Multi-Billionaire’s Project Would Sacrifice Last Great Open Space in Los Angeles

Guest Post By Maria Kay Fotopoulos

Will the ‘Philosopher King’ Work for Wildlife or Double-Down on Vanity?

“All the news that’s fit to print” is the long-running tagline of The New York Times. If one were being polite, one would say The NY Times defines “fit” extremely broadly. More directly, the Times has a rich history of playing fast and loose with journalistic standards. From more of a PR-client relationship with the CIA, as independent journalist Glenn Greenwald wrote in a 2012 Guardian commentary, to other infractions he noted, including giving “veto power” over quotes for publication to former President Obama’s people.

Among high-profile failings were hiring Jayson Blair, a writer eventually outed as a plagiarist and magician conjuring stories out of thin air, and – again to cozy relations between the Times and government – the “reporting” of Judith Miller, who made the (false) case for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. More recently we’ve seen the unhinged writing and tweeting of their columnist Paul Krugman, the embrace of “Wokeism,” as embodied in the controversial 1619 Project, and the meltdown of the commentary section, as evidenced by the brouhaha over a reasonable commentary of a sitting U.S. Senator, Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and the resultant resignation of the publication’s opinion page editor.

With such a rich history of compromised content, it’s unsurprising that “the newspaper of record” would run a pure puff piece on real estate and investment mogul Nicolas Berggruen (net worth: $2.9 billion). The story’s fawning author, Michael Steinberger, who also manages to make himself part of the story, skirts the real story: A billionaire’s push for a vanity project that would sacrifice the last great open space in Los Angeles.

In opposition to the local community, Berggruen plans to plop a George Jetson-looking complex atop a Southern California mountain on a 447-acre holding that is home to rich flora and fauna, and offers respite to Los Angelenos via hard-won open space and public hiking trails. In the more than 3,500-word Times article, Steinberger gave only one line to the controversy: Berggruen “has yet to break ground on the project, which has drawn resistance from nearby residents.”

The Backstory

Now based in Los Angeles, the Paris-born Berggruen, a dual-citizen of Germany and the United States, is establishing himself as a philosopher, thinker and benefactor – the gushing Steinberger writes that Nic has been called a “latter-day Medici.” The physical manifestation of the thinking of the “Philosopher King” and formerly “Homeless Billionaire,” as the Times headed the Steinberger article, is the Berggruen Institute. It was created in 2010 with $100 million “to develop foundational ideas about how to reshape political and social institutions.” The Institute currently offices in Downtown Los Angeles in the iconic Bradbury Building, a location for the film classic, “Blade Runner.” The historic Bradbury Building is an exceedingly cool space, but perhaps it doesn’t have the necessary lebensraum to match Berggruen’s vision of a proper think tank.

In 2014, Berggruen purchased property in Los Angeles west of the 405 freeway and north of the Getty Center for $45 million (the NYT piece stated $15 million) to build his mountaintop retreat, which Town & Country described as “devoted to sheltering the world’s elite thinkers in a peaceful yet intellectually fervid sanctuary for reflection and dialogue.” In addition to housing the Institute, the development would include private quarters for Berggruen. Prior land owner and developer Castle & Cooke had been in a long, litigious battle over the 447 acres with various stakeholders, including area residents, the Canyon Back Alliance, Mountaingate Open Space Maintenance Association (MOSMA) and others. The end result in 2006 was zoning that allowed for 28 individual homes and unrestricted trail access – in other words, not a development such as what Berggruen desires.

Berggruen’s project “is blatantly illegal and cannot be built under existing law,” wrote the Sierra Club’s Santa Monica Taskforce in a seven-page January 2021 letter to the planning department for Los Angeles and to City Councilman Mike Bonin, who represents the disputed area. Of the 447 acres, the Sierra Club letter outlines that 424 acres are protected from development:

“The 424 acres of open space and two historic trails are protected through conservation easements held by the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority, a local public agency exercising joint powers of Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy (SMMC), the Conejo Recreation and Park District, and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District.

“The protected open space and historic trails are part of the Westridge-Canyonback Wilderness Park, contiguous with the 20,000-acre urban wilderness park known as the “Big Wild.” The Big Wild connects to the Backbone Trail, a 67-mile National Recreation Trail. These trails provide access for hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrians in the Santa Monica Mountains.”

In addition to the Sierra Club letter, MOSMA, Brentwood Residents Coalition, Bel Air Skycrest Property Owners’ Association, Center for Biological Diversity and numerous other groups have all either expressed problems with the development as proposed or outright opposition to Berggruen’s vanity project at the proposed site. Prior developments in this area included the Brentwood Country Estates and Mountaingate, which “kind of caught the community off guard,” according to a local activist. Such is not the case with the Berggruen project, which community activists are prepared to fight.

Skirball Meeting

In January 2018, more than 500 community members attended a meeting at the Skirball Cultural Center, located within the immediate area of the Berggruen development proposal. The audience, largely opposed to the project, listened to a presentation from Berggruen’s people, and opposition arguments. Nic Berggruen did not attend the meeting, nor has he since reached out to community organizations to discuss any compromises, according to an activist close to the issue. Overheard after the meeting outside the Skirball as attendees exited was one of Berggruen’s people saying to a colleague how it was much easier to get things done in Europe.

