tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12122840653633472312024-02-20T10:10:23.829-08:00Friends of HahamongnaMbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-88427454691277475152011-05-25T10:47:00.000-07:002011-05-25T11:12:42.823-07:00HWPAC May 24 Meeting reportThe Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee had a full house and a full agenda at its May 24 meeting which began with an item concerning the temporary use of an Annex building by the Pasadena Fire Department. Fire Station 39 located on Avenue 64 was found to be structurally unsafe and the City closed it immediately. The Fire Department has requested the use of the Annex main administration building garage to store equipment and fixtures. The equipment will be out of service and not in use by fire personnel so there will be minimal impact upon the park. It is expected that the Fire Department will need the use of the space for about two years. Staff emphasized, however, that should work on the Environmental Education Center move forward, the Fire Department is aware they might need to find a new storage area.<br /><br />As you may recall, the Forest Service, which was displaced because of the Station Fire, was also temporarily using a portion of the Annex. They have now moved out and will be returning to their own facilities.<br /><br />Brad Boman, Pasadena Water & Power, gave an informative presentation concerning the department's extensive work in the Upper Arroyo necessitated by the massive sediment flows out of the mountains. He stated that the major maintenance activities have now been completed. The next steps are to hire a consultant to upgrade/replace the water intake structure, to renew the Fish and Game permit, and to integrate the JPL east parking lot into the water spreading operations. (There were several inquiries as to when JPL will be leaving the east lot. The city does not have this information yet but expects to shortly.)<br /><br />The presentation on grants, both pending and recently denied, elicited the most comments from both the Committee and the public. Rosa Laveaga reported that the city just narrowly missed approval for a Nature Education Facilities grant awarded by the California Natural Resources Agency, a real disappointment considering the long delay in the implementation of the Environmental Education Center. The grant for the Pasadena Equestrian Center was also rejected as were two grant applications for the restoration of Berkshire Creek. in 2010 and 2011 only two grants were awarded which have Hahamongna components, a trail restoration grant for the Eastside Neighborhood & JPL (Altadena) Connector Trail and a $100,000 habitat restoration grant. Things are not looking so good on the grant front. Money is scarce, competition fierce, and the city staff much reduced.<br /><br />Staff gave a report on the agreements with the Annex tenants, Rose Bowl Riders, Tom Sawyer Camps, and Mach 1. The process is very time consuming since it involved multiple city departments including Public Works, Planning, Human Services and Recreation, the City Attorney's Office, and the Real Property Division in the City Manager's Office. The first step is the application for a multi-tenant Conditional Use Permit. Public Works will be the lead department in moving the process forward. No funding has been identified for the projects.<br /><br />Another item on the agenda concerned the LA County Post Station Fire Sediment Removal Project but there was no one from the County there to give a presentation. Committee members and the public were urged to attend the County's meeting on Thursday, May 26, 6:00 pm at La Canada High School at which the various sediment haul routes will be presented.<br /><br />Last but not least, staff provided the Committee with an update on the Hahamongna Basin Multi-Use Project, one of the Greater Los Angeles County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan projects to be funded by Prop 84 funds and administered by the Arroyo Seco Foundation. There were a number of errors in the grant application which staff is correcting. The completion date of the CEQA process was listed as June 2011 which has now been corrected to an estimated completion date of February 2012. The number of acres of open space created by the sediment moving has been corrected to 15 acres not the 23 acres originally stated. The update also makes clear that, although IRWMP funds will not be used to build the controversial sports field and expanded parking lot, the funds to do so will provide the matching funds which will allow the IRWMP projects to proceed. In non-bureaucratese, you can't have one without the other.<br /><br />The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Advisory Committee will be Tuesday, July 26, 2011.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-62276286079795560982011-04-28T14:12:00.000-07:002011-04-28T14:30:59.872-07:00More on Devil's Gate Interim Sediment Removal PlanAt its April 26 meeting the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" class="blsp-spelling-error">Hahamongna</span> Watershed Park Advisory Committee received an update from Los Angeles County Flood Control concerning the interim measures to be taken to clean out sediment in <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" class="blsp-spelling-error">Hahamongna</span> behind Devil's Gate Dam. The most important update was a clarification of the haul routes to be used to remove the sediment.