Conversations : Maria Gutzeit Interview
Written by Jeff on March 18th, 2008I interviewed City Council Candidate Maria Gutzeit last night. Click below to listen to the podcast of the interview.
EDIT: I’ve been told that if you listen to this podcast through the player below, you may hear what’s being called the “Chipmunk” effect (the whole podcast plays really fast and voices sound high pitched). Try refreshing your browser (hit the F5 button) or download the file by clicking the download link (It plays fine if you download it to your computer). I’ve found the problem and will fix it tonight.
Gutzeit had some interesting views on Old Town Newhall redevelopment. We also spoke about undocumented workers, illegal housing conversions, the hospital and some of the controversy that met Gutzeit when she came on board as a Newhall County Water District board member.
Loading ...
18
AM
Well done. Thanks.
18
AM
I have a big problem with Maria’s “take” on the G&L Medical Office Building project. Maria says all we need to do regarding G&L’s and Roger Seaver’s refusal to guarantee a hospital expansion is to “tighten up the guarantee.” There is no guarantee to tighten up, so Maria’s statement is meaningless. Even worse, this comment gives uninformed people the wrong impression. People not up on the hospital issue will believe that being assured of an actual expansion is just a matter of “tweaking” existing wording when existing wording does not even exist. The ONLY wording that exists regarding the hospital expansion is quite clear in releasing G&L from any obligation to build a hospital expansion at all, ever.
This clause must be removed, and if it isn’t, this clause means G&L can build medical office buildings and leave. And if this is NOT what they intended to do from day 1, they would not have included that clause in the development agreement.
The issue of empty beds was not discussed. There are always a number of empty beds at Henry Mayo while people lay on cots in hallways (doctors have testified to this) so what is being done to free up this current unacceptable empty bed problem? When a patient leaves a room, the room must be santitized and until that is done, the room remains empty, and this is the reason people lanquish in hallways. The beds are actually available, as doctors have explained, but the rooms are not being sanitized fast enough to get patients out of the hallways. Since this is an ongoing problem NOW, why would this problem just fix itself when more beds become available? Of course, Roger Seaver needs those patients in the hallways to “prove” a hospital expansion is necessary, a hospital expansion Roger and G&L won’t even guarantee.
What about the parking deficit that was written right into the Master Plan! Nothing said about that. How do we “tweak” the wording there to miraculously produce adequate parking so that surrounding neighborhoods are not negatively impacted by the huge amount of Henry Mayo traffic from patients that cannot find parking at Henry Mayo because the G&L Medical Office Building project will be a few hundred parking spaces short? If a magic wand can “tighten up” a guarantee that doesn’t even exist, perhaps this same magic wand can find a way for 2 cars to fit into one parking space with enough room for people to open their doors?
I see Maria worked real hard to change the wording in a project to get bike trails and that is real nice, but I don’t see this same level of scrutiny from Maria regarding the necessity of REMOVING a clause from the Development Agreement that releases G&L from building a hospital expansion.
As for high-density projects, the reason people move here is for the rural atmosphere, for the house with a yard so their families can be raise without the inherent high density problems so many came here to escape from. If people didn’t mind high-density living, there would not have been the mass exodus from the San Fernando Valley. Also, our existing roads and freeways are way too conjested now to even think in terms of major high-density projects, and too many high density projects will keep SCV moving further down on that safest cities list.
18
AM
I haven’t listened to the podcast yet, but I just want to add a bit about density.
Of the 200,000 or so people living in this valley, very, very few live in or near a rural atmosphere. And while I agree that it would be unfair to hoist high density on to establish low to mid density neighborhood, the MO that has driven development in this valley has caused the need for long and complicated car trips for simple things. For me to do just about anything in town, I’m driving miles and miles, going through countless intersections and contributing to the traffic in any number of neighborhoods.
The San Fernando Valley is not high density. That’s its chief problem. It is a giagantic blob of sprawl where nearly everyone has to drive to do almost anything. There is no core, no center to speak of. To the extent there is high density, it’s here and there. Usually the product of developer greed instead of smart urban planning.
This may cost me my head around here, but I think the best planned area in the entire city is from Granary Square to Pavilions. I particularly like the newer apartment buildings along Magic Mtn. Parkway and McBean. They are very high density, but so many people living there can walk to so many stores, even work. The housing behind Granary Square has an incredible paseo system that hasn’t been rivaled in 20+ years. It allows for people to easily go to one another’s houses or to the store or out to eat without using a car.
18
AM
It’s interesting to note that Newhall Land’s original plan for Valencia included a couple of high rise towers, if I recall correctly. Leon Worden once interviewed a Newhall Land exec who brought out the original drafts; I distinctly remember him showing a few high rise towers in Valencia. I’ll have to find that video.
