-
Civic Activist 08/07/2011 1:19:00 AM
The focus on high school remodel is not where the focus should be, the focus should be on safety factors, we are on a water table, gas and oil. There are areas under ground of community emergency shelters. These two points are not often brought to the attention of those making the decisions. Or does it not matter?
-
Jstewart 07/22/2011 10:19:00 PM
John Mirisch, thanks for your comment. One slight correction: Patrick Range McDonald says the subway would move "two blocks" if the Constellation route is chosen over the Santa Monica route because the move would consist of switching the route southward about 1,000 feet. The average city block is about 525 feet. We decided it was more accurate to say two blocks, even though no street bisects the very long block. -- Jill Stewart, LA Weekly news editor
-
Gary Aminoff 07/21/2011 6:56:00 AM
That should read, "To tunnel under the high school makes NO sense."
-
Gary Aminoff 07/21/2011 6:55:00 AM
It seems like a no-brainer to me. Santa Monica Blvd is a heavily traveled thoroughfare and is a State Highway. It makes infinite sense to me that the subway stop should be on Santa Monica Blvd, not on Constellation. For those who work in Century City and use the subway (minimal) they should easily be able to walk the one block to Santa Monica Blvd. To tunnel under the high school makes to sense. This is clearly a diversion from the original plan just to satisfy JMB, a major donor to Mayor Villaraigosa. If one is going to build the subway, and I contend that it shouldn't be built, it should be on Santa Monica, not under the high school. I contend that it shouldn't be built because it will have zero affect on traffic conditions and will cost hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars. Why are we spending that money on something that will not have a beneficial effect on traffic? Nuts!
-
07/20/2011 10:18:00 AM
Right, the business people and residents in the uber expensive high-rises are the perfect target group for use of the subways. Like they'd ever really use it. BH is just doing what it always does, protecting its own little world without acknowledging there's a bigger one surrounding it.
-
Lori Higgins 07/20/2011 9:11:00 AM
Or as I like to call him "Nate Beholden to everyone".....
-
Lori Higgins 07/20/2011 9:08:00 AM
The Los Angeles Planning Commision is in bed with the developers and the City Council members are in a rush to try to make their mark on the city with no regard to the residential areas that abut these developments.
The lack of the Enviromental Impact report is plaguing a development known as The Distric Square at Rodeo and Crenshaw where a 60 foot concrete parking structure will be less than 10 feet from one story, small single family residences.
We attempted to appeal the project as the neighborhood group most impacted by the development and they used Nate Holden to try to sway my neighbors in their direction. Nate Holden was one of the worst, most patronizing City Officials ever.
Our councilman for the 10th district, Herb Wesson, is even worse. Herb Wesson is always looking to grease palms and get his picture in the paper. His office and the planning commision have yet to produce a traffic mitgation proposal, even though my neighborhood will be impacted by the light rail, the metro and the new bus/train line proposed to run on Crenshaw and the additional of a 600+ capacity parking structure for Target and Ralphs. My street, Norton Avenue, is regularly used as a bypass shortcut for Crenshaw with crazed drivers speeding upwards of 60 miles an hour down our residential streets to try to avoid traffic at Crenshaw and Rodeo. With the light rail, this will prove to be a HUGE problem. I did attempt to fight City Hall. Apparently, they are doing all these projects under the radar of the normal citizens who really don't understand the process. We did not receive due notice to review the project or any other mailed notices, and we are the ones that will have this looming eyesore in our backyard. Corrupt! Where there is money in the millions to be made to you think they actually care about our little neighborhoods?
Lori Higgins
Concerned Citizens of Norton Avenue
lori.higgins@gmail.com
-
Undercover_101 07/20/2011 6:49:00 AM
oh, boo hoo! poor little beverly hills high school can't make the big bad MTA move their annoying subway line that will serve millions of riders for the next 100 years....so that they can build a subterranean parking garage (to presumably park all those bmw 3 series that mommy and daddy leased junior for getting straight Bs)? are you kidding me?? that is pretty much where i stopped reading this incredibly NIMBY piece of community 'journalism'. beverly hills is everything that's wrong with america. hey patrick 'range' mcdonald - guess what?? we don't really give a f*ck what beverly hills wants. they're lucky that pos high school isn't bulldozed in the process. eminent domain 1 - beverly hills 0.
-
07/20/2011 2:11:00 AM
BH did not support the original Red Line in the 1980s and quickly jump on the wagon to stop it as soon as it had a chance. BH and Cheviot Hill residents constantly complained about the extension of the Expo line as well. And the most recent example of NIMBYism is BH blocking the dedicated bus lanes.
-
07/20/2011 2:07:00 AM
BH recently blocked dedicated bus lanes.
Subway is worth the expense in some areas because of high density traffic and geographical reasons. Also, you would have to buy additional right of ways which are very expensive to do at this point. Metro tries, whenever it can, to use existing right of ways that they already own but are not in use.
Also, with Subways you can run cars more often and faster. Not the case with light rail because of intersections and cross traffic.
-
07/20/2011 2:02:00 AM
That's not true. BH did not support the original Red Line Subway, And between BH and Cheviot Hills, have put up delay after delay to the extension of the Expo line. And more recently blocked the dedicated bus lanes in BH.
-
07/20/2011 1:58:00 AM
This "journalist" doesn't know what he's talking about. The subway will be close to 100 feet underground beneath the rear part of the sports field. Build an underground parking structure? Really? You know how expensive that is? Just build an above ground unit if you really need it which I doubt considering the school has been around for decades and I doubt the enrollment or staff has grown such to justify building it.
You should have done your homework and taken a poll of how many Angelenos would prefer a station directly beneath Century City or on Santa Monica. The overwhelming majority would pick directly underneath. It's also the cheaper and straighter alignment.
What about the fault line that runs along Santa Monica Blvd. in that area?
Beverly Hills has historically blocked public transit projects for social status reasons. The latest being blocking the dedicated bus lanes in BH. It's ridiculous that you'll have dedicated bus lanes from downtown LA up to the BH border, they disappear, and then appear again on the other side of the BH border. Their crying about the subway under the sports field of their pricey privilege high school is selfish, arrogant, and short sighted.
At this late stage in the game, I would prefer that Metro bypass Century City and BH altogether and use the money that would have gone to subway stations in those two cities to move the line that much closer to the beach. Extend the Subway pass the VA two more stations.
-
07/20/2011 12:35:00 AM
Nate Holden is a moron. It's a shame how this deadbeat ex-councilman who never lived in his own district got a great building dedicated to him that the city cannot even afford to use. If this retread had any civic pride or dignity, he would donate a portion of his retirement to help operate and program the Art Center on Washington for the people that he screwed over for years.
He has no right to renig on his promise from ten years ago or lie about the Sears building at Midtown to be an obstruction; it never was. That building was an historic art deco icon that was raped repeatedly by his office for multi-faceted swap meet, low-rent retail hoodwinkery until the last bits of it were finally demolished. Midtown Sears, in its glory, was a landmark where you could sit on the roof and overlook most of the entire city, East, North, and West. Neighbors to the South could do the same because IT WAS NOT IN THE WAY of their view to the North. Not at all. You could see clear over it in all directions. Holden is lying through his chipped dentures when he denies this FACT. As was expclaimed in his last election "No more Holden on!" Why would you even quote this liar?? Oh. that's right. You are the LA Weekly.
-
Dave Frevele 07/19/2011 12:03:00 AM
A revival of rail transit in southern California interests me enough that I've attended most Metro scoping meetings for years. The endlessly outrageously high costs of today's construction projects rob what little hope there is. Among many other things, hopefully some of us have prompted them to build the current "revised locally preferred alternative" under the Japanese Village Plaza for the Regional Connector.
