The Pow Wow Forum

The Apache Pow Wow


    Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Share

    ashleychi

    Posts : 230
    Join date : 2009-09-02

    Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  ashleychi on Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:52 pm

    DRAFT 1
    -----

    by Andrew Chang and Ashley Chi

    Rick Caruso, developer of the Grove of Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005, to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named the Shops at Santa Anita at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in eleven areas. Westfield appealed on an additional eighteen points, creating a total of twenty-nine necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR report. Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials call a “level playing ground.”

    Their battle by no means limited itself to the courtroom. Westfield started a group called Arcadia First in 2006: a group of Arcadia residents and business owners against Caruso’s plans for the Shops at Santa Anita. Arcadia First mailed out brochures and leaflets to Arcadians, delineating the possible environmental ramifications of the Shops at Santa Anita. On the other side of the battle, Caruso held a “Year of the Pig” festival at the Santa Anita racetrack for Arcadia’s large Chinese-American community, hosted get-togethers with Arcadia’s major home owner associations, the Chamber of Commerce, and the police and firefighters associations, and hosted a complementary date night for 3,000 people. Of the two companies, freshman Anna Wang states, “I think that it is a waste of valuable time and money for these two companies to sue each other. They are doing so on a basis of greed and competition.

    Legally, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be called the Community of Homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” In short, the public sentiment seems to support neither Caruso nor Westfield—and rather seems to contend that Arcadia needed no more malls in the first place.

    Arcadia’s main source of revenue could very well become one of its main sources of controversy in the coming months.

    lenakalemkiarian

    Posts : 166
    Join date : 2009-09-01

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  lenakalemkiarian on Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:12 am

    by Andrew Chang and Ashley Chi

    Rick Caruso, developer of the Grove of [in] Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005, to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named the Shops at Santa Anita ["The Shops at Santa Anita"]at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in eleven areas. Westfield appealed on an additional eighteen points, creating a total of twenty-nine necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR report. Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials call a “level playing ground.”

    Their battle by no means limited itself to the courtroom. Westfield started a group called Arcadia First in 2006: a group of Arcadia residents and business owners against Caruso’s plans for the Shops at Santa Anita ["The Shops at Santa Anita"]. Arcadia First mailed out brochures and leaflets to Arcadians, delineating the possible environmental ramifications of the Shops at Santa Anita ["The Shops at Santa Anita"]. On the other side of the battle, Caruso held a “Year of the Pig” festival at the Santa Anita racetrack for Arcadia’s large Chinese-American community, hosted get-togethers with Arcadia’s major home owner associations, the Chamber of Commerce, and the police and firefighters associations, and hosted a complementary date night for 3,000 people. Of the two companies, freshman Anna Wang states, “I think that it is a waste of valuable time and money for these two companies to sue each other. They are doing so on a basis of greed and competition.

    Legally, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be called the Community of Homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” In short, the public sentiment seems to support neither Caruso nor Westfield—and rather seems to contend that Arcadia needed no more malls in the first place.

    Arcadia’s main source of revenue could very well become one of its main sources of controversy in the coming months.

    ashleychi

    Posts : 230
    Join date : 2009-09-02

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  ashleychi on Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:35 pm

    DRAFT 2

    by Andrew Chang and Ashley Chi

    Rick Caruso, developer of the Grove at Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005, to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named “The Shops at Santa Anita” at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in eleven areas. Westfield appealed on an additional eighteen points, creating a total of twenty-nine necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR report. Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials call a “level playing ground.”

    Their battle by no means limited itself to the courtroom. Westfield started a group called Arcadia First! in 2006: a group of Arcadia residents and business owners against Caruso’s plans for “The Shops at Santa Anita.” Arcadia First! mailed out brochures and leaflets to Arcadians, delineating the possible environmental ramifications of “The Shops at Santa Anita.” On the other side of the battle, Caruso held a “Year of the Pig” festival at the Santa Anita racetrack for Arcadia’s large Chinese-American community, hosted get-togethers with Arcadia’s major home owner associations, the Chamber of Commerce, and the police and firefighters associations, and hosted a complementary date night for 3,000 people. Of the two companies, freshman Anna Wang states, “I think that it is a waste of valuable time and money for these two companies to sue each other. They are doing so on a basis of greed and competition.”

    Legally, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be called the Community of Homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” In short, the public sentiment seems to support neither Caruso nor Westfield—and rather seems to contend that Arcadia needed no more malls in the first place.