<br /><br />According to the presentation, 25,000 cubic yards of sediment will be removed from the area immediately behind the dam. The work will proceed on an emergency basis under a <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" class="blsp-spelling-error">CEQA</span> exemption which will require that no further environmental work will have to be done.<br /><br />Preparatory work began March 31, 2011. Actual sediment removal is anticipated to take 16 to 20 days with the removal of 1600 cubic yards of dirt per day. <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">Clean out</span> is scheduled to begin June 17 and to continue until August 15, 2011. Other measures to improve dam safety are scheduled to be completed between August 15 and October 15, 2011. These include heightening the sluice gate, replacing the damaged ladder system, installing a new catwalk and log booms, and modifying the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" class="blsp-spelling-error">Altadena</span> West Storm Drain.<br /><br />The County anticipates having to do a similar <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">clean out</span> effort each year until the environmental impact report for the final sediment removal project is completed.<br /><br />The haul route as illustrated in the presentation will go north along an access road on the east side of the park to just below the east <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" class="blsp-spelling-error">JPL</span> parking lot where the trucks will turn south and go down Windsor Avenue to the 210 Freeway. The bulk of the sediment, over 90%, will then be trucked east to pits in <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" class="blsp-spelling-error">Irwindale</span>. The organic material comprising the rest of the sediment will be taken via the 210 Freeway to <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" class="blsp-spelling-error">Scholl</span> Canyon landfill in Glendale.<br /><br />There were a number of questions concerning why the County had chosen the haul route which would cause the most neighborhood disruption as well as the most environmental impact within the park. The Committee and the public both asked about other alternatives. One mentioned was the road at the southwest corner of the park which has been used for prior debris <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">clean outs</span>. Another was the possibility of exiting the park from the southeast in a way which would not impact the neighborhood. The County assured the Committee that this alternatives had been considered.<br /><br />The Advisory Committee passed a motion to request the Pasadena City Council to examine the County's transportation plan to identify areas to be impacted, to ask the County to consider alternative routes which would reduce environmental impacts, and to notify areas to be impacted.<br /><br />If you would like to read County Flood <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" class="blsp-spelling-error">Control's</span> presentation, it can be found at<br /><a href="http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/Removal/DevilGate/HWPAC%20Interim%20Measures%20200110426.pdf">http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/Removal/DevilGate/HWPAC Interim Measures 200110426.<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" class="blsp-spelling-error">pdf</a></span>Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-1319077646416780672011-04-12T11:37:00.000-07:002011-04-12T12:01:26.431-07:00Hahamongna sediment removal report to City Council<div>At their April 11 meeting the Pasadena City Council heard a presentation by Steve Sheridan of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works concerning the County's plans for sediment removal behind Devil's Gate Dam in Hahamongna Watershed Park. </div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>County Public Works is working with a consultant to prepare an Environmental Impact Report as directed by the Board of Supervisors to study the effects of removing the massive amounts of sediment which have washed into the basin as the result of the Station Fire. As yet no schedule has been set up for outreach meetings. When the schedule is set up, the City and the public will be notified. </div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>The bulk of Mr. Sheridan's presentation, however, focused upon the measures which the County will take while the EIR is being prepared to protect the integrity and continued operation of the dam and to insure flood protection to downstream communities. Chief among these measures is the removal of 25,000 cubic yards of sediment from along the face of the dam. This excavation will be within 100 feet of the dam and no vegetation will be removed. The work is expected to begin in June or July of this year, depending upon how quickly the basin dries out, and to last about one month. Mr. Sheridan in his presentation stated that there would be 250 truck trips per day. The report to the Board of Supervisors (link given below) estimates 150 to 200 truck trips per day, however. </div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>To remove the sediment from the basin, the access road along the east side of the dam will be re-established. The haul route will be along this road to just below the JPL east parking lot, then on to Windsor Avenue to the freeway and ultimately to Scholl landfill. According to Mr. Sheridan, at present no alternate site has been identified so that the sediment would not have to be deposited in the Scholl landfill. Other interim operational measures include extending the height of the existing sluice gate trash rack, replacing part of the damaged ladder system on the face of the dam, replacing the existing wooden boom logs, installing a new catwalk around the spillway ports, and modifying the Altadena West Storm Drain to allow discharge in the event the outlet becomes blocked by sediment. </div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>The County is also working on two emergency plans to be in place until the reservoir cleanout is complete. The first will notify agencies and residents in response to potential flooding due to high debris flows. The second will be used to notify agencies in response to a dam safety emergency.