In all the years I've been to Metro meetings of all different kinds, the subway's project director, Mr. Mieger, has been the most gentle, kindest and most respectful person on any side, a true credit to Metro and his profession. He justly deserves no retribution.
For years the Santa Monica Fault has played a major factor at public subway meetings that seems to predate any overt involvement of JMB Realty in the now Westside-But-No-Longer-To-The-Sea-Subway. I wonder how Mr. McDonald feels the fault zone figures into this story.
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2011/02/possible_solution_for_century_city_subway_station_fracas.php
Dave Frevele
-
Randall Bustard 07/18/2011 5:43:00 PM
One wonders why it is the L.A. Downtown News has nearly no opinion of all the CRA's scandals, from stealing $1 billion, to Eli Broad, to removing tens of thousands of rent-controlled apartments and replacing them with over-priced condos (which have since been reverted to rented spaces) to this latest scandal.
Oh, wait, the DTLA News did write a piece about the CRA: "More Cleantech Disappointment." (http://www.ladowntownnews.com/articles/2011/07/08/opinion/doc4e17881fea106122137266.txt) However, after apologizing profusely for the CRA's bad luck and all that, apparently there was little room to offer copy on what the CRA is really doing to Los Angeles, and with stolen taxpayers' funds.
In 1947 Walter Lippman complained about how the Commission on Freedom of the Press proposed "that the members of the press engage in vigorous, mutual criticism," responding that "[his] conclusion is that the hard feelings it causes are all out of proportion to the public benefit it causes." Having seen what half-century of restraint has allowed, what has become "out of proportion" is the collusion between corrupt government agencies and certain mouthpieces.
Perhaps it is time to ignore Lippman's adherence to the fellowship and expose the "news"papers that have strayed too far to be brought back. The CRA might not have been so successful if the weekly rag that is in its bag yard—and perhaps the agency's back pocket—had long ago been mindful of the public benefit.
-
07/17/2011 9:35:00 PM
Do your homework, journalist: the existing Wilshire subway would be extended from WESTERN AVENUE, not VERMONT AVENUE. Subway trains have been operating under Wilshire Boulevard westward to Western for over fifteen years, you idiot! Your mistake shows exactly how familiar you are with the reality of mass transit between Downtown L.A. and the west side. However, credit must be given where credit is due: at least you didn't stick your third rate journo nose up the asses of the rampant egos in charge of the Bus Riders Union.
-
07/17/2011 9:21:00 PM
The issue of a supposed threat to sacred Bev Hills High School is just a false issue, is a cudgel for convenient use by so many BH egos full to the brim with themselves.
If there indeed were to be an actual physical threat, the geologic strata could easily be injected with cement as hold-fast while tunneling is conducted. That was the case beneath 12 story office buildings in Downtown L.A. on the first phase of the Redline. I once ran a branch office across the street from the Beverly Wilshire Hotel; believe me, the area and too many of its citizens are simply full of bullshit. This issue of preserving sacred Bev Hills High School is nothing more than an opportunity for these assholes to flare their nostrils. One would think that they'd be happy to have SO MANY MTA red buses eliminated from that jammed thoroughfare called Wilshire Boulevard. But regional transit efficiency doesn't matter to them; their elite superiority must remain front and center, issue number one.
-
Valerie 07/17/2011 4:38:00 PM
Thank you, Weekly, for saying it like it is. Beverly Hills has always supported the Metro effort...until there was a "bait and switch" and suddenly a much more expensive route which, for no logical reason, was to go under a 100 year old high school in need of renovation. Money speaks...but there will be years of opposition to this. Why not take the logical and less expensive way out and stop on Santa Monica Boulevard?
-
Richard 07/17/2011 7:45:00 AM
Andrew has hit the nail on the head. There is a project over on Edinbourgh and Willoughby. It was a four story density bonus nightmare. To "protect" the single family homeowners behind this four story monster building, the City Planning Commission imposed a number of protective provisions.
When the developer revised the plans to omit the protections imposed by the Planning Commission, and submitted the plans for Planning sign off, Kevin Keller signed the plans even though the new floor plan shows "enhancements" not allowed by the Planning Commission.
An appeal was filed and Kevin Keller started recusing himself from the room whenever the appeal was heard. Why is Keller recusing himself? What ties does Keller have to the private development project he oversaw? Is there a state conflict of interest violation? Should the FBI expand its investigation of Building and Safety to include the Planning Department.
-
Dave Frevele 07/16/2011 11:59:00 PM
This article has "backstage" aspects that interest me greatly. I'm so concerned the revival of rail transit in southern California that I've been attended most Metro scoping meetings for years. Among many other things, hopefully some of us have prompted them to build the current "revised locally preferred alternative" under the Japanese Village Plaza for the Regional Connector. The endlessly astronomical costs are the greatest burden to our hopes. In all the years I've been to Metro meetings of all different kinds, Mr. Mieger has been the most gentle, kindest and most respectful person on any side, a true credit to Metro and his profession. I hope nothing bad is now going to happen to him. For years the Santa Monica Fault has seemed to predate any overt involvement of JMB Realty in the now-Westside-Subway-no-longer-To-The-Sea). I'll get in touch with Mr. McDonald but feel that others may want his take on how it figures into his article.
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2011/02/possible_solution_for_century_city_subway_station_fracas.php
Dave Frevele
-
07/16/2011 10:27:00 PM
Eminent DOMAIN on those rich bitches for a change! Signed, the East LA interchange.
-
Jonathan 07/16/2011 9:45:00 PM
The question nobody is asking is why, in a city which is perfect in so many ways for buses and streetcars, are we talking about a subway? For the cost of the subway, we could flood this city with frequent, reliable bus service in dedicated lanes at regular intervals. Streetcars could be used on some high density routes. No, it would not be sexy, and maybe rich white people will never take them (let them choke in their cars), but it would provide a true alternative.
-
Brian 07/16/2011 3:30:00 AM
Finally an article that connects all the dots. The story is as old as humankind just follow the money. This is another example of elected officials and large developers taking advantage of the tax payers for their own beat interest. In the case of the politicians it is money and support to future their political careers or secure employment after they leave office. For the developers it is all about the profit. Now those who support Century City developers based in Chicago and their surrogates resort to school yard tactic of name calling. Litigators will say that when you cannot argue the law argue the facts, when facts are not with you attack the person. The Constellation alignment is not supported by the facts so they are attacking Beverly Holls.
-
Ken Goldman 07/15/2011 7:11:00 PM
Contrary to all these people who just want to trash BH:
1. Beverly Hills long ago officially supported the westside extension. That was before Metro switched locations for the Century City station at the behest of CC landowners who simply want to increase their property values. So BH is NOT anti-subway. The High School is the City's only high school and major disaster center. If something happens (construction accident, construction defect, subsidence, etc etc--as has happened elsewhere) it shouldn't be designed to happen under a high school with 2,500 kids and teachers. There is a very good reason why--if Metro did tunnel under BHHS--it would be the ONLY high school in the County (and probably the state) to have a subway tunnel directly under it (contrary to what one of the commentators here incorrectly stated); that ought to tell you something about subways under schools! In addition, it would immeasurably impact the School District's ability to modernize an 85-year old school.
2. The people in BH are not NIMBYs and do not want to "keep people out" (despite all the really nasty comments to the contrary). There will be TWO subway stations in BH. That's hardly "NIMBYism."
3. Putting the station at Santa Monica (instead of moving it to Constellation) will decidedly NOT stop construction of the westside extension (as several commentators here have said). In fact, construction time will be quicker AND it will cost Metro $60 Million LESS to build the CC station on Santa Monica Blvd. CC landlowners want you and I and Metro to spend $60M more just to make their properties closer to the station and therefore more valuable.
