A child and a nanny chased on the grassy area below the baseball diamonds. It seems dogs have been running off-leash in George Wolfberg Park.
In Circling the News’ Musings on March 20, this editor made an error writing, “Also on the Thursday agenda is PPCC support for reviving the proposed dog park.
This editor had clicked on the March 23 meeting agenda and saw that President Maryam Zar, under her reports and concerns, had written a letter about the dog park with a link.
Zar wrote, “It [dog park] takes on a ‘new urgency’ as people come to GWPPC (George Wolfberg Park at Potrero) to enjoy the wonderful trails and fabulous vistas with their dogs, and often allow them off-leash in the coastal landscape. Unfortunately, these off-leash dogs threaten the delicate riparian habitat and topography of this well-planned, passive-use park.”
The letter is under the president’s report, but the dog park will not be on the agenda.
In an email (cc’d to this editor) to Leslie Campbell, one of the people leading the effort to get a park, Zar wrote, “Leslie, It’s not on the agenda this Thursday. It was a few weeks ago when you were there and I wrote a letter to the city in support, after the board told me I should, and cc’d you. You’ve since answered that email and it has prompted you to be in touch with the Council Office on it (string in which I am included — there are likely many you are on without me).”
“The Dog Park is not a PPCC matter it’s just something we support. Not an agenda item that I can foresee,” Zar said.
At the meeting this week, March 23, via zoom, there will be a presentation by Brian Hale, LADOT Chief of Parking Enforcement and Tim Fremaux, a transportation engineer to discuss parking issues and crosswalks and updates on intersections. Maybe they’ll be able to clarify the problems on Temescal Canyon Road, and why the parking lines on one side seem to be backwards?
There will be a report from the Potrero Canyon oversight committee.
There will be a vote on whether to include two new entities for inclusion in the Community Council: Palisadian Americanism Parade Association and the Forestry Committee. The Forestry Committee is asking to rotate under Culture and Aesthetics, not environmental. PAPA would rotate in the ??? category . . . . (CTN reached out to Zar to ask which category they would be included in, but she never responded.)
Community Council members will also be asked to consider two motions, one about housing, the second about requiring developers to have an evacuation plan.
The Westside Regional Alliance of Councils, which is made up of 10 neighborhood councils and four community councils, routinely asks this community to support a motion. (https://westsidecouncils.com/motion/motion-re-rso-housing-replacements/) The support sought is for a housing motion: PPCC requests that “the Los Angeles Housing Department presume that 100% of RSO units slated for demolition per the Ellis Act are inhabited by low-income households, and 100% of the replacement units shall be rented at the corresponding low-income rent.”
A possible motion will be sought from the Community Council to support SB 571, introduced by Senator Ben Allen. This bill would require a proponent of a new development within a state responsibility area or local responsibility area that is within a high or very high fire hazard severity zone to include an evacuation plan with its application submitted to the local government for the development.
But no, the dog park is not on the agenda, neither is Temescal Canyon Road.
The meeting will be from 6 to 8 p.m. Visit: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82505310911?pwd=OThJUTdtWUprU0c3SC82MVlKK3F2dz09 Meeting ID: 825 0531 0911 Audio Only/Dial-In: 1-669-900-6833 or 1-669 444 9171 Zoom doors will open at 5:45p.m.
Paving still has not been finished on Temescal Canyon Road.
Dog Park should be in Temescal Canyon north of Sunset. PS Whoever stripped Temescal without checking the weather forecast should be fired.
Reply to Wharfplank: Temescal Canyon north of Sunset is MRCA land under Joe Edmiston, who has no interest or charter in hosting a dog park on that land. Sadly, it is not an option for a dog park,
Whoever did the bad job on Temescal to begin with should be fired. That must have been extremely expensive, and it was all for nothing. And now it’s awful and Chautauqua is crowded because people are understandably going that way to avoid it. I wonder what other repair jobs will be have to be canceled because the City has to spend all that money on doing Temescal twice? Boondoggle.
And, yes, a dog park would be cool. Too bad it can’t happen at the Rec Center.