I found the article, “Traffic, fire safety big concerns for Whole Foods Project,” in last week’s paper to be misleading with critical facts omitted. Being a resident with both interest and skepticism for new development, I attended and sat through the entire Planning Commission meeting. I watched facts being presented and saw resident after resident stand up and speak in support of this project, describing a number of benefits this development would bring to Malibu, our schools and our kids. The vast majority who spoke was there to express support. I left the meeting feeling good about (and supportive of) this project and was glad to see that many parents/residents are also supportive.
I was dismayed to see that the article in your paper, which I read with interest, painted an altogether different picture from what actually occurred. Despite the overwhelming support from the public, this article simply focused on the few concerns expressed by a small fraction of residents who appeared to refuse to believe or put any weight in the numerous studies conducted by independent third parties that concluded this project is low impact, safe and meets Malibu’s high environmental standards for new developments.
This article did not mention the benefits of the project, such as the massive Shane’s Inspiration Playground or the educational garden that would be of great value to our children, that the proposed Whole Foods is relatively small and not a big box, and no mention of the landscaped grounds that would include new sycamore trees. Moreover, despite the 500-page report’s conclusion that impacts to traffic and emergency access will be negligible with mitigation, the headline suggested that the experts concluded otherwise. That is disappointing, as this bias seems to cloud the expected objectivity of other articles.
I have no problem with a journalist having a particular viewpoint, but expect that to be in an op-ed and advertised as such. But this seemingly news report was misleading at best.
I am hopeful that future reporting will be more grounded in the facts and represents the actual views in a fair depiction.
Michelle Kahen