In any event, I’m in complete agreement with Mike. For me it boils down to one thing. We could have designed this town as towns and cities and municipalities have been designed since man started thinking about these things: grid pattern.
Instead, we chose the other way. Winding avenues that switch from south to east to west to north. Even the cops get confused by them (some still have out of date Thomas Guides even after patrolling for years). Scores and scores of cul-de-sacs that trap drivers rather than letting them get through.
Yes, it’s a master plan, but it’s a master plan made obsolete by high gas prices and a desire to get out of the car.
Paseos, pedestrian bridges, and such mitigate that to some extent, but it’s still a problem.
I too don’t want to lose my objectivity here, but this is why I choose to live in Newhall. I’m always walking Lyons to go to Vallarta or Ralphs or the video store.
It’s not that we need high density per se, and I think Newhall Land is trying to address this problem with their “village” concept.
So far, the only candidate I’ve talked to who didn’t poo-poo higher density developments out of the gate was Diane Trautman.
18
AM
It’s seems a little late for the high density debate for the City. Just like it is too late to speak about new roads to improve traffic in the City.
The damage appears to be done IMHO! But I could be wrong.
18
AM
Re: Sheriff and Thomas Guides
One of the station volunteers made SCV guides several years ago, they were distributed to all of the cars that patrol the SCV. There were also GPS systems donated to the station.
18
AM
dude, seriously, it confuses readers to have “mike” disagreeing with himself. please use a modified username.
I’ll add this… all those apartment around the hyatt, both developments would have been better served by a better retail mix in their immediate vicinity. They should have made it so things other than cigar shops and plastic surgeons would be viable.
Pedestrian bridges built since the “golden years” of Valencia have been pretty impractical, as have the paseos. They are glorified hiking trails that are OK for recreation, but are dangerous for cyclists and walkers/runners/dogs to share and don’t have the dual purpose of being super practical.
By golden years, I mean before the Summit. Newhall Land hasn’t built an exceptional single-family development since, even if they are better than most.
18
AM
High density brings exactly what people moved here to escape from. I know high density means high-rise type structures, but it also means a whole lot more people per acre of land and a lot more traffic and crime and air pollution. Yes, it’s too late to think of SCV as rural, but I live in the rural Happy Valley in Newhall so don’t write off rural just yet.
Our roads will never support high density, look at us now. And if you have to sit in Newhall pass every morning and every night, high density is not a plan that sounds good to those stuck in freeway gridlock every day. My biggest complaint about high density is that our road system won’t change. Too late.
“….It’s seems a little late for the high density debate for the City…..” On that I will agree, this city is pretty much built out and high density is becoming pretty much a moot issue. If we started out that way, it might have worked, and people who don’t like living like sardines in a can could have just moved elsewhere.
Too many Mike’s on this board!
18
AM
It is different. Pay attention! I like the paseos system. True they were not intended for the mountain bike club. Sorry, but it will take a very long time before people leave the car to ride the bike, even with $4.00 gas. Perhaps the mountain bike club should stay on the streets and leave paseos to the family’s with children.
18
AM
I don’t want to take it down to this level, but using the same username as someone who was here for a long time before is really discourteous. Please stop.
18
AM
Hey Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude! I will use the lower case m, OK Mike!
18
PM
mike 2, lowercase mike, whatever…original Mike is right. It’s not cool, please revert back to your mike 2 name or something else entirely different. We’re here to talk and it makes discussion confusing.
18
PM
Sorry, if you prefer I leave the board, that is fine. If Mike is having a identify problem oh well. I know which mike I am and he should be able to know what Mike he is. I have made the change for a reason. Not just to cause Mike problems. I thought this to be rather simple matter given only about 5 people are using the board. Many more are reading it though.
18
PM
Listening to the podcast now, I’m encouraged by her outlook on downtown Newhall. The vision of a massive strip mall is a silly one, and I like the idea of non-harassment of existing businesses, a very fair offer of eminent domain to incompatible businesses (there is such a thing, I’m afraid) and encouragement of new businesses to fill in the holes.
In theory. of course. In reality, it would likely mean the end to my beloved El Taco Llama and El Pariente. The taco joints in Newhall are about all SCV has to be truly proud for, food-wise. Maru, too. But I digress. Maybe easier said than done, because it will be very hard to balance the quaint notion of a theoretical Nehwall devised by the powers that be and a reality-based notion that takes into account the local residents who will still drive the majority of commerce, however pretty the street becomes.
18
PM
Sorry, if you prefer I leave the board, that is fine.
