Will Studio City Benefit from Harvard/Westlake's Sports Complex

Subject matter: Harvard-Westlake River Park Project DEIR SCH# 2020090536

TO: Councilmember Nithya Raman

nithya.raman@lacity.org

(213) 473-7004

Councilmember Paul Krekorian

Councilmember.Krekorian@lacity.org

(213) 473-7002

FROM: Joann Deutch, Zip 91604, Phone: 818 753-9922

HOW WILL A 16 ACRE

PRIVATE SPORTS CLUB

BENEFIT STUDIO CITY ?

INTRODUCTION:

With this CUP request, the school acknowledges that the proposed development is not appropriate for the SAID location.

The proposed River Project will serve 681* Harvard/Westlake student athletes. (*derived from online representations)

This submission for the Record speaks directly to the issue of whether the proposed use of 4141 Whitsett Avenue as a private sports facility & entertainment venue rather than the Open Space, as it was originally designated for the pleasure of our community, will somehow benefit the Studio City community and its environs.

The preliminary hurdle: WHY is this “Sports Complex” not seeking a “LASED” classification? which applies to Sports Complexes [see Definition Sports Complex], requiring Specific Plan level consideration? (LAMC 12.32-see page 9)

Honestly, Harvard Westlake’s quest seeks to avoid the proper controlling Land Use regulations by shoe-horning this project in under as a CUP. A CUP is not designed for this purpose nor is it elastic enough to provide the community with the protections it needs from such a heavy-use project. The requisite "Conditions” on the CUP would rightfully go on forever.

Harvard Westlake’s disingenuous effort here is to thwart any effort to control its future use of the land. It will certainly defend all challenges with “that use is not prohibited by the conditions”. It has proven itself not to be a “responsible neighbor” in the past.

The project includes parking for 500 vehicles underground. This feature speaks loud and clear that this is not just a sport complex, but also a commercial general & special occasion venue.

This “Red Flag” telegraphs that the school’s intention is to use this River Campus for major events, for the school population, and most likely for unaffiliated purposes motivated by profit.

The “General Plan” for Los Angeles, as drafted and as being updated and implemented, prizes OPEN Space as a Priority Goal, yet here you are being pressured by a private school with $150M in endowment funds to eliminate this Open Space which is enjoyed by not only the residents of 91604, but is a blessing to anyone who lives within 10 miles of the location.

----- All this to duplicate much of what the Harvard Westlake (Coldwater Canyon campus) already has, less than 1 mile away?

Who wants a mini-Crypto-Center next door? Who thinks this is a good idea for Studio City?

DISCUSSIONs regarding approval /denial need to resolve the CONTROLLING issues of:

1. Does the proposed River Project assure compatibility with the surrounding land uses?

i. The "LASED" Zone is the only appropriate classification for this Sports Complex (call it what you will)

2. Can CUP CONDITIONS be crafted which accomplish their goals, or be simply theoretical?

All discussions must focus on the “basics” without getting fouled up by the “technicalities” which the expensive experts often use to obscure the real issues.

THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS (simplified): The CUP process is a mechanism to scope out and define what compromises this developer must make in order to be awarded the extraordinary privilege of building beyond the pre-existing/ historical & ongoing land use permissions for this 16 +/- acres Open Space parcel.

BENCHMARK 1: What is the history of the area? By statute this element is tied to the decision-making considerations.

BENCHMARK 2: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for certain land uses which may need special conditions to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. These uses are specified under “Uses Subject to Permits” To be approved, … a CUP must be consistent with the existing adopted General Plan, including local area and community plans, which reflect the County’s policy regarding land use, and the Los Angeles County Code Title 22 Planning and Zoning.

DISCUSSION - BENCHMARK 1: Why is Studio City’s unique history important in this instance? Studio City plays an important, unique role in the development of this part of the Ventura Boulevard Corridor, serving as a Model for the adjacent communities westward along Ventura Blvd. I

In the 1920’s it was intentionally developed under a well-articulated plan whereby a small commercial area was surrounded by residential area accompanied by open/recreational space.

The Studio City area is an intentional urban plan GRAND EXPERIMENT. It was & still is the linchpin in the concept of a small commercial district surrounded by residential housing for both the affluent and the working class, encircled by open space and recreational opportunities. This is the design that has been copied throughout to the rest of Ventura Blvd westward from Studio City. This is what gives you the cohesive communities of Sherman Oaks, Valley Village, Encino, etc.

Come to the Studio City Farmers Market to return all the phones calls you couldn’t cram into your workday agenda. Catch up with friends and neighbors. It’s all part of this “Community” with a capital “C”.

Ask the residents of Studio City whether the original foundational plan has created a cohesive, collaborative neighborhood where people are civically engaged and committed to preserving the early Master Planned Mega Development, of which this Open Space plays an integral role.

CurbedLA published a detailed narrative explaining how Mack Sennett and the “Central Motion Picture District Corporation” originally planned and developed Studio City. See Studio City was LA's Original Master Planned Mega Development. You are requested to read it carefully.

You are obligated to consider THE HISTORY OF THIS COMMUNITY. The Studio City plan was planned based upon the theories of the famous “fresh-air architect” Fredrick Law Olmstead [see references below] who designed Central Park and advocated for Open Space Review also: “Parks, Playgrounds and Beaches for the Los Angeles Region” latimes blog on Olmsteads influence on local "planning"- to gain an understanding of this revolutionary urban planning concept which was implemented first in Studio City….

