BALLONA WETLANDS Ecological Reserve Draft EIS/EIR September 2017 - Jeanette Vosburg's Comments Submitted 1.30.18

Submitted on

January 31, 2018
    Dear Ballona Supporters here are the BWER comments I sent to Army Corps and Fish & Wildlife
   
Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve (BWER) Draft Environmental Impact Report/Statement (DEIR/EIS).  
I support Alternative 11 and acquisition in Alternative 12. I oppose Alternatives 1, 2 and 3.  
Let's preserve Ballona WILDLIFE, HABITAT, FRESHWATER AND FRESHWATER WETLANDS.

Since Wetlands 90, many members of Marina Del Rey, Playa Del Rey, Venice and greater Los Angeles and beyond have
fought for the purchase and restoration of 640 acres of BWER. We should restore Ballona to what it was.

      Jeanette Vosburg, Chair Sierra Club Airport Marina Group, Board Member of Grassroots Coalition       
      Jeanette@saveballona.org       310-721-3512

TEXT OF COMMENTS

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIS/EIR) BALLONA WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT (BWER) Comments.

ATTENTION: Bonnie L. Rogers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Los Angeles District, Regulatory Division

ATTENTION: Director Charlton H. Bonham and Richard Brody, Land Manager Ballona Wetlands, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (BWER)


Dear Colonel Kirk E. Gibbs, Ms. Bonnie L. Rogers, Director Charlton H. Bonham and Mr. Richard C. Brody,

Questions.

  1. Q. Why did the Draft EIR/S Fail to address drains installed in the wetlands by a private developer that were the subject of California Coastal Development Permit No. 5-17-0253 on December 14, 2017?

Without considering such adverse impacts the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

- Along with a historical drought, these drains have contributed to a drying out of the BWER.

- The California Coastal Commission voted unanimously on December 14, 2017 to; 1) cap the two illegal drains capped within 30 days, 2) have a Coastal Development Permit approved within 180 days, 3) have the drains removed within one year.

Unanimous Yes Vote to Remove Illegal Drains(link is external)  1.24 minutes
https://youtu.be/hjsN4iSryIg(link is external)​ 

2.   Q. Why did the Draft EIR/S Fail to address letters from the California Coastal Commission to the DFW that unpermitted drains installed in the Ballona Wetlands caused a detrimental effect on the hydrology and surface water in a widespread area? Why hasn’t an independent Hydrology Report been done?

Without considering such adverse impacts the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why did the Draft EIR/S fail to address letters from the California Coastal Commission to the DFW requesting that DFW agree to enter into a consent Cease and Desist and Restoration process in regard to unpermitted drains installed in the Ballona Wetlands?

Without considering such adverse impacts the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why did DFW and USACE fail to recirculate the Draft EIR/S in order to address the California Coastal Commission issuance of Coastal Development Permit No. 5-17-0253 on December 14, 2017 that required DFW to cap and remove illegal unpermitted drains under its control from the Ballona Wetlands and to prepare an EIR within 180 days from the permit issuance to fully remove the drain structures?

    Without considering such adverse impacts the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.
     

  2. Q. Why did DFW and USACE fail to address that illegal drains under control of both agencies constituted violations of the U.S. Clean Water Act (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Act), and that the illegal structures were not covered by a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan nor a National Pollution Discharge Permit?

Without considering such adverse impacts the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why did the DEIR/S fail to address that the proposed introduction of salt water into a freshwater wetlands environment was contrary to the State of California Porter Cologne Act that encompasses the Venice Sub-Basin of the Santa Monica Groundwater Basin and is protective of groundwater resources as a potential source of public drinking water?

Without considering such adverse impacts to the groundwater basin by saltwater intrusion and in the absence of consideration of compliance with the Porter Cologne Act the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why did the DEIR/S fail to address the flood control project for the adjacent private Playa Vista Project approved by California Coastal Development Permit 5-91-463 that is on public lands controlled by the DFW, that the project was required to be managed by an entity approved by the California Coastal Commission named the “Ballona Wetlands Foundation” but is currently managed by an unauthorized private entity named the “Ballona Wetlands Conservancy”, and pursuant to USACE National Permit No. 90-426-EV construction of a “salt marsh” to contain storm waters from a 50-yr flood event was required and not com8. pleted?