</div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>To read a copy of the Board report, go to </div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/Removal/index.cfm </div>Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-12403266298182154122011-03-26T07:10:00.000-07:002011-03-26T07:52:19.782-07:00Report on recent Hahamongna Advisory meetingThe following is a report on two items of interest which were discussed at the March 22 meeting of the Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee.<br /><br />The first was the Hahamongna Basin Multi-use Project, a cooperative effort between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the City of Pasadena, and the Arroyo Seco Foundation. The project is one of 13 Greater Los Angeles Integrated Regional Water Management Plan projects submitted to the CA Department of Water Resources for possible Proposition 84 funding. Should funds be awarded, the grantee would be Los Angeles County Flood Control which would complete a Memo of Understanding (MOU) with the Arroyo Seco Foundation. The initial amount requested is $4,341,281 and the total project cost is estimated to be over $7 million.<br /><br />According to the grant application, this project "will increase water supply, improve water quality, and improve ecosystem health..." Some of the project components include the removal of 250,000 cubic yards of accumulated sediment from the Hahamongna Basin and the use of this sediment to create 23 acres of open space outside the flood zone at the northern end of which the existing parking lot will be expanded south to accommodate 200 vehicles. Adjacent to the parking lot, the compacted fill will create a 4-acre level field to accommodate a future 2.4 acre multi-purpose field. (This sediment removal project is not the Los Angeles County Flood Control Post Station Fire Sediment Removal Project but rather an additional project to be completed after the County's project.)<br /><br />Other project components in the Basin include raising the base elevation of the SCE power poles, restoring habitat, raising 3000 linear feet of the Perimeter Trail out of the area of frequent inundation, restoring Berkshire Creek, and widening an existing park road to allow for two way traffic.<br /><br />Up in the Arroyo Seco Canyon, project components include replacing the intake dam with an inflatable dam, fish screens, habitat restoration, trail enhancements and the installation of a public restroom.<br /><br />The staff presentation at the meeting emphasized that certain of the above components of the Hahamongna Basin Multi-use Project, such as the sediment removal to create the sports field and enlarged parking lot, would not be paid for by Prop 84 IRWMP funds. These projects such as the Sycamore Grove field and the Berkshire Creek restoration were identified as "Multi-benefit Projects." When questioned, staff stated that other funding sources for these projects had not yet been identified.<br /><br />There followed a long and confusing discussion concerning future environmental documentation, the first of which was to be completed in June 2011 according to the grant application. Pasadena staff assured both Committee members and the public that this date was incorrect. There will be environmental impact reports done for the IRWMP-funded portion of the project, for the portion staff referred to as the "Multi-benefit Projects," and for the County Flood Control Post Station Fire Sediment Removal Project. How these environmental impact reports will be coordinated is unclear. Stay tuned for how to get involved when more information on this is made available.<br /><br />If you are interested in learning more, take a look at the Prop 84 Implementation Grant Application which is available online. The work plan for the Hahamongna Basin Multi-use Plan is in Attachment 3. Work Plan 1 of 5. The link is<br /><br /><a href="http://ladpw.org/wmd/irwmp/index.cfm?fuseaction=TopDocListing&directory=Prop84ImplGrantApp&ttl=Prop%2084%20Implementation%20Grant%20Application">http://ladpw.org/wmd/irwmp/index.cfm?fuseaction=TopDocListing&directory=Prop84ImplGrantApp&ttl=Prop%2084%20Implementation%20Grant%20Application</a><br /><br />Staff also gave an update on the JPL east parking lot, all but 200 spaces of which is to become spreading basins. JPL is planning to move ahead with a $22 million parking structure on their own property. When this is built, the lab will no longer need the east lot parking in Hahamongna. Funding has not yet been approved by Congress, however.<br /><br />The Advisory Committee passed a motion to recommend to the City Council that the Council urge JPL to plan its onsite parking garage so that the lab can also vacate the 214 space parking lot on the west side of Hahamongna (the lot immediately adjacent to the JPL campus). You may recall that the west side parking lot is the so-called "temporary" parking lot which was carved out of park open space in 1986 and which has always been slated to return to open space. The motion passed unanimously/<br /><br />The next Hahamongna meeting will be held May 24, 2011. The March agenda item concerning the HWP Annex and Environmental Education Center Planning was held over until this meeting.