4. CC and some of the commentators here make a station at Santa MOnica Blvd sound like it would be the end of the world. It's only ONE BLOCK (along one, but one block). (One commentator here tried to persuade readers that it was the equivalent of 4 blocks. Total nonsense, unless you're secribing Legoland.) And Metro could easily span the one block by a moving sidewalk as in every major subway station and airport in the world.
5. Again, one commentator wants to imply that the author and othes are somehow on BH's payroll. BH has been forced to spend money on engineers and lawyers and others to protect their only high school. Unlike apparently JMB's and others' political contributions, none has gone to the campaigns of the Metro directors!
6. The author did a monumental amount of thoughtful research and writing for this article.
Those who are trashing him and the LA Weekly simply don't like the conclusions that he came to after talking to, and endlessly researching, BOTH sides.
Those who want to argue the other way, OK. That's reasonable. But don't go trashing the author and BH and its residents just because they have a different point of view.
-
John Mirisch 07/15/2011 6:42:00 PM
By "workforce people," you undoubtedly mean the employees who attended the pro-Constellation press conference and who were ordered to attend by their employers...
-
John Mirisch 07/15/2011 6:37:00 PM
So according to Phelps, by fiat, it is simply impossible that anything negative, unjust or unfair ever be visited upon Beverly Hills. To me, this suggests that Phelps has simply eaten up the stereotype of Beverly Hills, with skin, hair and all. He suggests there are "valid" arguments for the Constellation station, yet simply dismisses all of the arguments used by Beverly Hills as irrational, fear-based nonsense.
While there have been irrational arguments on both sides, the main arguments that I and others representing Beverly Hills have made are based on pure logic and common sense. Respect for the LPA, local control, choosing the least expensive, least intrusive viable route, consistency of criteria, as well as the impacts to the City's only high school are arguments which we have made from the beginning. As well as the fact that many of us are allergic to bait-and-switch maneuvers. Add to this Metro's own ridership projections and the increased travel time of the Constellation alignment, and where is any semblance of "logic" on the Constellation route, other than the, in transit terms, meaningless buzzwords "the center of the center"? You want to keep repeating that you have to build a station in "the center of the center"? Fine -- lose the VA station, which isn't in the center of anything, and build the Westwood station in the "center of the center" of Westwood. Consistency of criteria is certainly one of the definitions of logic.
Metro's staff may be technically brilliant, but their bosses are ultimately politicians, who are subject to the kind of influence Mr. McDonald illuminates in his article. To suggest otherwise is to be woefully naive of business-as-usual in the development world of the LA region.
While Phelps seems to suggest that an "alternative roots" publication, by definition, needs to stick it to BH, because BH is BH, good journalists know that "the man isn't always the man." You want to "stick it to the man," fine, but be sure that you can definitively say the schoolchildren are the "man" you want to be sticking it to rather than developers and their political cronies. And back that up with a little credible information, as well.
The fact, plain and simple, is that tunneling under the high school could limit future growth, renovation, refurbishment and development at the high school. In perpetuity. And all for the sake of the property values of Century City developers. This isn't about a specific garage, but about a campus which serves 2000 kids and which is about half the size it should be under current CDE regulations. Any restrictions on what can and can't be built above the tunnels will unnecessarily tie the hands of the Community forever to make the most out of a location which is going to have to serve future generations of Beverly Hills schoolchildren.
LA Weekly has understood that by not sticking to the script that the Century City PR flacks have been trying to sell as "factual," a script that attempts to make Beverly Hills seem unreasonable and irrational, they are doing the entire region a tremendous service by shining a light on facts and connections which represent the inconvenient truths for many of those in LA's Insiders' Club. Guessing that's just one of the reasons Mr. McDonald recently was named Journalist of the Year by the LA Press Club.
-
Deppeuribe 07/15/2011 3:38:00 PM
These anti-progress job and development people infuriate me. There is an implied premise that these homes are somehow entitled to a view of the Hollywood Hills. WHY? This is not a community with an even implied vista. It is a typical neighborhood in the middle of city that "happened" to have a view of the Hollywood Hill because there was an essentially vacant lot across the street. If the house at the corner of my neighborhood were not there I would have a beautiful view of downtown - so what! A view does not prohibit the enjoyment of the beautiful pool that is prominently featured in this picture. This project will provide a much needed service in the community - jobs and a local home improvement place with a greater selection than the osh across the street. It is too bad a Costco is not planned (to my knowledge). It would be great not to send our tax dollars to all other neighboring communities than our own. If these people were smart they would have simply asked for a landscaping stipend for their backyards. Plant a tall hedge or better yet - let the CIM group paint the view of the Hills that you lost. It is Hollywood after all.
-
Sybil Goldrich 07/15/2011 2:18:00 PM
A "people-mover" like the ones in most major airports would protect Century City riders from having to exert themselves by walking from the Santa Monica Station.
Beverly Hills High School is the designated "emergency center" for our community - the place to report in the event of a disaster.
An earlier plan to tunnel under Good Shepherd School was quickly squelched by Mayor Villagarosa's relationship with the Diocese.
One entrance to a subway? That is woefully inadequate if it becomes necessary to leave the site quickly.
-
07/15/2011 11:35:00 AM
Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!
Nice blog on Bathroom remodeling Michigan.
Keep sharing more & more.....
-
07/15/2011 9:46:00 AM
Ah, another Patrick Range MacDonald anti-transit article, eating out of Wendell Cox's crazy cake (though in this article, he does come across pretty well). You depress me, LAWeekly. No wonder you are so irrelevant. I laugh every time PRM manages to mention that subways don't reduce traffic congestion. (Basically) true. But you know what also doesn't reduce traffic congestion? Building new roads and freeway lanes. Look at the studies of the 405 expansion, for example. It's been all over the news. Stop taking the attitude that you are somehow being scammed by Metro, and that you are somehow so much more versed in transit expertise than those people over there who are professional transit planners. It may surprise readers of this particular article, but there actually are logical reasons to put the station on constellation avenue. You are completely dismissive of that logic, you don't even address its existence. I'm not even saying their right- I don't personally care either way as long as the damn thing gets built- but I am saying there are legitimate arguments to be made which are totally lost in an unending sea of glib righteousness. You would think this is watergate or something. The Metro staff is completely comprised!!! Don't believe the EIR!!! Please.
The main problem with the whole article is proved right here on the comment board. You make it sound like Beverly HIlls' only reason to protest is because the subway might prevent them from building an underground parking lot for their children's beamers. The absurdity of this "problem" aside (PRM seems to take it at face value), this has just not been born out in the public hearings on the situation, or on the comments here on the comment board. The REAL concern of Beverly Hills parents are issues of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) about a subway and the supposed danger of tunneling under a high school. Because subways are so unsafe, or something. Of course, this fear is totally irrational, there are tunnels under schools all over the place, and subways exist perfectly safely in all kinds of earthquake prone cities of the world, and have proven to be very safe places to be indeed in an Earthquake. (it wasn't BART that collapsed in the Loma Prietta quake in Oakland, remember.) But the problem for PRM is this argument doesn't fit his agenda: to make the people he wants to make look good and like victims look good and like victims, and to make Metro and it's ivory-tower planners look evil, corrupt, and dismissive.
That LAWeekly could even publish an article that accepts without question the narrative that Beverly Hills is a victim of anything kind of makes me wonder if they've lost a little touch with the city they're supposedly covering. Not to mention their alternative-press roots.
-
07/15/2011 9:09:00 AM
You're crazy. An oil company? Also, it may surprise you that there are subways in many of the worlds earthquake zones, and they are one of the safest places you can be. Mexico City, Tokyo, etc.
