[City Hall report, p. 25]...This privately-owned property [3701 Pacific Place] is encumbered (currently in escrow) and has an active entitlement in progress. On February 25, 2020, an entitlement application was filed for 3701 N Pacific Place for a development project to construct a self-storage and recreational vehicle parking facility. The project also includes approve. .64 acres for a public access easement and public trailhead to the LA River and a native plant preserve.

The property is also located between the 405 Freeway and the Metro A line light rail train tracks, providing limited neighborhood access. The property is oriented along the northeast intersection of the 405 and 710 freeways and directly to the east of the LA River. The site is only accessible from its southeasternmost point, via Pacific Place which deadends into the property and is adjacent to a Caltrans maintenance station to the south. The property's location in terms of access, contamination and surrounding land uses (freeways, the river, Metro light rail tracks) renders it an auto-oriented property that prevents pedestrian compatibility by default.

Additionally, the property has considerable remediation needs. Prior to the site’s operation as a golf driving range, uses at the site included an oil brine water treatment facility for on and offsite oil production activities and oil well drilling. The oil-brine water treatment facility was established in the 1920s and activities included the pumping of oil brine to oil sumps (evaporation and treatment ponds), with the majority of the project site serving as a treatment sump. As a result of the treatment activities, water seepage into the subsurface below the sumps caused a sludge residue onsite. Operations for the treatment facility were discontinued in the 1950s and fill soil was imported to the site in the 1970s. The site’s oil well drilling activities took place between the 1930s and 1980s, with thirteen oil wells being drilled (11 of which produced oil). All of the oil wells were abandoned between 1961 and 2014, in accordance with the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) standards.

Therefore, for these reasons, this property was not identified as one of the nine opportunity sites

Sponsor

Sponsor

[Aril 8 release] We very much hoped for a legitimate study, and thanked Councilman Austin for this proposal at the time, though we feared the worst -- that the City would use this study as a disingenuous brief to defend its own betrayal of the community up to this point (having already greenlit initial stages of commercial development).

Sadly, our worst fears have been realized. This ‘feasibility study’ is in fact an infeasibility study: It is nothing more than a dishonest attempt to rewrite history. It is a retroactive rationalization and justification of decisions already made by callous, arrogant City Planning staff during the past two years, totally in contravention of the 2007/2015 Long Beach RiverLink Plan, the 2015 Lower LA River Revitalization Plan, and the 1996 and current 2020 Los Angeles River Master Plans. It specifically takes the crown jewels of river revitalization, the large, 405 Freeway-adjoining tracts 3701 Pacific Place and 712 Baker Street, off the table and hands them over to private developers.The bottom line is that the City plans to see that these crown jewels of future riverine park space, promised to the park-poor, disadvantaged residents of the western half of the city, will be developed and lost forever. River revitalization planning of two and a half decades andthe residents be damned [and the Long Beach section of the L.A. River will be further industrialized. [italics in original.]

...This entire ‘feasibility study’ essentially boils down to two sentences on p. 17 of the report: "2017: The City engaged TPL [Trust for Public Land] again to connect with the private property owners for 712 Baker and 3701 N. Pacific Place and attempt to identify an amount the owners would entertain for the sale of these properties. After 10 months of repeated attempted communication with the property owners with no returned communication, TPL concluded that the property owners were not willing sellers and the City was not able to begin any discussions with the property owners that would result in acquisition."

This statement is categorically false. The Trust for Public Land is a non-profit organization which helps facilitate the acquisition and development of parks and open space. It is not the responsible party for the action or inaction of a municipality failing to serve its residents. More to the point, we have been in close communication with TPL and it is our understanding that the characterization of TPL’s role is wholly inaccurate as a factual matter. The reality is that they very much have an active plan for the acquisition of these properties and they have chronically failed to receive the cooperation of the City, despite repeated outreach. The were in fact never engaged by the City as its official representative to negotiate for purchasing the land either in 2017 or at any other time. But they have made clear to us, they are extremely motivated and eager to become involved.