    This puts the city of Arcadia in the middle of the two Westfield and Caruso lawsuits, a healthcare debate, and increasing budget cuts. However, no matter the allocation of fault, the conflict as a whole remains a poignant issue subject to contention by both sides. The verisimilitude in this lawsuit is entirely unclear, but one thing is apparent: that one of Arcadia’s main sources of revenue could very well become a primary source of controversy in the coming months.

    andrewchang

    Posts : 38
    Join date : 2009-09-01

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  andrewchang on Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:40 pm

    DRAFT 3

    Rick Caruso, developer of the Grove at Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005, to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named “The Shops at Santa Anita” at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in eleven areas. Westfield appealed on an additional eighteen points, creating a total of twenty-nine necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR report. Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials call a “level playing ground.”

    Their battle by no means limited itself to the courtroom. Westfield started a group called Arcadia First! in 2006: a group of Arcadia residents and business owners against Caruso’s plans for “The Shops at Santa Anita.” Arcadia First! mailed out brochures and leaflets to Arcadians, delineating the possible environmental ramifications of “The Shops at Santa Anita.” On the other side of the battle, Caruso held a “Year of the Pig” festival at the Santa Anita racetrack for Arcadia’s large Chinese-American community, hosted get-togethers with Arcadia’s major home owner associations, the Chamber of Commerce, and the police and firefighters associations, and hosted a complementary date night for 3,000 people. Of the two companies, freshman Anna Wang states, “I think that it is a waste of valuable time and money for these two companies to sue each other. They are doing so on a basis of greed and competition.”

    Legally, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be called the Community of Homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” In short, the public sentiment seems to support neither Caruso nor Westfield—and rather seems to contend that Arcadia needed no more malls in the first place.

    The Caruso lawsuits have become Arcadia’s latest addition to its increasing mass of issues, and the conflict as a whole remains a poignant issue subject to contention by both sides. The verisimilitude in this lawsuit is entirely unclear, but one thing is apparent: that one of Arcadia’s main sources of revenue could very well become a primary source of controversy in the coming months.

    andrewchang

    Posts : 38
    Join date : 2009-09-01

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  andrewchang on Sun Sep 13, 2009 1:00 am

    DRAFT 4

    Rick Caruso, developer of the Grove of Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005 to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named "The Shops at Santa Anita" at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in eleven areas. Westfield appealed on an additional eighteen points, creating a total of twenty-nine necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The purpose of an Environmental Impact Report is to allow city officials to make an informed decision regarding the impact of construction on the biophysical makeup of a city—and so given these issues, Caruso’s project may be either stymied temporarily or halted completely. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR report. Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials called a “level playing ground.”

    With regards to corporate growth and general profitability, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield; construction cannot continue without a passable Environmental Impact Report. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be a community of homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” In short, the public sentiment seems to support neither Caruso nor Westfield—and rather seems to contend that Arcadia needed no more malls in the first place.

    The conflict as a whole remains a poignant topic, subject to contention by both sides; the Caruso lawsuits have seemingly become Arcadia's newest hot-button issue. With all the confusion, however, the verisimilitude in this lawsuit is entirely unclear. But one thing is apparent: that one of Arcadia’s main sources of revenue could very well become a primary source of controversy in the coming months.

    ashleychi

    Posts : 230
    Join date : 2009-09-02

    DRAFT 5/ final

    Post  ashleychi on Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:13 pm

    DRAFT 5/ final

    by Andrew Chang and Ashley Chi

    Rick Caruso, developer of The Grove in Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005 to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named "The Shops at Santa Anita" at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in 11 areas. Westfield appealed on an additional 18 points, creating a total of 29 necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The purpose of an Environmental Impact Report is to allow city officials to make an informed decision regarding the impact of construction on the biophysical makeup of a city—and so given these issues, Caruso’s project may be either stymied temporarily or halted completely. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials called a “level playing ground.”

    With regards to corporate growth and general profitability, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield; construction cannot continue without a passable Environmental Impact Report. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be a community of homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” Although residents may share different viewpoints on this fight, there is no question that the outcome will affect Arcadia as a whole.

    The conflict remains a poignant topic, subject to contention by both sides; the Caruso lawsuits have seemingly become Arcadia's newest hot-button issue. With all the confusion, however, the verisimilitude in this lawsuit is entirely unclear. But one thing is apparent: that one of Arcadia’s main sources of revenue could very well become a primary source of controversy in the coming months.

    lenakalemkiarian

    Posts : 166
    Join date : 2009-09-01

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  lenakalemkiarian on Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:09 am

    DRAFT 5/ final

    by Andrew Chang and Ashley Chi

    Rick Caruso, developer of The Grove in Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005 [add comma] to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On August 20, 2009, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.