An excerpt from the seminal Olmstead “Parks, Playgrounds and Beaches” postures,

[When Studio City was planned:] “When engaged in debates over city planning, they were not discussing issues of limiting access to the city. [… they]… saw city planning as a means to increase the real wealth of all citizens. They were not a group of outsiders intent on exploiting the environment. They lived there. They were seeking to make their homes nicer. Economic growth and development are to be sought; but not if this means destroying one's own home. In the 1920s, it looked like that was going to happen in Los Angeles and so the elite commissioned a plan that would enhance quality of life not destroy it. Clearly they were motivated by a desire to build the city profitable, but this did not mean that the city beautiful had to be abandoned. Santa Barbara and Redlands learned this lesson early. “ [the hard way]

Let’s take the veneer of this proposed project, call it was it is, and call out the degradation to its immediate neighbors; people trying to transit over the already over-crowded Coldwater Canyon intersection to and from “The City” [NB Coldwater Canyon is an Emergency Evacuation Route for the City of Beverly Hills], the intrusion and disruption to the local wildlife; the impact on the planned and future revitalization of the LA River; the number of school buses needed to transport athletes to & from campus and the proposed River facility during rush hour which coincide with after school hours; [as if the Coldwater campus has not created enough intolerable traffic congestion on Coldwater Canyon over the years.]

The list goes on.

DISCUSSION BENCHMARK 2: The CUP process is a mechanism to define what compromises the development must make to be given the extraordinary privilege of building outside & beyond the pre-existing ongoing land use permissions for this 16 +/- acres of Open Space.

A. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for certain land uses which may need special conditions to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. These uses are specified under “Uses Subject to Permits” To be approved, a CUP must be consistent with the existing adopted General Plan, including local area and community plans, which reflect the County’s policy regarding land use, and the Los Angeles County Code Title 22 Planning and Zoning.”

“B. “Major issues involved with the evaluation of CUP requests include consistency with the General Plan; compatibility with surrounding land uses; conditions to ensure compatibility; land suitability and physical constraints; project design; availability of adequate access, public services, and facilities to serve the development; and potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures.”

Open Space is so valued that it has been legislatively recognized in the “General Plan”.

“Three decades later, in the midst of the Depression, the Citizen’s Committee on Parks, Playgrounds, and Beaches called the lack of parks, recreational opportunities, and public beach access a crisis. As Davis notes, Los Angeles had made accessible outdoor space “the foundation of an economy capitalized on climate, sports, and outdoor leisure.” Yet nobody who actually ran the city made room for these things, since there was no immediate profit in them. In 1928, only 0.6 percent of the surface of the metropolis was parkland, less than half an inch for each citizen.”

….

“Los Angeles Country’s bountiful agricultural land was devoured by runaway suburbanization, … “another of Southern California’s natural disasters—recurrent and inexorable.” The Lost Paradise of Los Angeles, Jstor Daily Newsletter Oct 8, 2020 by Matthew Wells. [emphasis added]

---The General Plan Framework Element defines citywide policies that influence most of the City's include policies for:

1. Land Use

2. Housing

3. Urban Form and Neighborhood Design

4. Open Space and Conservation

5. Economic Development

6. Transportation

7. Infrastructure and Public Services” [emphasis added]

-- WHAT conditions, if any, can possibly be formulated & enforced to assure the community that this campus lives up to the Conditions imposed on the proposed River Campus as required by a CUP?

The answer to this complicated question circles you back to the conclusion that the LASED zoning requirements should govern this project. I urge you to refer to LAMC 12.32 which addresses all the concerns associated with a Sports Complex, rather than require the Studio City Community to demand and devise Conditions which will permit cordial relationship between the community and this Sports Complex with all the demands it will foist in the Community.

A. Will the sports complex serve both Upper and Lower Harvard Westlake athletes; this might weigh in on the possible conditions?

B. Will it lead to the future revision and densification of the campus on Coldwater Canyon?

C. Harvard Westlake claims that it has always been, and this new campus will also be, “Open to the Public”. The only statement I can find which supports that boast that it has always been “Open to the PUBLIC” is that it invites the public to watch sporting events, plays etc. There is no policy whereby locals can use the campus. The security measures in place confirm that this is a Closed Campus.

a. This project offers the community – at best - the right to walk along a narrow, fenced pathway questionably located on the “legally obligated set back” along the river, and locked at the convenience of the school. Yup – “Open to the Public When we Feel like it.”

I have never heard of a local Community Organization being invited on the Harvard Westlake Coldwater campus for its regular, meetings or special events.

Obvious issues which require Conditions:

Traffic; Noise; Lighting; Parking; Security; Hours of Operation; Sanctions: Penalties for Violations/ who bears the burden of policing Harvard Westlake guest preferring to park on the street? Etc etc etc.

Will the school be required to “Pull City Permits” for special events?

REFERENCES:

Fredrick Law Olmstead, Sr. Legacy Theory of Open Space planning

LA Building Code for Sports Comlplex Building Code for Sports Complex

Sports Complex special zoning - LASED see p 9

See also Sports Complex Zoning for LA

THIS IS MY OPINION - WHAT'S YOURS ?