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-16686517907594173652010-12-05T09:45:00.000-08:002010-12-05T09:47:59.126-08:00CorrectionIn my prior post, I inadvertently left out an important piece of information. The trucks will be taking sediment out of Hahamongna not all year but rather from May until December at the latest, depending on the weather.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-2386850967025612902010-12-02T10:15:00.001-08:002010-12-02T10:45:50.315-08:00Hahamongna sediment removal projectThe County of Los Angeles is planning a massive earth moving project to be implemented in Hahamongna on an emergency basis. Ryan Butler of the Water Resources Division of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works gave a detailed presentation concerning the Devil's Gate Dam and Reservoir Postfire Sediment Removal Project to the Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee at its November 30 meeting.<br /><br />The project is required because of the Station Fire which burned nearly 100% of the undeveloped Arroyo Seco Watershed. Nearly one million cubic yards of sediment were washed into the basin in last winter's rains and the sediment level rose 15 feet in the basin. Should similar rains occur this coming winter, the sediment level could rise an additional 15 feet, putting the operation of the dam at risk, according to Butler. Devil's Gate Dam protects parts of Pasadena, South Pasadena, and the City of Los Angeles.<br /><br />The County's plan is to remove 1,671,000 cubic yards of sediment from behind the dam. This amount was chosen because it is an estimate of the amount of sediment which could accumulate behind the dam should a 50 year intensity storm occur when the watershed is entirely burned. The excavation area is planned to be about 50 acres. About 15 acres of willow trees will be permanently removed when the basin behind the dam is widened and deepened. The precise number of trees to be removed has not yet been determined.<br /><br />The huge amount of debris to be removed will require 300 - 400 truckloads of sediment per day to be removed Monday - Friday for at least three years at a cost of $35 million. The haul route will be along Oak Grove Drive and the 210 Freeway and will not impact the Pasadena neighborhoods adjacent to Hahamongna. The plan is to haul all the sediment away to the Manning Sediment Placement Site and Azusa Land Reclamation although the County is open to working with Pasadena to leave some fill onsite to create the proposed new sports fields. The County is also proposing a paved two land road on the west side of Hahamongna near the dam which could be used for future sediment removal projects. The road will cross the existing trail and could necessitate closing the trail and the Flint Wash Bridge during the work week for the three year duration of the project.<br /><br />The project, scheduled to begin in September 2011, is proposed to be implemented on an emergency basis with an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act so that no environmental impact report will be required, despite the massive scale of the project and the sensitive nature of the habitats in Hahamongna. The County will, however, be required to obtain all necessary permits from agencies such as the California Department of Fish and Game, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Environmental damage will be mitigated although, as one Committee member pointed out, this mitigation does not have to be done in Hahamongna but could be done elsewhere.<br /><br />Despite recognizing the necessity of sediment removal, the Advisory Committee and the public at the meeting expressed many concerns. One of the most frequently heard was a concern that other, less draconian, solutions had not been thoroughly explored as would have been required had the normal CEQA process been followed. One audience member referred to the proposal as a "scorched earth" approach which would have a catastrophic impact upon the wildlife in the park. Other issues raised were traffic impacts on an already congested Oak Grove Drive, air pollution and the nearby school children and noise pollution. Committee members questioned the need for a permanent two lane road in the park. The Committee also expressed a strong interest in jobs and contracts being awarded to local residents.<br /><br />The Committee passed a formal motion which included the following:<br />Committee notification of when the project comes before the County Board of Supervisors<br />Posting of the County's project presentation on the Pasadena city website<br />Strong support for jobs for local residents, especially women and minorities<br />Request that the County study alternatives which would have less impact upon the natural habitat and which would cause less noise, air pollution and traffic impact<br />Request that the County study the maintenance road in terms of its surface, permanent nature, and width<br />Request that the County seek opportunities to reduce the impacts of the project upon park users<br />Regular quarterly updates to the Committee about the project from city staff and a presentation by County staff after they have their permits from the regulatory agenciesMbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-7389028103887312512010-10-01T11:02:00.000-07:002010-10-01T11:17:42.902-07:00Recap of Hahamongna Committee meetingAt its September 28 meeting, the Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee held a discussion about how to proceed with the planning for the Environmental Education Center to be located on the former Forest Service campus in Hahamongna. Rather than forming a subcommittee to formulate recommendations, the Committee decided to hold a public meeting to be led by a facilitator who will solicit input from both the Committee members and the public. This will probably be held at one of the regular upcoming meetings of the Committee which are held every two months on the fourth Tuesday of the month although a date has not yet been finalized.<br /><br />The Committee also received a letter from the LA County Department of Public Works, Water Resources Division, informing them of a major sediment removal project in Hahamongna necessitated by the Station Fire. As the letter notes, the Station Fire burned over 160,000 acres in the San Gabriels including the Arroyo Seco and deposited 936,000 cubic yards of post fire debris. The sediment removal in Hahamongna will make room for future sedimentation that is expected to occur. Construction is expected to begin as early as next summer. The County will make a formal presentation of this project to the Advisory Committee when the details have been finalized.<br /><br />The Committee also asked for a report on the Hahamongna Basin Multi-Use Project which includes a sediment removal component as well. The latter is one of the two Upper Los Angeles River Watershed projects selected to be included in a Prop 84 implementation grant application by the Greater Los Angeles County Integrated Regional Water Management region. The initial amount requested was $2.971 million with a total cost of 7.255 million. Should the Prop 84 funds be awarded, the CEQA date is December 2011 and the estimated construction start date is May 2012.<br /><br />Given the urgency of the County's Station Fire sediment removal project, the Committee asked that the County's presentation be given at their next meeting if possible. The date of the next meeting has not yet been set.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-40525053892882183982010-07-10T09:00:00.000-07:002010-07-10T09:10:56.305-07:00Council to reconsider more fields in HahamongnaThe following is the text of a letter I sent to the Pasadena City Council urging them to take another look at adding the sports fields in the current Hahamongna Master Plan. The Council has been hearing from me for about 12 years now, however. They need to hear from NEW voices about how important it is to Save Hahamongna! Thanks so much to all the bloggers who wrote so passionately about the need to save one of Pasadena's last great places - your comments are eloquent proof that the support for the park is widespread and deeply felt. I hope that you who are reading will add your voice as well because the decisions now being made will shape the park for decades to come.<br /><br />Mayor Bogaard and City Council,<br />The Friends of Hahamongna urge the City Council to reconsider the building of additional sports fields in Hahamongna Watershed Park. We agree with the Arroyo Seco Foundation, the Pasadena Audubon Society, the Hahamongna Watch Group and the over 1280 concerned citizens who have signed the Save Hahamongna petition, all of whom have asked that this issue be revisited.<br /><br />As you know from our many appearances before the Council, Friends believes that Hahamongna is an irreplaceable environmental treasure, a remnant of wild California in the heart of our densely settled urban region which should be preserved for future generations. With some creativity and persistence, sports fields can be built anywhere - even atop a parking garage as is the Maranantha High School sports field in Pasadena. The rare habitats, the trails, the equestrian recreation, the very serenity of Hahamongna cannot be moved elsewhere. Once it is gone, it is gone for good.<br /><br />And therein lies the heart of what we are asking you, the City Council, to do. We ask you to make the politically difficult choice and take the long view of what will be best for the future rather than continuing on with this ill-advised compromise. Building sports fields in Hahamongna with the attendant noise, lights, car traffic and pollution may help to alleviate the sports field shortage for a few years but at what a cost? <br /><br />We ask that, with your leadership, the City of Pasadena live up to its own Green City Action Plan which states that "Pasadena values the beautiful Arroyo Seco... and protection of the native animals who live in these habitats." Building sports fields in Hahamongna is the very antithesis of the protection of natural habitats as promised in the Action Plan. The residents of Pasadena and surrounding communities have overwhelmingly demonstrated their support for keeping Hahamongna natural by attending hundreds of meetings over two decades. They have written hundreds, if not thousands, of letters and emails, over 600 during the Arroyo Seco master planning process alone. They have not only signed the Save Hahamongna petition but many have contributed eloquent, thoughtful comments as to why they believe this special place must be preserved.<br /><br />The time has come to hear these voices, to plan the additional sports fields elsewhere, and to save Hahamongna!