    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named "The Shops at Santa Anita" at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company who had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.

    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in 11 areas. Westfield appealed on an additional 18 points, creating a total of 29 necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The purpose of an Environmental Impact Report is to allow city officials to make an informed decision regarding the impact of construction on the biophysical makeup of a city—and so given these issues, Caruso’s project may be either stymied temporarily or halted completely. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR[.] Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials called a “level playing ground.”

    With regards to corporate growth and general profitability, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield; construction cannot continue without a passable Environmental Impact Report. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. “Arcadia was supposed to be a community of homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” Although residents may share different viewpoints on this fight, there is no question that the outcome will affect Arcadia as a whole.

    The conflict remains a poignant topic, subject to contention by both sides; the Caruso lawsuits have seemingly become Arcadia's newest hot-button issue. With all the confusion, however, the verisimilitude in this lawsuit is entirely unclear. But one thing is apparent: that one of Arcadia’s main sources of revenue could very well become a primary source of controversy in the coming months.

    Joanna Shen

    Posts : 87
    Join date : 2009-08-31

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  Joanna Shen on Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:36 pm

    Rick Caruso, developer of The Grove in Anaheim, has had his eye on the Santa Anita racetrack for quite some time—since 2005 to be exact. But with Westfield’s new plans to expand into 13,500 feet of restaurant space at its outdoor Promenade, Caruso Affiliated may now see a bit of a roadblock in its newest entrepreneurial venture. On Aug. 20, Caruso sued both the city and Westfield, demanding an environmental impact report for the conversion of such a large area into restaurant space.
    Caruso Affiliated is not totally unfamiliar with Westfield. The battle began when Caruso proposed an upscale mall to be named “The Shops at Santa Anita” at the Santa Anita racetrack. Caruso hosted festivals and meet-and-greets, gaining approval from most, but rejection from one: Westfield Santa Anita, the company which had built a 1.3 million square foot shopping mall a mere hundred yards away from Caruso’s proposed retail space.
    Back in 2008, Caruso’s project filed its mandatory Environmental Impact Report—which was judged to be problematic in 11 areas. Westfield appealed on an additional 18 points, creating a total of 29 necessary revisions before Caruso’s project could move forward. The purpose of an Environmental Impact Report is to allow city officials to make an informed decision regarding the impact of construction on the biophysical makeup of a city—and so given these issues, Caruso’s project may be either stymied temporarily or halted completely. The city, however, maintained that the expansion of restaurant space by Westfield would not require another EIR Caruso Affiliated stepped in here, citing “significant air quality, sewage, waste, water, population, land use and parking impacts” and forcing Westfield to play on what Caruso officials called a “level playing ground.”
    With regards to corporate growth and general profitability, the impacts of this controversy could be detrimental to both Caruso and Westfield; construction cannot continue without a passable Environmental Impact Report. So much is certain. But on the contextual level of the local residents, it’s an entirely different story. While some advocate the expansion of Westfield and some the virtue in Caruso’s qualms, the prevailing disposition in Arcadia students seems to be one of disintrerest regarding corporate expansion as a whole. “Arcadia was supposed to be a community of homes,” remarked junior Ray Chao, “not a tourist attraction.” “Our mall already brings in enough revenue,” agreed sophomore Farihah Chowdhury, “and I’ve so far been disappointed with the level of congestion which has occurred in these past few years.” Although residents may share different viewpoints on this fight, there is no question that the outcome will affect Arcadia as a whole.
    The conflict remains a poignant topic, subject to contention by both sides; the Caruso lawsuits have seemingly become Arcadia’s newest hot-button issue. With all the confusion, however, the verisimilitude in this lawsuit is entirely unclear. But one thing is apparent: that one of Arcadia’s main sources of revenue could very well become a primary source of controversy in the coming months.

    elliottlee

    Posts : 2
    Join date : 2009-09-01

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  elliottlee on Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:57 pm

    Uh, this is after publication so there's not much we can do about it, but isn't it really The Grove at Farmers Market, and not The Grove of Anaheim? My guess is a Google search led you do the wrong Wiki page and the wrong place was chosen...


    Last edited by elliottlee on Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:00 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : fixing link)

    Sponsored content

    Re: Caruso/Westfield Lawsuit

    Post  Sponsored content

      Similar topics

      -

      Current date/time is Tue Aug 22, 2017 12:28 pm