I think you have interesting things to say. Unfortunately, it gets lost in the Tell It to The Signal-type hostility. In case you haven’t noticed, this blog trends more NPR and less high energy talk radio.
Stay or go, I don’t care, but to the people who read this blog, having two mikes with different opinions is confusing to read.
18
PM
I have enjoyed to opportunity to post. I will leave for a while. Should you want to email for more an explanation, I will respond. Thanks
18
PM
Goodbye! You have been nothing but hostile since you appeared here. It will be nice to have the blog back to the way it was. JMHO.
18
PM
Not sure anyone cares about your opinion. Windbag!
18
PM
We all know the city is growing but it’s the applied method for achieving the goal that I find outrageous. While we’re discussing the nuances of “high-density” and proper “urban sprawl”, our city staff is working on re-writing our city’s General Plan — often referred to as the city’s “Master Plan.”
In this re-write, no longer will traffic flow be viewed in “peak hours” and other times as we currently measure it. The current methodology weighs A.M. and P.M. commute traffic and establishes limits on acceptable traffic flow. New development projects must demonstrate acceptable traffic flow at completion as part of their environmental review or they must mitigate the problem prior to approval of their project.
The new system will eliminate such annoying limitations. Our staff is advocating a “24-hour averaging” methodology where, say, the 20,000 cars through an intersection during peak commute are averaged with traffic levels found at 3am. The result will be substantially flawed data that will hide the true traffic impacts. How much more development can we handle then? The sky is the limit - and you better believe that our staff will accommodate every bit of it.
We all know that the roads are empty at 3am, yet this type of trickery is EXACTLY what propelled SFV and every other eyesore around L.A. into high-density urban sprawl centers that everyone wants to leave. This is where the scrutiny should be. The lies that continue to pour out from existing proposals like the hospital reveal false benefits to the community and perpetual fortunes for developers and landowners.
The city manager’s job is to grow the city. Unfortunately, he’s run his agenda far too long without adequate checks and balances and the Frank Ferry, Laurie Ender, and *uck McKeon alliance is the worst way to ensure this continues. If we don’t have council members who will address this issue, the rest of the conversation here is moot.
As for the two Mikes on this board, I enjoy reading both of your views but I have to agree with Mike on this one.
David
19
AM
After listening to Maria’s interview, I have to say that she makes more sense than most of the other candidates.
Is she perfect? No, nobody is. Asking someone to agree with you 100% on every item is just silly.
However, she does have the most realistic view on most of the issues, and she’s the ONLY candidate to agree that the current actions against businesses in the Downtown Newhall area are clearly harassment. She’s definitely not against the overall redevelopment plans, but I completely agree with her that there is a better way to go about this than what is happening now.
Businesses in that area are enduring a measurable loss of business due to the rerouting of traffic away from their locations, the City is refusing to issue basic permits for repairs and modifications (Maria says that they can’t even get permits to replumb bathrooms), and there has been intensified code enforcement for items that have existed for years. Don’t believe me? Listen to Maria’s interview, and then call some of the auto service businesses in the area.
Can some level of redevelopment be done in Newhall without killing the existing businesses first? I think so, and so does Maria. Change is inevitable, and if the City Poobahs think that Newhall can really be turned into a boutique district, then have at it. But don’t send all of the existing businesses the way of the dodo bird while you’re at it.
19
AM
I don’t think Maria would be a bad choice, but I am losing my patience with the candidates who refuse to address the G&L Development Agreement. Obviously those hospital campaign contributions are quite powerful, candidates who boast about getting changes from other projects are totally unwilling to do the same thing with the G&L Development Agreement so this city can be ASSURED of getting the hospital expansion from G&L they say they want.
And after Roger Seaver admitted at city council that because of financial downturns he can’t predict he couldn’t guarantee that an expansion could actually be built once the office park was built out, well, it is extremely important to get the G&L escape clause removed and we should all be leary of any candidates that have been unwilling to so much as address this clause AND ignore Roger Seaver’s refusal to guarantee an expansion. Tells me that we, the people, may not get the representation we need from these G&L/lobbyist-friendly candidates while this city is being overrun with greedy lobbyists who do not have SCV’s best interests in mind as they push one bad project on us after another. I just want to know the candidates are at least addressing this escape clause, if they won’t, REFUSE, to address it, they look bought already.
And with all the same lobbyists floating around from one bad project after another (like the Smiser Mule Ranch and Casden Properties) we are doomed if we end up with 3 people on city council who are owned by these lobbyists. Not just about the Henry Mayo Office Park, this is about the future of an entire city from one end to the other. If voting for a candidate is a vote that will put a lobbyist in the city council seat, then we must look elsewhere to hang our votes.