<br /><br />Sincerely,<br />Mary E. Barrie<br />Friends of HahamongnaMbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-21261993990413190552010-05-06T09:48:00.000-07:002010-05-06T10:26:16.700-07:00Prickly enough?The Friends of Hahamongna were tickled to be awarded the Doo Dah parade's Thorny Rose Award. We appreciated the recognition of our efforts to shine the light on the less publicly acknowledged aspects of Hahamongna planning. Since we are unfailingly polite and generally mild-mannered, we bridled a bit at the adjective "prickly" but accepted it as a reference not to any grumpiness or ill manners on our part but rather to our tenacity and persistence in support of this great open space park - prickly like a foxtail in an Irish Setter's coat!<br /><br />Imagine my amusement to see Tim Brick ask the following question on the Arroyo Seco Foundation website: "Friends of Hahamongna gets the Doodah Parade's Thorny Rose Award, but are they prickly enough?" At first I just grinned and the old saying came to mind about how you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. <br /><br />Tim's question lurked in my mind, though, and, as I thought about it more, it seemed like perhaps a very good question indeed. Maybe none of the Hahamongna activists have been prickly enough. After all it was <strong>19 years ago</strong> in 1991, that a consultant to the City of Pasadena was quoted in the Star News as saying that "the consensus of opinion that we are hearing is that people really want it left as natural as possible<strong>." </strong>For 19 years the community has asked for a natural park and we're still fighting off roads and more soccer fields? <br /><br />Maybe it is time to get prickly.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-4084229651593857212010-03-29T10:55:00.000-07:002010-03-29T11:21:00.958-07:00No more sports fields in HahamongnaLately I've been thinking quite a bit about the proposed new sports fields in Hahamongna for the same reason given by one of the Hahamongna Advisory Committee members - it's the nose of the camel under the tent. The fields are incompatible with the natural park now (look how far out into the basin they will built!) but they could become even more so in the future.<br /><br /><br /><br />How tempting will it be in the future to add lights for night play if the shortage of fields continues or grows worse? Then comes all the attendant noise, auto lights, and traffic - not to mention opening up the park to all kinds of uses (and misuses) after dark. And, if the park no longer closes at dusk, all the parking lots will require security lights and then what is to stop these parking lots from being used for supplemental parking for all kinds of non-park events, further degrading the natural area. Don't forget that exactly this was proposed in earlier versions of the Hahamongna Master Plan. What is now a dark and silent wildlife corridor out in the basin would be severely impacted.<br /><br /><br /><br />Lest you think my domino theory is far-fetched, here's what the Hahamongna Master Plan Findings of Fact document stated: "The Hahamongna Watershed Park element would also include the expansion or rehabilitation of play fields in the Upper Arroyo Seco<strong>. The use of these fields would be expected to create a new source of light</strong> <strong>..."</strong>Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-33819183107848995782010-03-11T08:56:00.000-08:002010-03-11T09:58:49.601-08:00Annex Plan Staff Guidelines Approved!At its March 8, 2010 meeting the Pasadena City Council approved the final version of the Guidelines for staff to use in implementing the Master Plan for the Hahamongna Annex. The Guidelines were drawn from the recommendations of the Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee and other City Commissions and were strongly supported by the community in attendance at the Council's February 1 meeting at which the Annex Plan was adopted.<br /><br />At the February 1 meeting, the minutes reflect that the Council approved the Annex Plan and included "the advisory bodies' recommendations, as amended." At the March 8 meeting, however, the Guidelines were adopted separately, although the Council did clarify that the Guidelines were Plan "conditions of approval."<br /><br />One of the most controversial aspect of the Plan was the proposed removal of 70 non-native trees. The Guidelines now state that every effort will be made to minimize tree removal in the Annex. The direction given to staff is reinforced within the language of the Plan itself which has been changed to state that "every effort shall be made to minimize native and non-native tree removal in the Annex. Any replacement trees required as a part of an Annex project should be of a native species. Any tree removals shall be done only on a per-project basis and only as Annex projects are funded and implemented."<br /><br />The other very controversial aspect of the plan was the northern "corridor" which began life in the Annex conceptual plan as a 50 foot wide road/greenway to the JPL west parking lot. The Guidelines now specify that only a 10 foot wide (maximum) bikeway is to be built along the northern perimeter of the Annex and that it shall be designed in such a way that it "does not lend itself to becoming a road." <br /><br />Two of the recommendations relate to developing a vision and mission as well as a management and operation plan for the future environmental education center. Staff recommendations will be presented to the Hahamongna Advisory Committee for review and comment.<br /><br />Other recommendations may appear dry and technical but they are critically important to the future of Hahamongna and the Annex. These include studying the removal of the Planned Development zoning from a portion of the Annex, a study of including Hahamongna within the Arroyo Seco Public Lands Ordinance, the review of Conditional Use Permits by the Hahamonga Advisory Committee, and a requirement for further project-level environmental review as projects are implemented on the Annex.<br /><br />If you would like to read the Guidelines in their entirety, go to <a href="http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/councilagendas/council_agenda.asp">http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/councilagendas/council_agenda.asp</a> and click on March 8. The Guidelines are Item 10 on the Agenda. For more background information, click on the link for the Agenda Report. If you are a well-organized and dedicated Hahamongna fan, you might want to print a copy of the Guidelines and keep them in a safe place for future reference.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-23966658713425728292010-02-21T12:55:00.000-08:002010-02-21T13:09:43.157-08:00The germ (or more) of truth...The following started out as a letter to the Editor of the Pasadena Weekly a couple of weeks ago but since it hasn't yet seen the light of day, it can be adapted into a good blog entry as well.<br /><br />Andre Coleman recently wrote an interesting article [Road to Nowhere, 2/4/2010] about the adoption of the Hahamongna Annex Plan. This article mentioned a rumor of long duration about the use of Hahamongna to provide parking for the Rose Bowl and seemed to suggest that there was no basis for this rumor.<br /><br /> For almost twelve years I have followed the Hahamongna planning process closely. I too wondered why this rumor about Rose Bowl parking in the park was so persistent if it was all just a figment of someone's fevered imagination. Several years ago when I was doing some research on Hahamongna history, I found a document on the subject that I had not seen before the Hahamongna Master Plan was approved in 2003. (The full, weighty and cumbersome title is "Assessment of Travel Management Strategies for the Central Arroyo Master Plan", Linscott Law & Greenspan, Engineers, Appendix G to Appendix F, Traffic Impact Study, Arroyo Seco Master Plan, Arroyo Seco Master Environmental Impact Report, Volume II, Hahamongna Off-Site parking.) Whew!<br /><br />And, lo and behold, in this obscure document there was indeed a proposal to use Hahamongna as off-site parking for the Rose Bowl. The following is a direct quote:<br />“Parking facilities identified in the Hahamongna Master Plan would be available for use by employees and/or patrons [of the Rose Bowl].<br />“The Hahamongna Master Plan indicates the availability of parking facilities as part of arrangements with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and/or as part of the development of a ‘West Arroyo’ parking structure adjacent to the Arroyo. A shuttle service originating at JPL and/or the ‘West Arroyo’ parking facility would reduce the demand for event related parking and vehicular travel in the Central Arroyo.” The report even included an exhibit of the “Hahamongna Off-Site Parking Route.”<br /><br /> The idea never made it into the Hahamongna Master Plan itself as is the case with many recommendations made during the course of a planning process. As far as the rumor is concerned, my guess is that someone on the inside saw this document early on, became alarmed at the idea, and started spreading what turned out to be not such an unfounded rumor after all.<br /><br /> If you are interested in learning more about recent Hahamongna history, there is a brief two page summary on the Friends of Hahamongna website, <a title="http://www.fohwp.org/" href="http://www.fohwp.org/">www.fohwp.org</a>.Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-33172817861250201972010-02-02T14:24:00.001-08:002010-02-02T14:24:58.530-08:00Annex Plan at Last!The Annex Plan and Initial Study were approved by the Pasadena City Council at its Feb. 2nd meeting -- with the very important addition of recommendations of the Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee. One of the most significant was that every effort should be made to minimize all tree removal on the Annex, native and non-native. The Committee also responded to the community's concern about a future road across the property by specifying that only a 10 feet wide bikeway be built in the northern corridor where a road had formerly been proposed. A new equestrian/hiking trail was approved at the southern edge of the Annex. The Committee and the Council agreed that the Planned Development zoning should be removed from the Annex and that the Annex and all of Hahamongna should be included under the Arroyo Seco Public Lands Ordinance. Other recommendations concerned the implementation of the long-awaited Environmental Education Center.<br /> <br />A diverse group of over 30 community members addressed the Council. There was a great deal of concern expressed over the possible removal of the 70 non-native trees. A large contingent of MACH 1 supporters spoke to the Council about their desire to move into the area promised on the Annex for a new therapeutic riding center. Other speakers expressed concern over the designation of the existing trail on the property in the Plan as for "bikes only" even though the trail is the only access which JPL employees have out into the park. <br /><br />The Council directed that staff fine tune the motion and return in several weeks with the final version. Then work on the long-awaited Annex projects can begin!Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1212284065363347231.post-47794852908610303922010-01-30T14:25:00.000-08:002010-01-30T14:32:58.932-08:00Hahamongna Annex PlanFirst posted on January 15, 2010:<br /><br />At long last it looks like the Hahamongna Annex Plan is finally going to the Pasadena City Council. The hearing is scheduled for Monday, February 1, 2010 at 7:30 pm in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 100 N. Garfield St.<br /><br />And what a plan it is!<br /><br />TREES<br /><br />Seventy non-native trees are slated to be removed from the Annex in the name of "habitat restoration." Not surprisingly, thirty-three of the trees to be cut down are located in the formerly proposed road corridor. (Remember that road? It was to be cut across the Annex to provide access to a 1200 space JPL parking garage, which was removed from the 2003 Hahamongna Master Plan after strong community opposition.)<br /><br />The non-natives include majestic Italian stone pines, liquid ambers, Chinese elms, California peppers and others too numerous to mention. These trees will be cut down despite the fact that the Annex is a landscaped area which was planted by the Forest Service, LA County Fire and Rose Bowl Riders many decades ago. The trees are an integral part of the history and uniqueness of the property just as the same species are in the Central Arroyo where no one is trying to cut them down. The trees serve a variety of wildlife. Cooper's hawks, a species of concern, have raised their young in their branches and western gray squirrels, driven from higher elevations by the Station Fire, have taken refuge in them - not to mention the human generations who have enjoyed their beauty and shade.<br /><br />This drastic proposal wasn't always in the Annex documents. An earlier version says that "it is the city's intent to align the trails in a manner that preserves as many existing trees as reasonably possible... city estimates that the number of trees that would be impacted... in the range of 7 - 19 trees." Why the complete about face - is the plan now to do a Colorado Blvd-style chainsaw massacre on the trees in the corridor and just be done with it?<br /><br />BIKES ONLY<br /><br />The latest proposal from staff, put forth only AFTER the documents had been seen by the advisory groups, is that the northern bikeway will be for "bikes only". Obviously that isn't going to work since JPL employees walk on that trail to get from the lab into the park. So staff's answer is a trail/bikeway which is almost 40 feet at its widest!<br /><br />Now you may have noticed that elsewhere in Hahamongna down by the Flint Wash Bridge, horses, bikes and pedestrians all share a 12 foot hard surface path with a 4 foot shoulder. This is what is also proposed for the three other new segments of the bikeway in Hahamongna - a hard surface path and an immediately adjacent soft surface trail - no buffers or barriers. Why do you think it is only in the formerly proposed roadway corridor that an ultra-deluxe "meandering" greenway with buffers and vegetation is necessary and everywhere else in the park the bikeway/trail is shared use and not more than 20 feet wide?<br /><br />DON'T BLAME THE CITIZEN COMMISSIONS<br /><br />The Planning Commission, the Design Commission, the Transportation Advisory Commission and the Hahamongna Watershed Park Advisory Committee all supported nothing wider than a 10 foot path for bicyclists and hikers in the northern corridor . The Transportation Advisory Commission went so far as to say that it should be designed in such a manner that it could never become a road. They all tried their best with what were incredibly confusing documents. There were four different versions of the Plan in the space of seven months and the Plan seen by one Commission wasn't necessarily the same plan seen by the next. The Final Draft even had material that was not seen by any of the advisory groups whose purpose is to advise the City Council. The documents they approved will not be the documents before the Council.<br /><br />In the final Plan, the trail portion of the greenway seems to have been removed until you take a close look. The trail was taken out of the Exhibits and the Land Use section of the Plan where the casual reader would expect to find it but it is still included in the Mobility section. So is it in the Plan or not? If it is not in the Plan, then why is it being studied in the Initial Study? Questions such as these abound.<br /><br />Lest you think I am anti-trail, nothing could be further from the truth. What I am anti is a corridor which will be as wide as Foothill Boulevard once the trees are cut down. The Annex, and all of Hahamongna, is a rustic, peaceful place that should remain that way for future generations which is what the community has been saying for over 20 years. I've been accused of being against progress. If "progress" is bulldozing and asphalting over this little green corner of the world that has miraculously escaped it thus far, I'll admit to the charge gladly.<br /><br />Enough on what has been quite an amazing process which will take much more than an email to document properly (a case study for a class on CEQA perhaps).<br /><br />I would make one suggestion to those of you who love Hahamongna and have been involved at one time or another in the over 20 year fight to save it. Now is the time to get back in the game before the chainsaws and the bulldozers start firing up. When that happens, there will be howls of protest and disbelief but by then it will be way too late.<br /><br />It's up to you!Mbarriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07869223148528334617noreply@blogger.com0