Without considering the unauthorized management and incomplete private flood control project, the public is placed at danger of flood.  Therefore, the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.
 

Q. Why did the DEIR/S fail to acknowledge that the flood control project authorized by California Coastal Development Permit 5-91-463 and USACE National Permit No. 90-426-EV first required the applicant to obtain a Flood Control Permit from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Flood Control District?

Without considering the unauthorized management and incomplete private flood control project, the public is placed at danger of flood.  Therefore, the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why did the DEIR/S fail to acknowledge that the flood control project authorized by California Coastal Development Permit 5-91-463 and USACE National Permit No. 90-426-EV required a deed restriction be placed on the entire project, and, that the restriction was not placed by the applicant/permittee, that the deed restriction is not compliant with either permit and that the restriction was only placed on part of the project, the riparian corridor (in 2016) well over a decade too late? 

Without considering this failure to comply with both permits the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why have the DFW and USACE incorrectly characterized the proposed project as being a restoration, when it is in fact creation of an environment that was not there before, and that such a creation is inconsistent with the California Coastal Act?

Without considering this failure to truthfully characterize the existing environment, the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.
 

  1. Q. Why is the water from the Page 384 Table 3.1-1 Cumulative Project No. 41 entitled Low Flow Diversion: Facility 1 Ballona Creek Reach 2, Facility 2 Sepulveda Channel and Mesmer located in Centinela Creek proposed to be sent to Hyperion rather than piping it to the BWER? 

Local residents, activists and scientist fought for years to preserve this rare freshwater coastal wetland. To help it function as a wetland, let’s divert this water to the BWER reserve instead of to Hyperion. This will provide much needed freshwater for the habitat and the animals, birds and insects to thrive.

I supported this change in my comment letter to LA Sanitation re: Ballona Creek Bacteria TMDL EIR dated October 1, 2017.

SEE SUBMISSION AT END OF THESE COMMENTS

  1. Q. Why wasn’t the lack of a completed Flood Control System at Playa Vista included in the DEIR/EIS?

Without considering this failure to comply with both permits the DEIR/S is defective and must be recirculated to comply with CEQA and the California Coastal Act.

  1. Q. Why do the first three “restoration alternatives” appear to protect Playa Vista / Playa Capital’s multi-billion-dollar investment from flooding / tsunami at the taxpayers’ expense? Isn’t this a conflict of interest?

The Full-Tidal Alternative, as well as, the more muted Alternatives 2 and 3 were designed by a heavily weighted team of Playa Vista Proponents.

  1. Q. What is relationship of California Department Fish and Wildlife Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve Land Manager Richard C. Brody to the Playa Capital Board Directors and to the Bay Foundation? Are they legal?

See Ballona Wetlands Land Trust Lawsuit admissions by former Chair Shelley Luce of both Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission and the private foundation the Bay Foundation.

Ballona Wetlands Land Trust Lawsuit 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y8NgNCDOEqPSddoel3RCqv30tZ9NXDgp/view?u...

Karina Johnston was ruled to have worked on Ballona for the public agency SMBRC, despite an attempt by SMBRC and TBF to claim she only did Ballona work for The Bay Foundation (despite the business cards, letters on state agency letterhead, etc.). Other court records such as deposition transcripts are at http://www.ballona.org/litigation/ 

Walter Lamb Speaker Topic: Ballona Wetlands Land Trust Lawsuit Update ​
https://youtu.be/uI5RTV6S8wY (link is external)     32 Minutes   4.19.16 

Also see Chapter 5 List of Preparers and Contributors 5.2 Consultants. The Bay Foundation.

Also see 5.3 Sub-Contractors associated with Playa Vista / Playa Capital Psomas (Engineering Services) and Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (Geotechnical Services).

Also See: California Coastal Com - Incomplete Playa Vista Flood Control Project - John Davis 12.13.17 6 Minhttps://youtu.be/F_Sy3DkE594

  1. Q. Why wasn’t 2.3.1 Alternative 5 Enhance Existing Habitat with Minimal Grading given equal status with Alternatives 1 through 4?