So Many Issues

California has long had a reputation of being “owned by developers.” The state also had a reputation of being the place from which trends emanate, but a bit of an inferiority complex too for not having the venerable cultural institutions of the East Coast – a situation changed with the addition of the impressive Getty Center and LACMA upgrades. All this combined perhaps led Berggruen to believe his high prestige project would be welcome and he need not make public pitches to defend it.

Among concerns about the proposed development are fire. In the past, wildfire season was usually a three-month period every year in California – bad enough – but today wildfires in California may be expected in any month. Major fires have burned near or at the Berggruen property. In December 2017, the Skirball Fire burned 475 acres, destroyed or damaged 18 structures and forced 46,000 residents to evacuate. The October 2019 Getty Fire burned 745 acres – blackening some of the Berggruen property – destroyed or damaged 25 residences and forced thousands to flee. On its face, building in a high fire zone seems foolhardy.

Additional fuel for the opposition? Methane. The site is on top of a former landfill now monitored by the City of Los Angeles. Methane gas leaks, which can lead to fire, have happened on this site. A massive Southern California methane gas leak in a neighboring community in October 2015 should be taken as a cautionary tale for this proposed project.

As well, Eric Edmunds, Chair of the Sierra Club Santa Monica Mountains Task Force and President of the Brentwood Hills Homeowners Association, writes that the development “would invade wilderness open space south of Mountaingate, and … threaten the Riordan Trail (a hiking trail connecting Mount Saint Mary’s College) down into Bundy Canyon (a beautiful riparian wooded canyon) and climbing up to the Kenter-Canyonback Fire Road in Brentwood.”

For the Wild

Berggruen may be underestimating the level of engagement among community members and their commitment to the environment. Berggruen need only look just a bit north to the 101 Freeway and Liberty Canyon area to see a mighty environmental collaboration of residents, government leaders and nonprofit organizations and a staggering $85 million commitment to the world’s largest wildlife crossing, the Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing. If Berggruen were to gift his land holding to remain as open space, it would continue to benefit area wildlife and help connect the patchwork of land to support the movement of animals.

As the last great open space in Los Angeles, the Berggruen property features wild woodland with ferns, oak trees and sycamores. The natural habitat is home to cougars, coyotes, deer, falcons, great horned owls, raccoons, redtailed hawks and quail, among other animals, who navigate the Santa Monica Mountains. In addition to loss of wildlife habitat, the Berggruen project would bring more light pollution. Travis Longcore, science director for The Urban Wildlands Group, who spoke at the Skirball meeting, has written about the impacts of light on wildlife. According to his research with Catherine Rich, “In the past century, the extent and intensity of artificial night lighting has increased such that it has substantial effects on the biology and ecology of species in the wild.” Longcore said the development would also eliminate an important corridor for animals, including cougars.

SlowMo

Nicolas Berggruen is now 60 years old. Likely he’s interested in “getting on” with breaking ground and executing on his think tank project atop the Santa Monica Mountains. But movement may proceed at a glacial pace. It likely will take years to work through an environmental impact report and address the many concerns that have been raised among numerous stakeholders. But with deep pockets, Berggruen’s organization can spend the time and money to potentially sway policymakers and the L.A. City Council to carve out an exception for his project by a specific plan or in some other way influence the system to defy the litigated use that was clearly defined when Berggruen purchased the property.

Why Berggruen would continue to want to develop in an area when the community is not receptive seems odd, given he could build his think tank anywhere. For a contemplative, meditative retreat, there is plenty of desert in California! Should he continue with his commitment to build on the 447 acres in L.A., “It’s going to become a hotly controversial issue,” said Eric Edmunds of the Sierra Club.

Incongruent Actions

It is not without irony that in 2021, the $1 million Berggruen Prize for Philosophy and Culture was awarded to Peter Singer, best-known for work on animal rights and his 1975 book, Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. There’s a level of inconsistency and disconnection of what the Berggruen Institute is recognizing through its award program and how it’s actually behaving, but that could be remedied. Berggruen has the opportunity to impact animals very profoundly and positively by allowing them to continue to have safe haven in the last remaining large open space in the L.A. area.

Berggruen Could Have a Victory

Edmunds says he would like to see Nicolas Berggruen “recognize the enormous public value of this land and cooperate with an agency such as the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy to donate the land to remain as wilderness and trails.”

Adds Edmunds, “I have no objection to him developing his project – just not here.”

What would a win for Berggruen and the community look like? The group Protect Our Woodlands recommends that Berggruen “consider locating his new institute in a part of Los Angeles that is already developed.” As such, traffic – already a problem in the area – would not be increased. Ditto for noise and light pollution. Building at an alternate site would eliminate the negative impact to animals and the environment in this last pristine area of L.A. And the risks associated with fire and methane would not be heightened.

In a state that’s horribly overpopulated and overdeveloped, preserving this intact area of precious wildland, wild animal habitat and trails forever would turn Berggruen – who is shaping up to be the local villain – into a local hero

Maria Fotopoulos writes about the connection between overpopulation and biodiversity loss, and from time to time other topics that confound her. On FB @BetheChangeforAnimals.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise