that in all of the
thousands of pages, hundreds of
charts and drawings, and dozens
of meetings, we still don’t know

what the Meadows Project really looks like. The only glimpse we have had
is a multi-coloured rendering of the entrance at Sunnyside looking up at an
angle towards the mountains. We see the tops of three homes peeking out
from overgrown shrubs, tall grasses and mature trees. And the first thought
that comes to mind is: Wow, what a fire hazard!

There are no other scale, life like renderings of the project from any perspective......
walking or driving down the streets, looking north or south, east or
west. No aerial shots looking down on the project. At this stage of the review,
and since July 2021, we have only seen a plot plan showing 4

It is remarkable, that in all of the thousands of pages, hundreds of charts and
drawings, and dozens of meetings, we still don’t know what the Meadows
Project really looks like. The only glimpse we have had is a multi-coloured
rendering of the entrance at Sunnyside looking up at an angle towards the
mountains. We see the tops of three homes peeking out from overgrown
shrubs, tall grasses and mature trees. And the first thought that comes to
mind is: Wow, what a fire hazard!

The latest plot plan below shows what looks like pieces of a puzzle. This is
supposed to show us what the Project looks like.

Strangely puzzling in these times of incredible technology and computer programs,
that we are not seeing this project ‘up close and personal’. Why are
we not taking a leisurely stroll on our computers down the street through this
planned development and looking to our left and right-seeing the various
home designs as they are planned, seeing how close they are to each other,
how tall they are, how big the front and back setbacks are, what size the yards
are, what ‘lot coverage’ really looks like, what the proposed mix of predominately
two story homes looks like, what the retaining walls look like, what the
landscaping looks like, how the views are affected and much more.

We all know the saying ‘A picture is worth a thousand words’ and recognize
how much information is conveyed visually. It begs the question why we are
not ‘seeing’ this Project .

We know that the meadow will be heavily graded in order to fit a housing
project that belongs on a flat piece of land and put it on a hillside. There are
no renderings of what this will look like.

We now know the Project has gone from mostly single story homes that
‘reflect the character of the surrounding neighbourhood’ to a majority of two
story homes with only twelve single story homes. There are no pictures of
what this will look like.

We know that this Project was designed ‘to retain the small town, eclectic
character that is cherished by the community’ and ‘promote compatibility
with the immediately adjacent neighbours.’ It is creating this vision by installing
‘buffers’ or barriers on all four sides to physically isolate it from the
community it desires to be a part of - and that is being touted as a Project
benefit. All it needs is a gate at the entrance to complete the picture.

We now know that the Project will require additional water usage from construction
and the addition of over 400 small trees that will require regular
water during the first years of their growth. There has been no update on
projected water usage.

As the vagueness and lack of detail in the developer’s ‘Specific Plan’ is questioned
during public meetings and comments, it continues to raise questions
about what we are not being told and what they are hiding that remains to
be uncovered.

WE CAN FOLLOW THE MONEY, TOO

There are so many problems with
the “Protect Sierra Madre – STOP
the Housing Project” initiative that it
is hard to believe someone actually
designed it thinking it would benefit
the City. We now know that the
initiative allows 68 mansions to be
built at the Monastery with little city
oversight and exposes all taxpayers
to significant legal liabilities. That is
probably why our City Council and
Mayor unanimously voted to oppose
this ill-conceived measure.

Why are these self-proclaimed “Protectors”
and “Preservers” of Sierra
Madre arguing so adamantly for the
city to give up a free public park, lose
40 acres of hillside placed in conservancy,
and do away with almost $1
million in net-zero water offsets, all
to change the zoning so it will allow a
bunch of mansions to be built? They
don’t appear to be incompetent because
all three proponents appear to
have extensive legal training.

There is a deeper story here. It
would be naïve to think that the
three people who sponsored this initiative
simply didn’t know what they
were doing.

Most disturbingly, we recently
learned that one of the most public

and vocal backers of this measure is
also a senior vice president for a Beverly
Hills homebuilder who refers to
themselves as “the world's leading
developer and operator of luxury
private residential communities.”
They specialize in building 5,000 -
12,000 square foot mansions, exactly
the size structures that can be built if
their initiative passes.

Of course, the initiative proponents
didn’t tell their supporters that their
measure was literally sponsored
by a senior executive with a luxury
homebuilder when they asked folks
to sign. This initiative would “stop
the housing project” they told voters.
This is a bait and switch of epic
proportions.

As we have been told many times
by those supporting the initiative,
“follow the money.” The initiative
doesn’t protect the hillside environment
but it does greatly increase the
value of the 45 acres that the Passionist’s
Retreat Center sits on because
it makes it possible to develop the
entire property with mansions. The
initiative incentivizes the Passionists
to leave the city and sell out to a large
luxury residential developer, just
like a proponent happens to work

for, where 68 identical homes can be
built and the city will not be able to
stop them if the initiative passes.