It is a much cheaper alternative. It is an actual Restoration. It is not a Creation which is illegal.

See: Margot Griswold Restoration Ecologist - Ballona Wetlands
https://youtu.be/XdtWA0t-030

Shown at the California Coast Commission on December 14, 2017 prior to unanimous decision by the Commission to vote for the removal of the Illegal Playa Vista drains in the BWER.

3:54

  1. Q. Why when 2.3.7 Alternative 11: 19th Century Wetlands clearly shows the majority of Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve has been a

Freshwater Season Wetland for over 100 years has the DEIR chosen Full Tidal or mostly Tidal for the first three alternatives?

Based on a study of the Ballona Wetlands by Dr. Travis Longcore, etal,  the BWER has not been full-tidal for 4,000 years. During major storm events it has on occasion been open to the sea and then closes.

See: Implications Ballona Wetlands Restoration, Dr. Travis Longcore,
https://youtu.be/1viLaZaVhQY

  1. Q. Why wasn’t 2.3.8 Alternative 12: Acquisition Rather than Restoration considered as a viable option?

Over 1.8 million dollars appears to be available to relocate and change approximately 90% of the current wetlands at the BWER.

According to the illustration on Page 729 it appears approximately 90% of the BWER will be either filled and/or excavated.

Also see Pages 91-93 1.2 Overview of the Project, 1.1.1 Location of the Project Site, Area C.

  1. A. Why not purchase SoCalGas Playa del Rey Storage Facility that is approximately 69 acres for upland habitat? B. Why shouldn’t these wells in Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve be Capped and Closed Down?

SOCALGAS GAS STORAGE FIELD TANK FARM

CULVER BLVD, PLAYA DEL REY, CA

SOCALGAS ENTRY TO WELLS IN BALLONA WETLANDS ECOLOGICAL RESERVE ON FIJI WAY IN MARINA DEL REY, CA

Neighbors consider it a constant threat to life, limb and property. In this DEIR it is proposed to cap, relocate wells and slant drill new ones.

See California Coastal Com - Aljazzera - SoCal Gas Leaks - Playa del Rey, CA - 12.13.17 - 5 Minutes
https://youtu.be/byfoVBQqnjk

See California Coastal Com - SoCal Gas Leak - Grassroots Coalition - Patricia McPherson 12.13.17 6 Min

Understanding the dangerous natural gas storage under Ballona Wetlands and need for transparency.
https://youtu.be/UAgFLLhF2X0

  1. Q. Why were the writers of this DEIR so determined to radically change the BWER to full-tidal when it hasn’t been for 4,000 years?

Local residents, activists and scientist fought for years to preserve this rare freshwater coastal wetland. Finally, it was brought into public ownership only to find in this DEIR the habitat and the animals, birds and insects are threatened with as proponents say, “a robust restoration”. In laymen’s terms a full-on destruction of the wetlands as we know it.

See Shelley Luce email below. Why would Shelley say, “We need numbers like 99% invasive plants” and “lowest seed bank of any so cal wetland” when current photos from every area of the BWER show wildlife inhabiting it now?

  1. How can “99% invasive species”, and “the lowest seed bank in So Cal” support 90 wildlife species currently alive and well at BWER? 

Current Locations are included with photos taken recently in the Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve.

Also See: Implications Ballona Wetlands Restoration, Dr. Travis Longcore, https://youtu.be/1viLaZaVhQY

  1. Q. Why, when Friends of Ballona and Playa Vista were only significant in saving 89 acres of BWER that has become known as the Freshwater Marsh and the Riparian Corridor, were they given access to the BWER to the exclusion of almost everyone else who fought to bring 640 acres of BWER into the Public Trust? Furthermore, why has the Bay Foundation a private foundation made up of primarily Friends of Ballona, Playa Vista and Chevron Gas been given a “seat at the table” when Sierra Club Wetlands 90 kicked off the acquisition by bringing 10,000 people to what is now BWER?
     
  2. Q Why, on a consistent basis, have Sierra Club Airport Marina Group, Wetlands Action Network, Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, LA Audubon and Sierra Club Ballona Wetlands Restoration Committee been missing in discussions about the future of the BWER?
     
  3. Q Why, on a consistent basis, have Friends of Ballona, Heal the Bay and Bay Keepers in discussions about the future of the BWER?
     
  4. Q. Why not do the right Restoration for the future of all wildlife that lives in the wetlands and create a top-to-bottom solution that includes the Ballona Watershed and the concerned citizens living within in it?

     Let’s be far sighted and not near sighted.

Submitted respectfully by,

 Jeanette Vosburg, Concerned Citizen
4124 East Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90066
310-721-3512 Jeanette@SaveBallona.org

Affiliations:

Grassroots Coalition, Outreach Coordinator
Chair, Sierra Club Airport Marina Group
Member Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Executive Committe

Ballona Creek Bacteria TMDL EIR Comments submitted by:

Jeanette Vosburg
Chair Airport Marina Group Sierra Club and Board Member of Grassroots Coalition.org Jeanette@saveballona.org
310-721-3512 Cell
4124 East Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90066

October 16, 2017

Mr. Hubertus Cox
LA Sanitation - Watershed Protection Division
1149 S. Broadway, 10th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90015 LAStormwater@lacity.org
Fax: 213-485-3939

Dear Mr. Cox:

I am submitting comments on the Draft EIR for the Ballona Creek/ChanneI TMDL project. Please keep me informed as to any further news/actions on this project.

• Chair Airport Marina Group Sierra Club and Board Member of Grassroots Coalition.org Jeanette@saveballona.org
310-721-3512 Cell

4124 East Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90066

COMMENTS:

I am happy that you are going to clean up the bacteria/pollution in this creek. For the last 15 years I have walking the Ballona Flood Control Channel from Sid Kronenthal Park in Culver City to the Pacific Ocean in Playa del Rey. I participated in the monthly meetings led by Ballona Watershed Coordinator Jessica Hall. I strongly believe in capturing rainwater from the top of the Ballona Watershed down, cleaning and reusing rainwater on the way down.

In September, 2017 I led a five hour Ballona Watershed Bus Tour sponsored by Sierra Club. Fifty-three concerned citizens took the Ballona Watershed Tour from the Sierra Club Office at 3250 Wilshire Blvd in Los Angeles to Echo Park Lake / Bird Sanctuary, Silver Lake Reservoir, Fern Dell Park in Griffith Park, Pan Pacific Park, Cochran Avenue Storm Drain at Venice Blvd, to Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook, Kenneth Hahn State Park, and Stone View Nature Center. As we traversed the area, we all took note of the densely populated, park poor center of the Ballona Watershed. Guest speakers on tour: David McNeill, Director / Baldwin Hill Conservancy; Betsy Damon Founder/Director / KeepersoftheWaters.org from New York City; Melanie Winter / Director / The River Project; Rex Frankel / Ballona Ecosystem Education

I, along with thousands of others, worked very hard to bring the Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve (BWER) and other parts of the Ballona ecosystem in the Public Trust. The Ballona Wetland is one of the few seasonal fresh water wetlands left along the Southern California coast. Others, such as Bolsa Chica and Malibu Lagoon have been turned into salt water/brackish wetlands. The 640 acres of Ballona Wetlands still has habitat for fresh water species that have lived there for many years.

1. Cleaning up the Ballona Watershed runoff water in the dry season and directing it into the Ballona Wetlands from the Ballona Flood Control Channel is especially important. Our Wetland really needs diversion of both cleansed rainwater and runoff all times of the year.

2. The water that gets cleaned up from this system should go into the Ballona wetlands, so the wildlife can survive. Citizens are working hard to try to use this water from the watershed beginning in Griffith Park to do small neighborhood parks that invite rainwater in to set for a while and be absorbed into the earth.

The rest of the water can be diverted to the Ballona Wetlands. Please refer to watershed map showing all the small creeks that once flowed towards the Creek

and are now in concrete storm drains. We are working to daylight some of this water, rather than have it continue to be sent underground into pipes that go to the ocean.

