THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION is investigating a drainage system with surface risers like this one built by Playa Capital in the Ballona Wetlands.
By Gary Walker
The California Coastal Commission is investigating a drainage system installed by Playa Capital LLC in the Ballona Wetlands that apparently is not legal.
According to the California Coastal Act, any development, which is defined as a change in the intensity of use of land, within the costal zone is required to receive a permit from the Coastal Commission.
“We don’t have any record of permits (for this drainage system),” Andrew Willis, the enforcement officer for the commission, told The Argonaut.
The Coastal Commission is responsible for regulating land and water use within the coastal zone.
On July 10, the Grassroots Coalition disseminated a press release alleging that Playa Capital was in violation of the Coastal Act, but the commission says no official sanctions have been given to the developer.
“We’re in the investigative phase right now,” Willis clarified.
The Grassroots Coalition identifies itself as “an organization that has long worked to protect the Ballona Wetlands and the surrounding areas of open space on the Los Angeles coast,” and claimed in its release to have received a notification from the Coastal Commission claiming that Playa Capital had been found in violation of not having a permit for development related to the drainage project.
In a letter described as “final (California Coastal Commission) news release,” the organization states the commission is now requesting that Playa Vista “comply with the California Coastal Act.”
“We were alerted by Ballona naturalists of these devices and once we understood their extent, we immediately began demands to the Coastal Commission to investigate what we now have confirmation is illegal activity on the part of Playa Vista developers,” claimed Patricia McPherson, president of the Grassroots Coalition.
In a June 12 letter to Marc Huffman, Playa Capital’s vice president of planning and entitlements, Coastal Commission Enforcement Analyst Jimmy Chang listed the possible ways that the installation of the unpermitted drainage system could be remedied.
“In many cases, violations involving unpermitted development may be resolved administratively through removal of unpermitted development, restoration of any damaged resources and mitigation for such damages or by obtaining a coastal development permit authorizing the development after the fact with any necessary mitigation,” Chang wrote.
Willis said part of the investigation would entail gathering more information on the drainage devices and reiterated that the investigation is ongoing and no official violations have been found. “No formal action has been taken,” he said.
“The drainage lines were constructed many years ago, at the request of the city of Los Angeles,” Huffman explained. “These drains are intended to protect the adjacent roads from flooding in the event of a massive storm, which has not occurred since the drains were installed.”
At question is a system of underground pipes that have been installed near the Ballona Freshwater Marsh in the wetlands. Attached to the system are what are known as surface risers that are visible on land. According to the Coastal Commission, the drainage lines are connected to the freshwater marsh outlet, which travels under Jefferson and Culver boulevards and takes fresh water to the Ballona Channel.
There is a long history of animosity between environmental organizations affiliated with the Grassroots Coalition and Playa Capital, which have clashed throughout the years over the planned community of Playa Vista.
McPherson and other groups affiliated with the coalition filed numerous unsuccessful lawsuits against the first stage of Playa Vista’s residential development in an effort to halt it. They have contended for years that the developer was awarded special land use privileges by the city and have warned of the dangers of building a residential community on top of a methane gas zone.
“Playa Vista was not found to be in violation of any statutes, nor did we receive a cease and desist letter. We are currently working closely with the California Coastal Commission and the Department of Fish and Wildlife to determine the next steps,” Huffman said.
The state-sponsored restoration of the Ballona Wetlands will be conducted by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the state Coastal Conservancy. The environmental impact report is slated to be released later this year.
Many of the groups accusing Playa Vista of breaking the law are also opposed to the planned restoration of the 600-acre wetlands.
Gary@ArgonautNews.com
On June 13 Deputy Director John Ainswoth made the following statement, in part:
“We have opened a violation against Playa Capital…..”
The hearing video is posted at:
http://www.cal-span.org/cgi-bin/media.pl?folder=CCC
You can find the statement at 51:02 – 51.31 minutes in the video.
This is more than a claim that a violation has occurred. It is a statement from the California
Coastal Commission Deputy Director.
Enforcement Officer Andrew Willis now contradicts the Deputy Director when he states that, “no official violations have been found”.
The question is, why did the Deputy Director make the statement of open violation if none occurred?
John Davis
It is important that the Coastal Commission’s investigation be timely, objective and transparent. The public deserves to know the full environmental impact of these devices. If it is determined that they were not legally installed then a cease and desist letter should be sent immediately. Allowing for an after-the-fact permit would send a terrible message to developers across the state that it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission.
The Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, the State Coastal Conservancy and the Department of Fish and Wildlife should coordinate closely with the Coastal Commission and issue timely statements on this matter. One would reasonably think that SMBRC and DFW staff would have noticed these devices during many years of on-site surveys of the land. They should confirm whether that is indeed the case and shed light on their understanding of the purpose, impact, and legality of these devices.
Also, while I appreciate the author’s attempt to put the allegations into the context of long-standing tensions at Ballona, the article comes across, to me at least, as somewhat dismissive of the allegations as a result. Regardless of whether one shares their broader views, the wetlands advocates who noticed these devices and brought them to the attention of the Coastal Commission, deserve some sincere gratitude. That it resulted in a formal letter from the Commission to Playa Vista, as well as prompting an investigation, demonstrates that this is not just a matter of activists “stirring the pot.”
I also fear that the article plays into the polarization that has long plagued Ballona, by wrongly implying that stakeholder groups fall neatly into “for or against” buckets regarding all of the many issues being discussed regarding this important ecosystem. Our organization, the Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, has expressed serious concerns about the restoration process, but we have reserved any judgement on the actual plans until the release of the draft EIR, and we’ve been criticized for that. As a matter of common sense, we do strongly oppose the construction of facilities for domestic pets in the ecological reserve, as do the vast majority of conservation groups (though not all have gone on record), including those who are generally supportive of the restoration.
This should not be about taking sides. It should be a matter of objectively evaluating individual situations based on the relevant facts. If these drainage devices are found to be having a negative impact on the wetlands, and illegally installed, then we would expect even those groups that have consistently supported Playa Vista, such as the Friends of Ballona Wetlands, to be just as concerned as those groups that opposed the project.
Lastly, I do commend the author for covering this story. The lack of coverage of the many substantial issues regarding this critical public resource has been disheartening. We hope that will change as the Draft EIR for the overall restoration gets closer and closer to release.
Walter Lamb
Ballona Wetlands Land Trust
http://www.ballona.org
Playa Vista’s spokesman says there is an innocent reason for their installing a piping system that drains the wetlands. But there is an obvious result of this supposedly “innocent” act, and that is to dry out natural habitat which Playa Vista claimed for years was not a wetland so they could threaten to build a few thousand condos there. This drainage system was installed secretly without any revelation of its effects on the wetlands. Sure, Playa Vista sold this land to the State, so at least the drains do not encourage more condos. Unfortunately, this system still benefits those who want to destroy this wetland. The new owner of this land, our state department of fish and game, benefits from this water diversion too, as its bureaucrats want to destroy this wetland by stacking 25 feet of dirt there. If the land is still considered a wetland, destruction of this wetland would not be allowed. That is what is most troubling about this secretly constructed drain system.
For clarity-
Grassroots Coalition (GC) disseminated a news release with attachments:
1. The California Coastal Commission’s (CCC) Public Record Act response to GC that included
the CCC’s Coastal Act violation letter to Playa Capital LLC. and;
2. Ballona Wetland images
And, GC has participated in only one lawsuit, ETINA v City of Los Angeles, Playa Capital LLC.
This lawsuit was won in the Court of Appeals.
With less than 5% of west coast wetlands remaining, it has been an important and lengthy struggle to save Ballona Wetlands from the development known as Playa Vista. That struggle produced a willing seller which is why the public now owns hundreds of additional acres of Ballona.
GC did work alongside the City of Los Angeles and was instrumental in garnering oilfield gas migration studies upon the proposed Playa Vista development site. The studies, performed by Exploration Technologies Inc., Victor Jones, concluded the Playa Vista site was one of the largest oilfield gas seepage areas in the country. The studies led to Playa Vista’s own new code which included experimental gas mitigation devices known collectively as the Playa Vista Methane Prevention, Detection and Monitoring Program. That ‘Program’ includes dewatering of Ballona’s groundwater in order to keep the gas intake pipes free of clogging from water and silts and thus failing. According to Department of Sanitation records, that groundwater is being thrown away into sanitary sewers.
Historically and now, Ballona was and is predominantly a seasonal freshwater wetland. Winter rains and natural springs and aquifers provide its life-giving freshwaters.
Ballona’s waters need to be protected and used onsite, not thrown into sewers, not syphoned off into wetland drainage devices that throw away the precious commodity into the ocean.
Grassroots Coalition remains dedicated to the protection of Ballona Wetlands and its inhabitants.
Patricia McPherson, Grassroots Coalition
Contrary to Playa Capital LLC Vice President Huffman’s Argonaut comment — the city of Los Angeles Public Works, has stated to Grassroots Coalition that, the device was designated as a private drain,…” so it has never been and is not now, a part of the City of Los Angeles’ Storm Drain system.”
“The drainage lines were constructed many years ago, at the request of the city of Los Angeles,” Huffman explained. “These drains are intended to protect the adjacent roads from flooding in the event of a massive storm, which has not occurred since the drains were installed.” Argonaut comment
Patricia McPherson, Grassroots Coalition
The remaining part of the Ballona freshwater wetlands ecosystem, approximately 650 acres left after Playa Vista destroyed half of it with their massive development, are a very precious resource for our coast and our local population. Fresh water wetlands are increasingly disappearing along our coast, and some migratory birds and other wildlife need freshwater wetlands.
Thanks to the hard work of Grassroots Coalition, the oilfield gas leak below Playa Vista was discovered before it was built, and this revelation also led to the Los Angeles Building and Safety Dept. stating that Playa Vista could not build housing over the Southern California Gas Co. underground reservoir west of Lincoln Blvd. This resulted in PV becoming a willing seller, and the public was able to purchase additional land in 2003.
The original Ballona wetlands were 2,000 acres of freshwater wetlands surrounded by 4,000 acres of upland habitat. What we have left is a small but very important remnant that is very valuable and should be strongly protected.