It is safe to assume that these initiative
boosters know exactly what
they are doing. If they did their due-
diligence then they also knew it was
likely that the city council would
come out against the initia-tive and
possibly not defend it in a lawsuit.
Why are these three legal experts
willing to personally take on the risk
of paying hundreds of thousands
of dollars to defend the inevitable
lawsuit if the city decides not to? Or
possibly costing them millions of
dollars in damages if the city loses a
First Amendment RLUIPA case? Do
the proponents have so much gambled
here that they will defend the
initiative themselves to protect their
investment?

Are they incompetent or is this just a
very carefully thought out plan? You
decide. Like they keep tell-ing us…
follow the money.

News | Sierra Madre Neighbors for
Fairness
news@sierramadreneighborsforfairness.
org
SierraMadreNeighborsforFairness.org

CITIZENS FOR TRUTH

THEY WHO FORGET HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT

Last week’s Mountain Views News
was full of unintended irony. A front
page article compared the fight for
Measure V in 2007 to the fight to
put the Mater Dolorosa property
into the Hillside Management Zone.
Doing this would ensure that the developer,
New Urban West follow the
same building codes as the rest of
us, rather than making up their own
codes in their Specific Plan, or as one
resident called it “their Special Plan.”

All kinds of dire consequences were
promised if Measure V passed. Instead
of approximately 175 condos in
two different buildings in our downtown
area, Measure V would “make
just about everything worse for Sierra
Madre.” “Taxpayers will foot the
bill for Measure V votes for tens or
hundreds of thousands of dollars.”
“The flaws in Measure V are so severe
that the proponents don’t even
do what it purports to do.” Measure
V was a simple solution to a problem
made worse by the misstatements
and misinformation of its opponents.
Its purpose was to keep over-
expansion of 175 or so condos out of
downtown by limiting any building
to 13 units per acre, two stories and
limited to 30 feet high. That seems
very clear, and it certainly worked.

Turn to page 3 of the paper, and the
Neighbors for “Fairness” – oh my –
state that this current initiative will

“make just about everything worse
for Sierra Madre.” One supporter
of the monastery spoke before the
Planning Commission a few months
ago, stating “putting the initiative on
the ballot will cost the City about
$50,000.” Of course, we know that
that is wildly exaggerated, the cost
is closer to $1000-$2000. Another
“Neighbor” wrote “many voters in
the City have not had a chance to
review or understand the ramifications
of this initiative.” Back to the
page 1 comparison – “It is usually a
safe assumption that busy residents
will not take the time to track down,
read, and analyze a 13-page legal
document. Fortunately, opponents
were wrong about that.” Just as the
“Neighbors” are wrong about residents
not understanding the ramifications
of the initiative, (parroted by
our City Council Members).

The “Neighbor” also mentioned the
City’s lawyer’s lengthy report, the
same City lawyer who works with
the New Urban West developer.
Interestingly, the Council in 2007
hired an impartial law firm to evaluate
the legality of Measure V, and
they found there was no conflict.
Given the acrimony this project has
caused throughout our community,
wouldn’t it have been smart for this
Council to hire an independent law
firm this time around? Particularly
since the City lawyer retracted part

of what he had stated to the Council
about the basis for a lawsuit. In
further irony – you may recall that
Preserve Sierra Madre completed a
lengthy rebuttal to the draft Environmental
Impact Report that was one
of seven public comments that were
not included in the draft Environmental
Impact Report. These comments
included in the Preserve’s report
were all the errors in the DEIR,
that were not specifically addressed
by the lawyer’s “lengthy report.”

It's no wonder that currently, just like
in 2006-2007, the good citizens of Sierra
Madre do not trust their elected
officials to actually do the will of the
people who elected them. A concerned
resident told the City Council
at their meeting on July 26 that anyone
who runs for or is elected to public
office should be required to take a
history course on Sierra Madre. This
sounds like an excellent idea!

In another bit of irony in last week’s
News, an arrest warrant is being
sought for the person/persons who
forged the neighbors’ signatures so
they could obtain a filming permit
at Alverno for “The Offer,” about the
making of “The Godfather.” Ironically,
wasn’t the Godfather known
for the famous (or infamous) line,
“I’m going to give you an offer you
can’t refuse.”

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

CONVERSATION

I’m frankly perplexed at the front-page
op-ed by Scott Hood in the July 30 issue
of the MVN. In it, Mr. Hood tries
to compare the 2006 Measure V Initiative
with the 2022 Stop Initiative. In 2006 a
group of local investors believed modernizing
our downtown would vitalize
the town. Others disagreed and believed
the downtown area was fine the way it
was and created the Measure V Initiative
to limit the size and height of buildings.
Measure V passed and Sierra Madre remains
its charming self.

Fast forward to 2013, when the Passionists
determined they could no longer be
self-supporting. They decided to sell the
lower 17 acres of their property to fund
their religious works and provide for
their aging priests. They believed a wellthought-
out housing project would have
the least impact on the Retreat Center,
the neighborhood, and the City itself.