-
Carolynro 07/15/2011 4:09:00 AM
ISN'T IT ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE AN OIL COMPANY TUNNELING BENEATH THE BEVERLY HILLS HIGH SCHOOL AND HUNDREDS OF OUR HOMES COVERING SEVERAL MILES. IN OUR "EARTHQUAKE" LAND IN BEVERLY HILLS, HOW CAN DIGGING AND DRILLING BE A GOOD THING. MY GRANDFATHER WAS AN EARLY BUILDER IN BEVERLY HILLS, SO I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE WHOLE AREA. "WE" DO NOT WANT A SUBWAY IN OUR LITTLE TOWN. WE ARE A UNIQUE SMALL AND FAMOUS CITY.....PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US.
AS A PROUD GRADUATE OF BEVERLY HILLS HIGH SCHOOL AND A LONG TIME PROPERTY OWNER, PLEASE LISTEN TO OUR PLEA FOR SANITY.
THANK YOU
-
Bob 07/15/2011 4:07:00 AM
Very complete story with all the "delicious" background info. There's a fight coming up and it's going to make Ali-Frazier seem like a minor sideshow!
-
John Mirisch 07/15/2011 3:58:00 AM
Actually, the "Rodeo" station in BH will be on Beverly. Comparing Santa Monica and Ave. of the Stars with, say, Rexford and Elevado isn't a great comparison: Metro would never have considered Rexford and Elevado in the first place, and for years they were basically only looking at Santa Monica and Ave. of the Stars.
If you drew your circle around the VA station, you'd find that there isn't that much going on within that circle -- certainly not the kinds of urban uses that justify the investment in a subway. And if you drew the circle around Westwood, the Village would be the "center of the center" -- and much meore convenient to UCLA.
Convenience in Century City all depends where your destination is. Jobs are concentrated around Santa Monica. Current ridership is estimated by Metro's own calculations to be higher at Santa Monica.
Of course, there are other factors that are considered when subway alignments and stations are considered. A station in between Santa Monica and Constellation might be convenient, but Metro can't do it because they would have to tunnel too deep (Well, guess they can do it, but don't want to pay for it...). Taking the BH High School into account is, in my opinion, a very important factor to take into account.
But if you want to talk about convenience, how is it possible that Metro is planning all the stations (except Westwood) with a single portal? Subways all over the world have multiple entryways for the convenience of the riders, yet here we're acting as if one is enough, unless someone else wants to pay for it. This to me would seem to be a larger, more important issue, as is the total lack of park and ride facilities along the entire Westside extension. How are the Westsiders (who aren't lucky enough to live within walking distance of a station) actually supposed to get to the subway? The answer probably isn't bus service, which is being cut down significantly. The answer should be park and rides: residents could drive the short distance from their homes, and then take the subway downtown (or wherever). This is where the focus should be. Ultimately, this focus on Constellation is really mainly -- as McDonald points out in his article -- for the benefit of the developers, and at the expense of the school. Not a good equation.
-
ConcernBHparent 07/15/2011 3:44:00 AM
Thanks for the article. This is the first article I have read on the subject which did not dismiss the concerns of Beverly Hills parents. We do not want to put our children at risk nor do we want to remove our ability to adapt to the future needs of our children.
-
ConcernedBHparent 07/15/2011 3:37:00 AM
Talk about bias, of course everyone agrees, the century city metro station committee contains Century City Developers and Century City Chamber of Commerce people. There is no one from Beverly Hills on the committee. The issue is not where the station should be but where the route should be. The committee has totally ignored that issue.
-
07/15/2011 3:25:00 AM
*LA is none of those places, but people such as yourself are trying to
destroy the unique character of Los Angeles to make it into a horrid
nightmare. If you love Hong Kong, you move there, but leave our homes
alone. I admit I have truble believing that you find crime and excessive
density to be positive attributes. If I had wanted that life style, I would
have stayed in Manhattan. I did not ask NYC to change; I returned to LA.
We predicted that what you call growing up was nothing but a pretext for
Corruption and Incompetence and time has proven us correct. **The City is
broke while we shovel billions of dollars into the pockets of the
uber-wealthy and accelerate the slumification of LA.*
-
Fern 07/15/2011 3:07:00 AM
Excellent article. A great example of investigative reporting. Follow the money...it leads to politicians who will sell their votes to the highest bidder (donor). There is every good, logical, cost-effective, community-supporting reason to favor the Santa Monica Blvd. route. But Beverly Hills residents don't vote in L.A. City elections, and their reasoned arguments are ignored by Villaraigosa and the MTA staff, whose minds are made up, bought and paid for by Century City developers.
-
LAofAnaheim 07/15/2011 2:51:00 AM
No! This is common everyday people in LA wanting Constellation boulevard as the station. Draw a circle around Century City and the center is Constellation...not Santa Monica boulevard. Plus, developers would love a Santa Monica boulevard station because it opens the golf course for more development (open land). Don't believe this biased reporting.
-
LAofAnaheim 07/15/2011 2:49:00 AM
Are you kidding? The common person in Los Angeles wants the subway at Constellation. Go to the meetings. This isn't developers shouting for Constellation..this is workforce people. This article is slanted by a PR campaign that Beverly Hills has paid $350K to promote Santa Monica boulevard over Constellation to protect their high school. Please read the facts before passing judgement. This article and the LA Weekly are doing very biased reporting.
-
07/15/2011 2:28:00 AM
CIM's trying to look innocent during all of this. They must have paid someone off to get the plans through building & safety and planning departments.
This project is 10 years old, so the city must have been pressuring CIM to get something up and running. To add, the city approved them a loan May of last year. And all they have to show for it is a giant wall to cover up the residents' view of the Hollywood Hills.
-
Felisa 07/15/2011 1:45:00 AM
What a tragic commentary on our society, when big business takes precedence over the welfare and safety of our children. I support the city of Beverly Hills fighting this to the very end.
Please tell Zev, and Villaraigosa not to come to Beverly Hills asking for future campaign donations.
-
Brian David Goldberg, PhD 07/15/2011 12:43:00 AM
It is so easy to divert attention by blaming Beverly Hills and resorting to elementary school tactics of name calling but the facts are the facts and they can be found at www.centurycitysubway.org. This article and its author should be commended for taking on the powers that be and speaking the truth about the real motivation for the bait and switch from Santa Monica Blvd. to Constellation. It is the same old story, follow the money. Litigators will tell you that when they are aruging a case to first argue the law, when the law is not on your side, argue the facts, when the facts are not on your side, attack the person, in this case the supporters of Constellation attack the people of Beverly Hills becasue the law and the facts are not on their side.
-
Barry Alexander 07/15/2011 12:38:00 AM
Thank you for an exceptional, in depth, accurate, report on the misguided attempt by Century City developers to re-route the subway under Beverly Hills High School.
Barry Alexander
Beverly Hills Ca
-
John Mirisch 07/15/2011 12:10:00 AM
While there is nothing inherently common sensical about Constellation (indeed, Metros own facts would suggest the opposite), Mr. McDonald does an admirable job of exposing the politics behind development in Los Angeles, and only a new level of ostrich-style naivete could lead one to suggest that the alignment decision is apolitical. In fact, the Metro board consists entirely of politicians and political-apointees. The decision will be and is anything but apolitical. Unfortunately, the city and region has an unenviable history of development decisions which are almost entirely politically motivated.
While it's quite understandable that Los Angeles city and county politicians are evidently unconcerned with the ability of the Beverly Hills School District to best serve its schoolchildren, common sense dictates that the residents, City and School District of Beverly Hills do whatever they need to in order to protect one of their most valuable assets: their one and only high school.
-
John Mirisch 07/14/2011 11:59:00 PM
Not sure why you should take New York uptown blocks as the measure of all things. You might as well take crosstown blocks, and the distance in question in Century City is approximately the same as one NYC crosstown block. Or, locally, about the same as the distance on Grand between Temple and 1st in downtown LA.
While there have been irrational arguments on both sides (one frequent argument for Constellation is "Let's stick it to the BH NIMBY's," which considering that Beverly Hills has two stations within its borders is about as irrational as can be), the City of Beverly Hills and the schools have always made the argument that the less intrusive, less expensive route makes the most sense, as it also respects the LPA and the principles of local control. To suggest that the Santa Monica station is not viable -- indeed, a number of self-styled "transit advocates" have seriously tried to compare this with the Green Line missing LAX -- is simply rhetorical nonsense.
The fact that the district's consultants have pointed out the impacts on future campus development, and that the District is now responding to this information by making further arguments does not make the other arguments less credible. However, this latest realization that the ability to develop the site will be restricted forever in the event of tunneling gives an even stronger reason for the City and school to resist the Constellation alignment. Quite rightly, neither the City nor the District sees why the ability of the school district to serve future generations of children on a campus which is already undersized should be compromised, especially when there is another viable route. This is neither irrational nor unreasonable, particularly given the background of the decision-making process which Mr. McDonald has shed so much light on.
You suggest that McDonald's illumination of some of the ties between the decision-makers and the developers is a valid exercise, yet that it's premature to draw any conclusions since we don't have all the information. This is exactly one of McDonald's points (and one I've made previously) and calls into question the subsequent reports and FEIR: if the decision-makers have prejudged the matter and have a vested interest in the outcome, how can the "facts" which emerge be trusted? As I wrote on Huffington Post, there's politics and there's company politics, and the staff of Metro is not stupid. They know what their bosses want and there is every reason to suspect that they will try to deliver. This, of course, calls into question the entire process, and it is one of the reasons why in order to avoid being railroaded and in order to protect its interests Beverly Hills may be forced to resort to an array of various methods. It's most unfortunate, as most people in Beverly Hills, I believe, would like to support the subway extension and the 30-10 ("America Fast Forward") plan, but certainly not at the expense of sacrificing the City's one-and-only, highly valued high school.
-
Hmcmath 07/14/2011 10:04:00 PM
Let's not forget the piece entitled "Touchy MTA Defends Antonio Villaraigosa's $9-Billion Subway to the Sea Rip-Off, Slams L.A. Weekly For Alerting Public" published last September bore Mr. McDonald's name as well. Never mind the sensationalist tone, the current price tag is $5.3B NOT $9B...
Obviously Mr. McDonald and The Weekly have little credibility. But it should be noted that in addition to his poor journalistic habit of only quoting so-called "experts" that support his editorial POV, he fails to mention 2 key facts relevant to the story.
First, describing the distance in question as one or two blocks as has variously been done is misleading. It is actually just under a quarter mile which in Manhattan terms is actually 4-5 (uptown) blocks. Thus anyone seeking to enhance the pedestrian experience in CC would obviously choose the Constellation site. Not that it is necessarily the better site or will attract more ridership but the fact that there are many constituents (in addition to just JMB) that support the Constellation location for this reason is indisputable. Yes, LA is a pay to play town and residents have every right to be cynical of City Hall/mega-developer ties but that fact doesn't in itself negate the validity of a Constellation stop.
Secondly, Mr. McDonald fails to mention that the BHSD only trotted out the underground parking garage argument recently. When news first broke that Metro was seriously considering the Constellation stop there was no mention of an underground parking garage from BHSD but rather ridiculous grasping at straws arguments such as potential damage to the high school or possible terrorist threats. Parents were making absurd arguments that the project threatened their children's lives and the like. Under the tutelage of PR firms and legal counsel BHSD has gotten smarter now is trying to appear rational focusing the argument on impacts to future development plans. This omitted fact fact however seriously undermines the credibility of BHSD's current argument.
Mr. McDonald raises some potentially valid concerns about the ties between the Mayor, JMB, and the Metro board. But given that many of the facts that could determine which station is preferable are as yet indeterminate be it cost, ridership projections, earthquake fault risk, or whatever, this type of reportage does nothing to advance the debate in a rational and objective fashion.
Amazing how far the Weekly has strayed form its roots...
-
Patrick Range McDonald 07/14/2011 9:39:00 PM
Thanks for the input everyone. I look forward to seeing more discussion on the matter.
Take care,
Patrick Range McDonald,
LA Weekly
-
07/14/2011 9:19:00 PM
The biased statements, inaccuracies, and lies in this article are too numerous too count, but I tried:
1. "Century City boosters urge spending tens of millions of dollars on a Westside Subway stop on sleepy Constellation Boulevard, instead of at a long-discussed site on bustling Santa Monica Boulevard about two blocks away."
The only thing bustling about the Santa Monica blvd site is its high speed through traffic. Otherwise, it borders a golf course. Hardly the best spot for a subway station. On the other hand, the Constellation/Avenue of the Stars site in the heart of Century City IS the right spot for the station.
McDonald is right though, the Santa Monica Blvd site WAS long discussed...as was the Constellation/Avenue of the Stars location. The MTA always floated both options. We won't even know which one' they'll recommend until they finish their report.
2. "Bursk, politically savvy if reserved, declares that a station "in the heart of Century City" — a marketing phrase she coined to promote building the subway stop at Constellation Boulevard..."
So...you're saying that Constellation/AotS ISN'T in the heart of Century City? And let me guess: The Santa Monica Blvd site (along side the golf course) is?
3. "Los Angeles leaders recently dropped the Subway to the Sea name in favor of the official Metro name, the "Westside Subway" extension, because the line has no serious prospects of reaching the ocean."
The Westside Subway extension was always known as the Westside Subway extension, and it was always intended to stop at Westwood. That's the alignment that was funded under Measure R, which more than 2/3 of voters voted for. Eventually, we all hope that the line will be extended to Santa Monica, but that's just conjecture at this point. Don't get it twisted.
4. "Metro conceded in a draft Environmental Impact Report that the Westside Subway won't cut congestion even slightly in the city or the region."
You're absolutely right. But the point of a mass transit system isn't to reduce traffic, its to give riders option. I could care less what traffic on the surface is like when I'm being whisked under it at 60mph.
Look at NYC. They have FAR worse traffic than LA. Its absolutely crushing. But you never hear about it because their subway system is so fantastic. In other words, NYC's sprawling subway didn't cure traffic. But it gives residents another option. Likewise, the Purple line extension won't cure LA's traffic ills. But it WILL give people a way to get from Westwood to Downtown and all points between far faster than driving, and travel times aren't held hostage to the unpredictable whims of the traffic gods.
5. "Plainspoken and direct, Korbatov is furious about the potential fate facing Beverly Hills High, where the district has extensive plans for underground construction on district land — land that would be gobbled up by a Metro tunnel if the subway is routed onto Constellation Boulevard."
The exppansion Karbatov is referring to is Beverly Hills High's plan to build an underground parking garage. I'll just let the irony of that sink in a bit.
6. "Century City News publisher Mike Carlin might be describing a crime syndicate when he declares of Beverly Hills Unified: 'Every time these guys do something, they deal from the bottom of the deck.' He slams the district's website, centurycitysubway.org, as looking 'like it's the official website for Century City, and that's the farthest thing from the truth. They're slimy.'"
Have to agree with Mike Carlin on that one. Its obvious that the site is intended to look like the official Century City website in order to make is seem like Century City supports the Santa Monica Blvd station. Its propeganda, plain and simple. And who would expect anythign less? The site was designed and built by public relations firm Sitrick & Company, hired by Beverly Hills School District with district funds. I wonder how many teachers or school supplies they could have paid for with the amount Sitrick & Co. charged?
7. "And they are pouring significant resources into fighting the much richer, bigger land barons of Century City."
"Land barons"? Seriously? I love how you're painting this as a war between the little guy (aka Beverly Hills School District) and the evil developers. How about the couple million of us transit users that just want to be able to ride the subway to Century City and pop out in the heart of things instead of at a golf course? We're all shills for the evil developers eh? Every one of us on their payroll? Sigh...I love a good conspiracy theory.
8. "The parking lot probably would be impossible to construct and, Korbatov argues, government regulations could prohibit or jack up construction costs by millions of dollars if the school district wants to build on the school land topping the tunnel."
"Probably". "Could". I love BHUSD is fighting against a rail project that the entire county stands to benefit from because they're worried that they "might" not be able to build their underground parking structure. Its just conjecture at this point! Instead of trying to divert the entire line, why don't they work together with MTA to find a solution? I'm sure there's somewhere on their grounds where they can find a spot to house the hundreds of additional cars that their students absolutely must drive to school.
Wow...I haven't even reached the end of page 1. I need a breather.
-
07/14/2011 9:04:00 PM
"18 minutes if they live inside the stinking subway." - wow..so 150,000 people a day using the Red Line..and that's your impression? Stinking subway? Whatever
No, rick, I'm not saying you should move, but learn to adapt. LA has grown up over the last 20 years. LA is moving into a CITY and is in comparison with Hong Kong, London, New York, etc... all cities with high crime dramas, congestion, traffic, pedestrian actvity, development, etc... If you want the anti- of all that.....those are the small cities that LA is NOT comparable against.
-
07/14/2011 8:46:00 PM
@John. .. you make it sound like we're being unreasonable with 1 block. It's not that. If you took a map of Century City and drew a circle around it, you would see that the center is Constellation boulevard. Other great transit cities put stations in the center (even LA with Hollywood/Highland and 7th street station). You make transit convenient to the thousands of potential users. What if Metro came to Beverly Hills and said "we need to move the Wilshire/Rodeo station to Wilshire/Rexford....how would you feel about that? Does that make sense? It's still surrounded by buildings.....but now people will just have to walk a little longer to the main attraction - Rodeo (which is your heart and soul of Beverly Hills). Does that make sense? We cannot speak for all cities, but we know that people take mass transit when its convenient. The convenience to Beverly Hills is Wilshire/Rodeo and the convenience to Century City is Constellation. You cannot dispute that.
-
07/14/2011 8:38:00 PM
What? How did Antonio support Constellation over Santa Monica? Where was that EVER noted? This article is very biased and factually incorrect on all accounts. Antonio supported the $4.1 billion to build the subway (which 68% of LA county voted YES on), but he did not personally pick the route. That's what traffic engineers, seismologists are for. It's not for a PR compaign to pick a route. It was never designated by a single politican. Reasonable, rationale Angelenos have come out in force at meetings to say they prefer Constellation to Santa Monica. This is not about developers v. Beverly Hills. This is common sense, rationale, reasonable Angelenos v. Beverly Hills.
-
Brett Hampton 07/14/2011 8:01:00 PM
Villaraigosa made a promise (for an "unusually speedy and cost-efficient completion of the $5.3 million Purple Line") and now appears to have broken it (by supporting the station stop asked for by two of his larger campaign contributors)? Add another broken promise to a political career so crammed full of them that it's a surprise anyone trusts him anymore. He couldn't be any more of a "Two Face" if his name was Harvey Dent.
-
John Mirisch 07/14/2011 7:38:00 PM
The top paragraph is a direct quotation from the article. You have a beef, take it up with Patrick Range McDonald for having used the "wrong" experts. Perhaps you also have a problem with Bob Stern at the Center for Governmental Studies?
However, having lived, worked and used the local subways and public transportation systems on a daily basis in 5 cities, including Paris, I can tell you from first-hand experience that the argument that it's somehow "crucial" to move the subway one block (not two, as stated in the article) would probably be considered ridiculous in any of those cities, especially if the promoted station cost $60+ million more. And, by the way, in all of those cities, it would be a matter of course and good planning to design each subway station with multiple portals, rather than just a single entrance.
Most of my post above is devoted to answering LA of Anaheim's question as to whether Paris, etc. would have an issue with tunneling under a school. And given the specifics of this situation here, I give several reasons why the answer would be "Oui."
-
07/14/2011 7:19:00 PM
Did you really just call Wendell Cox a "mass transit expert"? That's rich. He does research for conservative think tanks like Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation. He's made a career out of promoting automobile use and decrying the evils of public transportation. Basically, he's the sworn enemy of real mass transit experts.
You may want to choose better sources to support your argument.
-
07/14/2011 7:13:00 PM
What a biased, PoS article. I'd expect nothing less from Patrick Range McDonald, Westside subway hater extraordinaire.
-
07/14/2011 7:10:00 PM
*From Joel Kotkin, The Next Big Boom Towns in the US, July 6, 2011,
discussing that LA is #47*:
*Sadly, several of the nation’s premier economic regions sit toward the
bottom of the list, notably former boom town Los Angeles (No. 47). Los
Angeles’ once huge and vibrant industrial sector has shrunk rapidly, in
large part the consequence of ever-tightening regulatory burdens. Its once
magnetic appeal to educated migrants faded and families are fleeing from
persistently high housing prices, poor educational choices and weak
employment opportunities. Los Angeles lost over 180,000 children 5 to 17,
the largest such drop in the nation.*
*In 1993, the City of LA predicted this downfall unless the City halted it
plans for mega-density and concomitant follies like subways. Riordan, the
uber pro big business mayor, deep-sixed the 1993 Telecommuting Study and
just as predicted, LA densified and constructed a subway, and noise dived
into a steep decline. LA is now 47 and head south.*
-
07/14/2011 7:01:00 PM
*Excuse me? We should move? Are you totally insane? This is our city. If
you do not like Los Angeles, then YOU move to one of those cities that you
love so much. One of my goals is to have a Grand Jury put all these crooks
in prison.** I know LA is a corrupt Pay to Play town, but things can
change. Ask Duke Cunningham.
18 minutes if they live inside the stinking subway.
*
-
07/14/2011 6:42:00 PM
In reading this article I'm afraid that I do not find it to be either fair or balanced. Once a reporter uses terms like "boondoggle" or "scheme", as this reporter did, then an obvious bias is showing through. Once terms like these are used, not as quotes from people interviewed but by the writer themselves then an article ceases to be an article and becomes an opinion piece.
-
John Mirisch 07/14/2011 6:00:00 PM
The actual quote from the article is: The idea that it's crucial to move the subway stop two blocks, to the foot of Century City's skyscrapers, is seen by some as a symbol of L.A.'s leadership woes. "If this was New York, London, or Paris," says mass transit expert Wendell Cox, "that argument would be laughable."
None of those cities might laugh at balking at tunneling under a public high school (something Metro has never done) if the circumstances were similar to those in Beverly Hills:
1) The city only has one high school campus to serve all present and future needs.
2) The campus is only approximately 25 acres. If it were built under current CDE standards, the site would need to almost double its footprint.
3) Subway tunnels under the high school would restrict not only present campus modernization plans, but all future development plans in perpetuity.
4) The subway tunnels could directly impact the ability of the school district to serve the future needs of Beverly Hills schoolchildren.
5) There are no other 50 acres in Beverly Hills to which the high school could be relocated should Metro choose to use eminent domain to acquire the high school site (such efforts may be legally questionable in any event).
6) There is a viable option one block away, which according to current information provided by Metro, actually shows higher ridership.
Would any of those cities hesitate to protect their only high school under similar circumstances? My guess is that they wouldn't hesitate. This whole debate might not be an issue, because the political realities may be different in those cities.
With his extensive research, Patrick Range McDonald has done the entire region a service by shedding light on the entire process. Any attempt to suggest that he was paid to write this article smacks of more than sour grapes and interested motives -- or perhaps you think that Bob Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies, who is quoted in the article, is also on Beverly Hills's payroll?
The Beverly Hills community will rightly do whatever we can to protect one of our most prized assets: our only High School. You can shout "NIMBY" all you want (despite the fact that Beverly Hills will have two stations within our borders, not exactly the definition of "NIMBY"), but this is a community which values public education and we will do whatever we can to allow our School District to achieve their mission of academic excellence for the current and future generations.
-
07/14/2011 5:47:00 PM
Wow, talk about biased reporting. The writer doesn't even hide the fact that they're siding with the BH snobs.
-
07/14/2011 5:36:00 PM
The station at Santa Monica Blvd on the north side of Century City makes darn little sense. Everything to the north is golf course, and I seriously doubt many riders will be coming from or to there. The Constellation location has office buildings on three side and the Westfield shopping mall a block away, surely not too far for people to walk with their Louis Vuitton bags carrying their Tiffany sparkles. It is also across the street from the Century Plaza Hotel, which would make it easier for the maids and bellboys to get to work without having to (shudder) drive through Beverly Hills.
-
07/14/2011 5:30:00 PM
There is another option. Don't go through Beverly Hills at all. The route could be amended to maintain a nearly straight alignment from Wilshire and Fairfax to Westwood.
This Alternative Alignment would be about 7.75 mi long, and would be laid out as follows:
From Wilshire/Fairfax station, drop down to a station at Olympic/La Cienega (replacing the Wilshire/La Cienega station) and then west to an Olympic/Beverly station (replacing the Wilshire/Rodeo station), the west to the Constellation/Avenue of the Stars station and finally to the Westwood station.
This would avoid the Beverly Hills High School and the slant drilling of their oil well would be protected, and would create new development opportunities along Olympic (which could use the additional economic boost, while BH, frankly, neither needs nor seems to want it). The rail tracks would be very nearly straight, which makes for faster speeds between stations, and less wear and tear on the track and wheels (new 'tires' made out of steel cost big money), and a lot less noise (have you ever measured the noise in subways?).
-
07/14/2011 5:29:00 PM
There never was a Metro "complete turnaround from its long held intent" to put the station at Santa Monica. It was just one of the options available, and a bad one. Constellation is much better, and the people from Beverly Hills and the BHUSD that are suing Metro are destroying my city. The subway is NOT going to "wipe out" Beverly Hills, like the Beverly Hills Freeway surely would have, but support it. Ask the people in Hollywood how they fared with the subway. Sure, there was years of suffering. But in the end, it was worth it. Hollywood and Highland, large numbers of new apartment buildings, the W Hotel, etc. etc. etc. Even a Trader Joe's. Redevelopment the likes of which would have NEVER happened without the Red Line. You don't have to go to some faraway city to see that solid proof, just drive 10 miles up the road.
-
07/14/2011 5:28:00 PM
If people want areas of no traffic........they should consider moving to Bismarck or something. Cities of high traffic (London, New York, Paris, Moscow, Rome, etc...) is what LA should be like....with better alternative transporation. LA is a world-class city and SHOULD have traffic and development. If you want a bedroom community, LA is not the place anymore. We have grown up.
You think the people who take the Red Line in Hollywood and Downtown LA are upset it only takes 18 minutes to travel between the two districts 20 hours a day?
-
07/14/2011 5:24:00 PM
London, New York, Paris, etc... would laugh at the fact that Beverly Hills will not allow tunneling under its high school...........which those aforementioned cities have subways running under THEIR high schools. So does Beverly Hills think its elist?
Also....Santa Monica boulevard in Century City sits next to a massive golf course. Is that the place for a subway station? Or in an area surrounded by office buildings? Walk around Century City. This article is obviously not good journalism...the facts are not here at all. It's part of the Beverly Hills $350K PR campaign.
-
07/14/2011 4:46:00 PM
*Hollywood has gone into a significant decline since the subway and the CRA
**construction craze began about 10 years ago. While councilmen like
Garcetti consistently lied and said the population was expanding and life
was becoming better, people who lived in Hollywood and nearby Los **Feliz,
The Oaks, Hollywood Grove knew that the opposite was occurring.
**
The 2010 US census showed up Garcetti's lies. Not only was Hollywood a big
loser in population, there was a significant decrease in the SES status of
Hollywoodians. In other words, we were losing the more talented and the
better educated. For years, people had complained about the slumification
which the subway and the CRA were bringing to Hollywood. They pointed out
that the substandard CRA housing and the deteriorating infrastructure were
attracting "Default Tenants," i.e. people who could not afford to live
elsewhere.
The crime rate and gang activity have greatly increase. The city had to
obtain Gang Injunctions which extended north of Franklin. Nonetheless,
criminal activity north of Franklin and into the hills has been
significant. The LAPD has been superb!!! We could not ask for a more
helpful, friendly and responsive police department. On the other hand,
there is no rational reason for the the crime to have increases so that our
R-1 neighborhoods require such constant police assistance.
Back in 1915 the City of Los Angeles published its transportation study
discussing all phases of transportation including subways. LA studied the
transportation in other cities around the world. It was a highly
professional study. The garbage which the city foists off on the citizenry
today merits criminal prosecution in comparison. Today the City's reports
are packaged lies to support the greed of developers. In 1915 the City
noted the mathematics of subways and pointed out that people do not walk
more than 1/2 mile to reach a subway.
The 1915 study indicated that when a city's radius was 5 miles, it was
exceeding the maximum mathematical limit for a subway. Small cities can
support subways and linear cities like Manhattan can support subways. Even
in 1915, almost every city in the world had to subsidize it subways. Today,
the subways in LA take people almost nowhere. If one lives in Hollywood,
they can go to a very small section of the SF Valley and downtown. The time
it takes the subway is unacceptable. I tried the subway and by the time, I
reached the station by the courthouse, it had already taken me 3 times as
long as if I had driven. It was dirty, noisy and uncomfortable -- and it
cost more than if I had driven and parked. Thus, even within the 1/2 mile
radius, the subway is a bad choice. The subway is also socially regressive
as it ridership are the poor, and the extra time it takes to walk to and
from the subway and the time of the ride requires poor people to devote a
significantly greater amount of their time to their trips.
Subways' inherent limitations make them socially regressive. A secretary
who works downtown cannot stop to do grocery shopping or pick up the
cleaning when she is stuck on the subway. The poor can not take advantage
of buying in bulk. Just try to use the subway between Costco on Los Feliz
and El Centro in Hollywood.
Furthermore, the 1915 Study noted that Los Angeles unlike Philadelphia and
other eastern cities had extensive R-1 neighborhoods -- and that the
beautiful R-1 areas were essential to making Los Angeles a paradise. Due to
the financial burden operating subway places on a city, they destroy R-1
areas. Unless R-1 areas are razed for high rises, the city lacks the
population density to pay for a subway (ca. 60,000 ppl sq mi).
Some greedy developers nonetheless insisted on constructing a subway and by
1925, it was flat broke and closed. It is possible (hopeful) a similar fate
awaits the Hollywood subway. The last thing we need is another union with a
strangle hold on another part of the economy.
For almost 100 years, the mathematics of subways have been well known in Los
Angeles. Crooked city councilmen promote subways because their political
cronies own the construction companies who build the subways. Other
millionaire and billionaire backers are the real estate speculators who
build the mixed-use high rises with public funds. (see LA Weekly article re
JMB and its proposed 37 skyscraper in Century City if it can tunnel under
Bev Hills HS for a station at Constellation Blvd.) They argue that the
subway, which was so desperately need to handle a fictitious demand for the
subways, cannot support itself as there are not enough people who will ride
the subway. The general solution is the slumification along all the subway
routes. Look at the construction planned with the Subway to the Sea. It had
about 225 linear miles of additional mixed-us high rise construction crammed
within 1/4 radius of the subway stations
Slumification allows Garcetti, Tony V, Oily Wesson, Fat Tommy to hand out
over $1.5 billions dollars of CRA moolah to destroy stable neighborhoods in
order to construct high rises. As we have seen, in Hollywood this ploy has
resulted in people exiting Hollywood. It is vital to Garcetti, LaBonge, etc.
to make certain Hollywood becomes a slum because poor people are the target
population for subways. Garcetti and LaBonge refused to let the kids in
Hollywood have a park, but it was OK to give billionaire "goniff gadol" Eli
Broad $52 million for a parking lot next to his art museum. A park is
needed infra-structure attract families. Decent fire services are also
essential for home values. Garcetti and LaBonge cut the size of the new
Hollywood FS 82 by 75%. The roads are horrible and the traffic is a
nightmare. A deteriorating infra-structure is vital to lowering the SES
status of Hollywood.
Without parks, with decreasing fire protection, with less libraries, worse
traffic, atrocious schools (Prop 22) Hollywood is left with Default
Tenants. Contrary to what most people believe, the slumification of
Hollywood was not an accident, and the subway played a key role.*
-
Ken Goldman 07/14/2011 3:57:00 PM
In these days of minute-to-minute journalism and "I gotta be the first to break the story" journalism, it is refreshing to read a well-researched and thorough article. Instead of being "slanted" as one of the commenters below opines, perhaps--just perhaps--the author did his research and then formed an objective opinion about the causes of Metro's complete turnaround from its long-held intent to put the Century City station at Santa Monica. It seems obvious that this whole affair is not about having people walk ONE BLOCK from Santa Monica Blvd to Constellation (people in NYC, SF, DC, London and every other major city would laugh at the thought of all this holler over people actually having to walk ONE BLOCK); as the author points out, its all about the Century City developers spending hundreded of thousands of dollars to entice Metro to spend $60 Million more to divert the subway to their doorstep to increase their property values. Well written and well-research journalism.
-
LAofAnaheim 07/14/2011 3:40:00 PM
Do you ever ride subways in London, New York, Paris, Chicago, Boston, Philly? You must absolutely hate all that convenience. Yes, subways do being development, but it's smart development and focused on the center of the city. The existing Red and Purple Lines have brought higher densities and more pedestrians into Hollywood, Koreatown, and downtown since it's opening. Look at how more energetic those areas are than they were 20 Yeats ago. Remember how downtown use to be avoided pre - 1999?
-
LAofAnaheim 07/14/2011 3:33:00 PM
Worst written article ever. Very slanted against L.A. 1) Measure R will not send the subway to Santa Monica but to Westside, future funding could move it westward. To say there is a serious lack to move west is far from truth, look at Metro's AA studies. 2) Subways provide alternatives to road, it never reduces traffic. Why is there still traffic on the 101 freeway with the Red Line? Or traffic in New York, London, Paris, etc....? It proves an alternative to the road. 3) To call Santa Monica / Ave of Stats more "bustling" than Constellation is beyond ridiculous. Obviously, you are nit looking at pedestrian counts, building entrances, etc....but see a 10 lane road, which is horrible for transit corridors (see Green Line) 4) Beverly Hills was not blind-sided, Metro hadn't completed their Alternatives study to figure out routing. You are looking at at a hypothetical map in the 80s to pass inaccuracy that Metro initially chose Santa Monica blvd. This is just insinuating hate and anger ion a project. How much did BH pay for this article?
-
CarltonGlub 07/14/2011 3:32:00 PM
God forbid you should mention the fault line under Santa Monica Boulevard that a SMB station would be sitting on top of. Or that a supermajority of 68% of LA County voters backed Measure R and all the projects that it is legally obligated to fund. Or god forbid you should find someone other than noted anti-rail fanatics Wendel Cox and Tom Rubin to interview. Or talk to any disinterested transit advocates who overwhelmingly support Constellation, because it makes no sense to put a $100 million station next to a GOLF COURSE.
It's sad to see the LA Weekly carrying Beverly Hills' water, instead of fighting for the workers and students who ride transit throughout Wilshire every day to the tune of 80,000 boardings.
-
CarltonGlub 07/14/2011 2:52:00 PM
It's not Metro's fault that politicians can't keep their mouths shut about "traffic reduction."
If you know anything about transit, you know that's not the point of the wilshire subway. The point is that it's te ONLY way to move 100,000 through the Wilshire corridor -- the busiest east Manhattan -- from Westwood to Downtown in 20 minutes!
-
Sam 07/14/2011 7:49:00 AM
So the LA Weekly is now a hired shill for the city of Beverly Hills? You really expect us to believe that? Seems the article was filled with a lot of facts and information about campaign donations. Follow the money...
If you really believe that the LA Weekly was paid to slant their article, your sense of reality might be a bit askew and you probably should be careful about watching the following YouTube video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7Xp6Z0NZYw
-
07/14/2011 7:08:00 AM
Since Metro admits that this multi-billion dollar subway will not reduce traffic, what is the need? Would voters have passed R if they had been told, "We will raise your sales tax to build a freeway but there won't be any improvement in LA's traffic nightmare?" I doubt it very much. So why raises taxes if the subway won't improve traffic?
If voters had been told, "You should increase sales taxes so that cronies of the politicos can have their real estate values increase," it is unlikely that R would have passed.
Voters do not understand that subways are not about improving transportation. Subways are justification for real estate speculators to build more mega-skyscrapers like JMB's new 37 story tower. Each of the subway stops from Vermont to the VA will have a 1/4 mile radius of new high rise projects. Thus, each stop is a hub for billions of construction dollars. If LA had its way, all of the Los Angeles would have become one gigantic Community Redevelopment Agency which could have used Kelo eminent domain to take the desired properties and give it to goniffs so they could build their mixed-used high rise projects. Gov. Schwarzenegger killed those plans when he vetoed AB 2531. Like the monster in a Hollywood horror film, CRA/LA is about to come back to life under AB 1x 27.
Beverly Hills is far smarter than LA. Bev Hill looks out for its citizens (my office is in Beverly Hills at Doheny and Wilshire). The subway will not stop at Doheny. Why? The reason strikes me as obvious. Bev Hills does want to destroy all homes on Oakhurst, Palm, etc. Thus, there will be no land available for a 1/4 mile radius of high rises. Thus, no real estate speculator will make billions of dollars.
Los Angeles is a Pay to Play town where money buys everything. Mayors are bought, judges are bought, city councilmen are bought, supervisors, building inspectors, EIR's, etc. Corruption pays well. Diogenes' search would be fruitless in LA.
-
07/14/2011 6:30:00 AM
The author of this article sounds like just another PR person hired by Beverly Hills. To say that only big Century City developers care about a station at Constellation is a ridiculous spin. Communities adjacent to Santa Monica Blvd. watched that street torn up for 5 years when it became a huge divided parkway project. BH wants the station on SM Blvd. There is nothing in this slanted article that mentions the fact that SM Blvd. will be torn up again for at least another 5 yrs of construction, messing with already horrible traffic. BH wants the subway station next to a golf course rather than in the middle of Century City where thousands of commuters go to jobs every day. thousands of
Fox employees would have to walk for blocks, waiting for long traffic lights. Are we to be concerned because BH Unified School District contemplates underground parking for its school? I was interviewed by this reporter, sent him segments from the EIR backing up facts. None of the solid information was used because this guy was seriously given instructions to advocate for BH and paint everybody else as people on the take. What a sleazy article!
-
Emaail 07/14/2011 4:15:00 AM
its philip friedl not fried
