San Pedro Waterfront Plan

First Public Input Event

Report by Peter M. Warren, Coastal PCAC representative; Port and Environment Committee, chair

The Port held its first San Pedro Waterfront public information session in February, nearly five months after the Board of Harbor Commissioners (BHC) approved the waterfront Final EIR.

The meeting was attended by about 250 people, who heard Port Director Geraldine Knatz give an update about possible timelines for projects this year and also say that the Port was strapped for funds to go ahead with downtown watercut and plaza. One project that will go head with federal stimulus money is the remake of Henry Gibson Blvd.

The two-hour meeting heard about a dozen folks comment. One questioner asked about the USS Iowa but was given no information about where the Port stands on the issue. There also was no information provided on how the Port plans to select and organize stakeholders in the planning for the project, as stipulated by the BHC when it approved the project. Instead, the Port leadership continued to treat the San Pedro community as an audience and platform for their plans rather than as a partner, client or customer.

Knatz did not answer a question from your representative. I asked how the Port plans to carry out the BHC requirements for stakeholder input. She said she did not have the time to work on the BHC required protocols governing project timelines, financial decisions and sequencing of each stage of the project. She indicated that some of the BHC were no longer interested in appointing stakeholders to review panels.

The meeting was largely a public relations program. The interest from the community was high, but there was no follow through from the Port on moving ahead with BHC requirements that the Port “create a framework for public participation” by “identifying appropriate stakeholders” to participate in “overall project implementation…schedule [and] design.”

To recap what happened in September, the BHC Sept. 30 approved the San Pedro Waterfront Plan. It contained two revisions from the PORT staff:

• one required that any new terminal in the Outer Harbor first be placed in the East Channel,
• the second directed Port staff to fully involve stakeholders in the development and prioritization of the waterfront plan. It directed PORT staff to upgrade the Inner Harbor cruise terminal design so that it can properly serve as the “Gateway to the San Pedro Waterfront” and befit its status as a signature for the Port of Los Angeles. (This was in a motion from Board President Cindy Misicowski.)

The Miscikowski motion read:

Direct the staff to report back to the Board within 30 days with an implementation strategy for the Project.  That strategy should include protocols for guiding the Board in and the Port staff in determining which projects go forward in which sequence.  The protocols should include analysis of the various financing mechanisms for moving forward on both revenue generating and non-revenue generating projects.  The protocols should also include a framework for appropriate thresholds to consider in the sequencing of each project.

Additionally, the protocols should also create a framework for public participation in the Project implementation including identifying appropriate stakeholders for the overall Project implementation as well as stakeholders for specific elements within the Project.  This should include not only input on the implementation schedule of the Project but input on design elements as well.

Further, the staff is asked to include a proposal for more comprehensive design improvements for the Inner Harbor Cruise Terminal recognizing its importance as the Gateway to the San Pedro Waterfront with aesthetic and access improvements which befit its location and presence in the Port of Los Angeles.

We have our work cut out for us if we expect the Port to listen to the community. We have our work cut out for us in getting the BHC to follow through on the commitment it made to San Pedro about public participation in its September approval vote.

It would seem that the Port does not need to look far if it wants to find people who want to fill these rolls. The Neighborhood Councils already exist as sister agencies within the Charter of the City of Los Angeles. Or the Port could turn to the PCAC as the means to create public participation. Unfortunately, the current Port administration is intent on dismantling PCAC.