Mountain Views News published that
news, with Mater Dolorosa stating,
“no plans yet of the number of houses.”
Neighbors quickly formed a group in

THE BEST SEAT IN THE HOUSE

Being an environmentalist and caring
about finding ways to recharge my soul,
I seek out the Best Seat in the House.
By that, I mean, finding a place where I
can hear the sounds of silence. I moved
here last year, and, for me, I have found
this special place. I can go there at the
end of the day and hear nothing but the
sweet sounds of nature, the wind blowing
through the trees, witness animals at
their best getting ready for another night
in their habitat, hear the birds chattering
to each other as the sun sets, and watch
the bats busily at work doing their thing,
so that I don’t get bombarded with unwanted
nightly pests.

When I find this special place, I rarely
share this special place with anyone.
Why? I love that I am practically there
by myself.

It’s sad to think, but I sometimes feel
that many residents in Sierra Madre take
this place for granted. We have a goldmine
right in our own backyard. All of
this is threatened to be destroyed. And,
some residents are not even taking advantage
of the gem (gym) that we have!
Because this place needs to be experienced
in order to understand how valuable
it truly is, I will let you in on my

protest. Yard signs with the slogans,
“Stop the Monastery Development” and
“Preserve Mater Dolorosa and our quality
of life” appeared.

A Water Moratorium halted plans but
when it was lifted, New Urban West
(NUW) was introduced as the developer
of a proposed project. No plans were presented
at that time. The neighbors maintained
NUW would destroy everything
known to the citizens of Sierra Madre.
Fire, floods, wildlife harm, and increased
traffic would be the norm. There could
even be a traffic signal installed.

These arguments were shown to be false
by an Environmental Impact Report.
As a counter to that, the neighbors conceived
an initiative to convert the current
zoning from Institutional to Hillside
Residential. Instead of affecting only 17
acres, however, the initiative would rezone
45 acres, including the Retreat Center
site.

The proponents argue that only eight
6,500 sq. ft. houses could be built. Untrue.
They fail to account for the rest of
the property owned by the Passionists

secret. The Best Seat in the House is on
the northern edge of Sierra Madre. If you
are curious, please take a walk or drive to
Bailey Canyon Wilderness Park just before
dusk! Follow the dirt path through
the turnstile and walk up the paved path
to the top of the hill. The Monastery
property will be on your left. Take a seat
somewhere up on that hill and just watch
and listen. If you peer through the Monastery’s
fence, you can see the many deer
that graze every night. Last count, I saw
ten. You will be amazed at the wildlife
habitat that is there and all of the animals
and trees and fauna that coexist.

I have seen many deer, a bobcat, owls,
different species of birds, squirrels, rabbits,
bats, coyotes, and most recently I
saw two young fox. All of these animals
are obviously feeling safe and secure in
this habitat. To my knowledge, the only
animals that know there is a fence there
are the deer. They stay on the Monastery’s
land. They obviously feel safe in
this habitat.

The change of seasons brings amazing
colors and flowers to this area. Flowers
bloom everywhere and the birds and bees
and the wildlife embellish it all …. again,
coexisting.
Why am I sharing this with you? It’s because
of the proposed development on

and California’s housing laws that allow
lot splits and add-ons. This could result
in an additional sixty (60!) mansions.

Following existing procedures, in 2020
the Passionists filed, in good faith, for a
housing development. This is in progress.
Meanwhile, City Council’s current
analysis of the initiative has determined
that the initiative will create a development
contrary to the intent of the initiative,
and may result in a lawsuit due to
the overly restrictive downzoning of a
religious institution.

The Stop/Preserve groups scream bias,
saying our City Council is unworthy of
making an informed decision. Those of
us who have followed this process know
that from 2013 to date, the Stop Group
would have protested ANY development
proposed. This initiative is their
last-ditch effort to squelch the rights of
a land owner. I trust our Council. They
are addressing the Initiative, not the
NUW project. There is no comparison
between Measure V limits on buildings
and the new initiative which violates the
rights of the Passionists as land owners
and allows for 68 mansions. Pat Alcorn

the Monastery’s property.
According to the Arborist Report on the
EIR, New Urban West (the developer)
will be removing:
-10 protected Coast Live Oaks
-All 34 Chinese Elms on the
beautiful driveway when you enter the
property
-All of the jacaranda trees that
serve as a buffer between the Monastery
property and the entrance to Bailey Canyon
and park (noise and light pollution)

This development will obviously destroy
this habitat/ecosystem. Sierra Madre was
declared a Wildlife Sanctuary in 1972.
Evidently, New Urban West (the developer)
and the Monastery did not get the
memo.

Please go there and experience what I
experience practically every night. Just
do it! Go right at dusk before the gates
are closed, and just sit there. You will
NOT be disappointed. This will help you
understand why this area can NOT be
clearcut and destroyed. This is a living,
breathing ecosystem/habitat, and we can
NOT be responsible for taking the lives of
these trees and destroying the habitat of
so many animals. Thank you -

Claire McLean Resident and Concerned
Citizen

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