It is frankly shocking and very disheartening that City staff would stoop so low as to throw a noble organization like the Trust for Public Land under the bus, so to speak, to cover up their own failure to serve the community and the fact that they are captured by outside development interests...

...With regard to the claim that 3701 Pacific Place -- despite being seen as ideal for park development by river planning experts for decades, and having formerly served as private open space in the form of a golf driving range -- is unsuitable because it is inaccessible, that too is a lie.

To argue that because it has one access road at its southern end for vehicles means that the site must then become an "auto-oriented property" is logic impossible to comprehend. The reality is that the site can be accessed by bicycle and pedestrians from four different directions, and greater access could be added.

By directly lying, this so-called ‘feasibility study’ reveals itself as nothing more than a political weapon, a weapon against the activism of residents to save their river for parks and open space. It repeats the false claim that "it is unlikely that the current property owners are willing sellers" (p. 27), despite the fact that no negotiation was ever undertaken, no ground has been broken (except on soil testing), and no City Council decision has yet been made on whether an EIR (environmental impact report) should be required for 3701 Pacific Place or if it should be rezoned to ‘commercial storage’

The Riverpark Coalition release concludes:"This report must be rejected, and the City Council must refuse the request to rezone and commercially develop 3701 Pacific Place when this report is presented and a hearing is held on Tuesday, April 13th."

Sponsor

Sponsor

The issue is a political hot button in LA river-adjacent park-poor WLB, given years of greenspace lipservice by area politicians with relatively few results. Incumbent Councilmembers, including neighboring 9th district Councilman/Vice Mayor Rex Richardson, along with CD 1 incumbents Mary Zendejas and CD 7 Roberto Uranga, have stressed equity on other issues but now face a city-staff favored commercial development that would prevent the parcel's use as park/open space.

On April 13, the Council faces appeals of LB's non-elected Planning Commission approval by the well organized Riverpark Coalition, along with Ann Cantrell and Anna Christensen representing the Sierra Club Los Cerritos Wetlands Task Force; Corliss Lee representing Citizens About Responsible Planning; Juan Ovalle representing the Riverpark Coalition; Renee Lawler representing the Historic Equestrian Trail Association of So Cal; and Robert Gill representing the Los Cerritos Neighborhood Association.

The Riverpark Coalition ultimately aims to use public funds (including grants and the like) to purchase the parcel at 3701 Pacific Place for use as park open space. A Council vote to overrule their appeal would effectively slap back the grassroots equity efforts and facilitate the parcel's use as a commercial/personal storage facility with parking for RVs, trailers, campers, boats, trucks.)

Park open space was the parcel's land use designation until the Council quietly changed its underlying land to enable neo-industrial uses. Incumbent Austin was re-elected in November 2020 (after narrowly outpolling Reform Ticket candidate Juan Ovalle in March 2020.) But increasingly visible social network agitation from the Riverpark Coalition led safely-re-elected Austin (joined by Uranga and Zendejas facing re-election in 2022) to agendize a Feb. 2, 2021 Council item asking city management "to study feasibility of acquiring open space for public park development along LA River consistent with the Long Beach RiverLink plan and the Lower LA River Master Plan" and report back within 60 days.

But Austin included a key ambiguity in his Council agenda item: omitting mention of what "open space" he sought to include or exclude from possible acquisition...opening the door for city staff to exclude the 3701 Pacific Place parcel.

Sponsor

The Riverpark Coalition's position on acquiring the property is supported by retired 8th district Councilwoman Rae Gabelich (2004-2012). But in letters to the Riverpark Coalition, LB area incumbents -- including Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, Assemblyman Patrick O' Donnell, and Congressman Alan Lowenthal (all Democrats) -- have said that they support the group's general goals of more green and open space along the LA River but stop short of directly supporting a future park/open space for the 3701 Pacific Place parcel.

The Riverpark Coalition has publicly called on LB Mayor Robert Garcia (who has no vote but can veto Council actions subject to an override by six Councilmembers) to support a future park at 3701 Pacific Place. He has not done so.

Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report. LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. You can help keep really independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.