Committee denies Unite Here appeal, clears West Harbor SEIR and advances amphitheater project

The Los Angeles City Trade, Travel and Tourism Committee voted 3-0 to deny an appeal by Unite Here Local 11 and to certify the final subsequent environmental impact report (SEIR) for the West Harbor modification project, advancing the Port of Los Angeles waterfront redevelopment to the full City Council.

The committee’s action affirms the Board of Harbor Commissioners’ certification and adopts findings of fact, a statement of overriding considerations and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the project. Council member Nithya Rodriguez moved the committee decision; the roll call vote was Councilwoman Tracy Park: Yes; Council member Tim McCosker: Yes; Council member Rodriguez: Aye.

Why it matters: West Harbor would redevelop a 42-acre portion of the Port of Los Angeles waterfront in San Pedro with restaurants, attractions and a midsize waterfront amphitheater that speakers described as a catalytic development for local jobs, restaurants and tourism. Supporters told the committee the project will create union jobs and long‑term economic activity; the appellant argued the SEIR does not require sufficiently specific or enforceable mitigation to limit vehicle miles traveled (VMT), air-quality and traffic impacts on nearby neighborhoods.

Public testimony and positions Supporters — including Port officials, the West Harbor developer and local labor and business groups — urged denial of the appeal and certification of the SEIR. Gene Siroka, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, summarized the harbor department’s response to the appeal and urged the committee to “Please deny this appeal, certify the work that has been done by the Board of Harbor Commissioners, adopt the findings of fact, including the overriding considerations, adopt those very important mitigation, monitoring, and reporting program elements” for the project.

Derek Johnson, senior project executive at West Harbor and president of Jericho Development, described project financing and local investments, saying the proposal “has attracted $200,000,000 of new private capital into the community of San Pedro. The port and the city of Los Angeles has spent a $180,000,000 on infrastructure improvements on or adjacent to the project.” Johnson called the amphitheater and surrounding uses a mix of programmed event days and public park space on most days.

Nederlander Concerts representatives, local union leaders and dozens of residents and business owners spoke in favor of the project. Jordan Harding, senior vice president of Nederlander Concerts, said Nederlander seeks to run the venue with local partnerships and mitigation measures drawn from decades of running similar outdoor venues.

Appellant’s arguments Appellant counsel Jordan Sisson, land use counsel for Unite Here Local 11, told the committee the appeal was focused on mitigation and enforceability. “This appeal is about mitigation. Whether mitigation feasible mitigation is actually being implemented,” Sisson said, and he urged the committee to require stronger, enforceable steps. Sisson cited specific mitigation measures in the SEIR (identified in the record as AQ‑31, TRAN‑1 and GHG‑1) and argued they do not go far enough, raising examples including: whether zero‑emission shuttle buses are required if commercially available, why subsidized transit passes for workers are not mandatory, and the absence of contingency measures if a proposed measure cannot be implemented.

Sisson also disputed aspects of the VMT analysis, asserting that attractions such as a Ferris wheel and year‑round amusement elements will generate new vehicle trips, and he noted the SEIR estimates as many as about 100 events in an eight‑month April–November season (roughly three events per week), which he said could support stronger commute‑reduction measures such as guaranteed participation programs, showers and structured carpooling for repeated event schedules.

Committee discussion and decision Committee members and the Port defended the SEIR’s methodology, including selection of comparable venues (the Greek Theatre and the City National Grove were cited in the record) and the transportation demand management strategies included in the mitigation package. Council member McCosker said the Port’s selection of comparators and its VMT and parking analysis were persuasive and described the appeal’s legal arguments as lacking merit in the record.

Council member Rodriguez moved denial of the appeal, calling it “frivolous” in her remarks. The committee voted 3‑0 to deny the appeal, certify the SEIR, adopt the findings of fact and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, and affirm the Board of Harbor Commissioners’ certification. Committee members directed that the item move to full City Council for final consideration.

Outstanding issues and next steps Unite Here Local 11 and its members urged the City to require more specific, enforceable mitigation for transit and vehicle‑trip reduction (for example, mandatory subsidized transit passes and guaranteed carpool programs for frequent workers), and asked that the SEIR be sent back to the Harbor Commission for additional measures. Supporters said the existing mitigation package follows established CEQA practice and Port best practices and that many mitigation and monitoring obligations will be enforced through Port permits and lease conditions.

The committee’s action advances the SEIR and project approvals to the City Council for final action; committee members and commenters noted the item was expected to appear before full council promptly.