skip to main content

→ Top Stories:
Fracking
Safe Chemicals
Defending the Clean Air Act

Giulia C.S. Good Stefani’s Blog

Flood of Support for L.A. River

Giulia C.S. Good Stefani

Posted October 21, 2013 in Curbing Pollution, Environmental Justice, Health and the Environment, Living Sustainably, Saving Wildlife and WIld Places

Tags:
, , , , , , , , , , ,
Share | | |

Last Thursday night, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers held a public hearing to discuss the fate of the Los Angeles River.  Over two hundred Angelenos, Mayor Eric Garcetti, several state and local public officials, and representatives from a variety of environmental, public health, and community nongovernmental organizations—small and big, local and national—were there. 

LA River_large crowd 2.jpg

(Credit: NRDC)

The Army Corps started the night with a presentation of the L.A. River Ecosystem Restoration Integrated Feasibility Report. The Feasibility Report considers four different possible sets of plans to restore the 11 mile segment of the L.A. River from Griffith Park to downtown Los Angeles. 

LA River alternative maps.jpg

(Credit: NRDC)

The four plans—named Alternatives 10, 13, 16, and 20—include progressively greater areas of the River that would be restored.  The Army Corps announced its tentative support for Alternative 13.  The Corps justified its choice as the “Best Buy” and the most cost effective option. Army Corps Dr. Josephine R. Axt used the analogy of having to only pay a small amount to ride an elevator to the bottom floors but having to progressively pay more the further one takes the elevator up.  The Corps wants to take the “L.A. River” elevator only half way up. 

The Corps, however, was entirely alone in its support for Alternative 13.

LA River Garcetti.jpg

(Credit: NRDC)

Every single person that spoke during the public comment period—including Mayor Garcetti—voiced their unequivocal support for Alternative 20. 

LA River woman.jpg

(Credit: NRDC)

Alternative 20 offers the greatest opportunity to restore natural river functions, reconnect the river to major tributaries and its historic floodplain, and to ensure that the River Restoration Project is ecologically sustainable and environmentally just.  You can  read my public comments here.  You can watch a video of the Corps' presentation and the public comment that followed here:


Video streaming by Ustream

Alternative 20 is the only alternative that would connect the Verdugo Wash to the River, creating a habitat corridor from Griffith Park to the Verdugo hills.  As several commentators pointed out, this corridor would afford the mountain lion living in Griffith Park, “P-22,” an opportunity to find a mate without having to brave the 405 and 101 freeways. 

Alternative 20 would also connect the L.A. Historic Park (or Cornfields Park) to the River.  The Cornfields Park serves the historically park-poor areas of downtown L.A. and Chinatown, and it is a park that NRDC has a long commitment to supporting.

The L.A. River is at the heart of a movement here in Los Angeles to realize a greener, cleaner, healthier, and more connected version of urban living. 

LA River kayak.jpg

(Credit: NRDC)

The benefit of Alternative 20 cannot be measured, as the Corps suggests, by incremental gain.  Connecting the Verdugo hills and the Cornfields Park to the River benefits not just those places but every single mile of the Project. 

LA River concrete.bmp

(Credit: US Army Corps, Feasibility Report)

You can help.  Decades ago, it was the Corps that channelized the River, turning most of the River into the tepid, concrete, flood control channel we know today.  Tell the Corps that it’s time to restore the River and that Alternative 13 just won’t do.  Email your comments to Dr. Josephine Axt at the Army Corps by November 18, 2013:  comments.lariverstudy@usace.army.mil.

The Empire State Building is a 102-story building. Who travels to NY, NY to buy a ticket to the 51st floor? Nobody.  We've come this far; it's time to take this project to the ecosystem restoration top:  Alternative 20.

 

Share | | |

Comments

Save The Los Angeles RiverOct 23 2013 02:32 PM

Question #1-WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM? Answer: More taxes and bond measures and fees. Whatever plan is adopted (if any) is going to cost the taxpayers of this city for many, many years to come and given that the city is broke and can't even repair streets, sidewalks, pay pensions, trim trees or do much of anything else it has to come through more taxes and with overruns the final cost would be staggering.
Those who favor these plans have their hands in the cash register and do not care that a lot more are against this than are for it. Do you think people who live in areas where there is little park space want to pay for a disaster in an area where there already is thousands of acres of park lands. Do you think people in say Chatsworth, So. LA, W. LA want to pay for this mess? Ask them and they will tell you HELL NO!!!

Comments are closed for this post.

About

Switchboard is the staff blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the nation’s most effective environmental group. For more about our work, including in-depth policy documents, action alerts and ways you can contribute, visit NRDC.org.

Feeds: Giulia C.S. Good Stefani’s blog

Feeds: Stay Plugged In