3. The return of this water to our wetlands is very important as development has destroyed over 95% of our coastal wetlands in California, and these last few areas are critical to save for species like frogs, birds, and fish that use fresh water wetlands. Frogs are not doing well on our planet. They are very sensitive to contaminants coming in through their skin. Bringing more fresh clean water to their habitat in the dry season would be VERY beneficial.

Also Steel Head Trout have recently been seen in Ballona Creek. So it would be good to support their return to this area.

4. Currently the Playa Vista project, which was built on wetlands east of Lincoln Blvd, is pumping out over 600 hundred thousand gallons of water from the aquifer everyday from beneath their development. The State Water Board has confirmed this aquifer had dropped between 15 to 20 feet in less than 15 years.

This water was supposed to be cleaned up and sent to the Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve (BWER), but apparently the water is being sent to the ocean through the west end of Ballona Creek / Flood Control Channel. Therefore, any water that is cleaned up by this project should go to the wetlands.

I favor the Low Flow Treatment Facilities below that are proposed in the DEIR. I OPPOSE SENDING WATER from the these locations to the Hyperion Plant.

Low Flow Treatment Facility 1 located in Ballona Creek Reach 2

Low Flow Treatment Facility 2 located in Sepulveda Channel

Mesmer Low Flow Diversion located in Centinela Creek

This cleaned water should all go into the wetlands in Areas A and B of the BWER. See comments on the DEIR submitted earlier by TATTN.

5. The meetings that were held regarding this TMDL were not satisfactory. We attended the one on September 20, 2017 in the Westchester Municipal Building. There were poster boards up with pictures and drawings, and some staff standing around to answer questions. This format was not very helpful. There needs to be another meeting at which the public can attend, and make comments.

PLEASE HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING before approving this Draft EIR and allow the public at least one month to respond with comments after that public hearing.

6. Some of the sources referred to in the appendix were not accessible to read.

Thank you again for starting to work on cleaning up the dry season water in Ballona Creek. We look forward to seeing the treasured Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve once again connected to this important source of fresh water .

Sincerely ,

Jeanette Vosburg

Chair Airport Marina Group Sierra Club and Board Member of Grassroots Coalition.org

P.S. I support Tattn edits: Cover Page, ix, x, xi, xii, xvi, xvii, xviii, xxi, xxii, xxiii, xxvii, Page 1, 2, 6, 10, 12, 15, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 47, 49, 50, 99 (Playa Vista Illegal Waste of 646,242 Gallons per day), 101 (Error-source not found), 106 (Validation for treated water use at BWER), 107, 108 (not an estuary), 118 (illegally divert waters from BWER), 121 (false claim), 125 (Federally protected area/registered Sacred Site [s]), 127, 128 (false), 129 (National Historic Preservation Act) 130 (CEQA), 131 (JohnTommy Rosas – Lineal Descendant), 135 (Kizh Nation – non-documented) 191 (see TATTN comments in red)

January 30,2018 Addendum to: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIS/EIR) BALLONA WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT (BWER) Comments.

I would like your organization to ask Sister Agencies to review and weigh in on this DEIR/EIS on the BWER.

Primary: Baldwin Hills Conservancy, California Biodiversity Council, State Coastal Conservancy, California Coastal Commission, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Game Commission, Governor's Office of the Tribal Advisor, California State Lands Commission, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, Native American Heritage Commission, California Natural Resources Agency, Department of Pesticide Regulation, California Public Utilities Commission, Save Our Water, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, State Water Resources Control Board, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Wildlife Conservation Board, Department of Water Resources.

Other: California Pollution Control Financing Authority, California State Auditor and State Controller's Office.

Contact information is on http://www.ca.gov/Agencies.

Submitted respectfully by,

Jeanette Vosburg, Concerned Citizen
4124 East Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90066
310-721-3512 Jeanette@SaveBallona.org

Affiliations:

Grassroots Coalition, Outreach Coordinator
Chair, Sierra Club Airport Marina Group
Member Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Executive Committee

 

Links for Ballona (Watershed) Menu: 
Wetlands/Uplands
Lower Ballona
Habitat Restoration
  • 3574 reads