|
Post by gatewaygent on Apr 5, 2012 17:44:24 GMT -8
So Beverly Hills commissioned a study that supports Metro's decision and rather than step back with what little dignity they have left, they've decided to seek legal advice. Why do I get the feeling that Metro is going to be footing the bill for Beverly Hills High School's underground parking garage in exchange for the "privilege" of drilling under the school without legal obstruction?
|
|
|
Post by tobias087 on Apr 5, 2012 19:33:01 GMT -8
Why avoid legal challenges? Every study has supported this option, and metro has been very careful not to jump to conclusions. This will probably be a home-run for metro's legal team, which Beverly Hills will end up paying for.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 6, 2012 2:23:12 GMT -8
Yeah, this BH funded report was a HUGE blow for the NIMBYs.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Apr 8, 2012 18:21:54 GMT -8
I'm not sure, but I suppose it depends upon which is the cheaper, quicker option for Metro: 1) BH loses lawsuit, appeals to higher court. Rinse and repeat. 2) Settle, buy them a parking structure, and BH is legally required to shut up, at least as far as the high school is concerned. Even if its not cheaper, it would be quicker.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 9, 2012 1:41:14 GMT -8
I'm not sure, but I suppose it depends upon which is the cheaper, quicker option for Metro: 1) BH loses lawsuit, appeals to higher court. Rinse and repeat. 2) Settle, buy them a parking structure, and BH is legally required to shut up, at least as far as the high school is concerned. Even if its not cheaper, it would be quicker. It would be quicker for now, but might set a precedent where other institutions try the same thing. Of course, that happens even now (see the settlement over the gold line maintenance yard). Expected costs if metro pursues a lawsuit: probability of metro winning * probability of BH not paying the legal fees if Metro wins * expected legal costs + probably of metro losing * (expected legal costs + planning and construction costs of a realigned route + costs resulting from lower ridership) Expected costs if metro settles: Settlement costs + increased probability of being in the same situation again in the future * cost of future lawsuits Either way, it totally sucks. BH seems to be full of irrational jerks. I would have thought rich people would have gotten rich from being rational jerks, but I can't really see what they have to gain from making Metro re-route, unless they want to choke off access to Century City or something.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Apr 11, 2012 8:45:53 GMT -8
centurycity.patch.com/articles/letter-to-the-editor-what-will-happen-to-the-westside-if-the-subway-never-comesLetter submitted by Carol Spencer, a Westwood resident and member of the Westwood Community Council.LETTER TO THE EDITOREach time I read yet another alarming headline in the Beverly Hills Patch or the Beverly Hills Courier, I wonder if the entire dream of a Subway to the Sea will only remain a dream. Beverly Hills Councilmembers Bosse and Mirisch have stamped their collective feet and said there will be no tunneling under all of Beverly Hills if Metro insists on a tunnel under their high school. Is this what their business community really wants? Haven’t they already met to choose designs for the stations at La Cienega and Rodeo? What will happen to the entire Westside of the City of Los Angeles without the subway? Will those living and working west of Beverly Hills lose the dream of taking the subway to Disney Hall or Staples Center? So much for lawyers getting to court on the subway rather than driving through traffic. So much for the tens of thousands of employees who were looking forward to a quicker way to get to and from their jobs. Will cut-thru traffic so clog the city streets affecting local merchants' ability to thrive? Will tourists and shoppers alike stay away from the famous Rodeo Drive and nearby department and other shops in Beverly Hills because they cannot easily get there? Will Beverly Hills become a ‘Yesterday Venue’ with competition taking over that is easy to reach? Will the rest of the world bypass Beverly Hills? Will the workers west of Beverly Hills move closer to their jobs in order to get to work on time? This attitude of only having concern for one’s private corner of the world harms everyone. When even their own experts say it is safe to tunnel under the school, it is still not enough. It’s like a child so worked up in his tantrum that he can no longer see anything but the tantrum itself. And the tantrum is fed hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep going until the populace forgets why they’re even worked up. Has anyone considered the future of Beverly Hills and the Westside of Los Angeles as well as Santa Monica if the Subway to the Sea becomes mired in legalities and ceases to exist? -- Carol Spencer, resident of Westwood
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Apr 12, 2012 17:29:33 GMT -8
Slapnuts......Henry Waxman is getting involved again. This is bad bad news. He was the guy who wrote legislation to ban tunneling in LA. LA is f'd if this guy stops tunneling again. Can we stage a protest against Beverly Hills? This is becoming ludicrous. Even their own funded studies suggest tunneling is safe. blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/04/westside_subway_beverly_hills_3.php
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 12, 2012 23:13:35 GMT -8
Slapnuts......Henry Waxman is getting involved again. This is bad bad news. He was the guy who wrote legislation to ban tunneling in LA. LA is f'd if this guy stops tunneling again. Can we stage a protest against Beverly Hills? This is becoming ludicrous. Even their own funded studies suggest tunneling is safe. blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/04/westside_subway_beverly_hills_3.phpFrom what Waxman wrote, it sounds like he knows Metro is being reasonable, but is trying to phrase things in a way that allows Metro to proceed but shows that he's on the side of his constituents. Let's see if he in fact interferes going forward. Hopefully with this "warning shot across the bow" Metro will coordinate with him to avoid his being put in a political situation where he feels he has to step in with drastic action later on.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on Apr 13, 2012 13:36:10 GMT -8
This is the story of the little boy that wanted to play baseball. But when the boys didn't want to make him captain of either team, he had a fit. Then he took his baseball, bat, and glove and whined all the way home. But now the uptight, goody-two-shoes mother is getting involved.
So they've commissioned new studies? They didn't like what the first one said so now they're paying for another study to say what they want it to say instead? This is so stupid!
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 13, 2012 14:26:14 GMT -8
Waxman interferes at his own political peril. The political landscape is FAR more supportive of rail than it was in the nineties, even in Beverly Hills.
All Metro needs to do is crush BHUSD by running countless commercials and mailing letters to BH residents explaining in a nutshell why tunneling under Beverly Hills High School is the safest, and ultimately, the most cost-effective option, while also mentioning that BHUSD has absolutely NO reason whatsoever to oppose subway tunneling but support oil extraction underneath it. Tell them that their own taxpayer money is funding the opposition and remind them that Beverly Hills' own funded studies (also with BH tax dollars) support the findings of Metro's studies.
|
|
|
Post by simonla on Apr 14, 2012 9:09:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Apr 14, 2012 11:27:26 GMT -8
We need to start contacting Waxman ASAP. We don't want a repeat of the 1990s due to these incoherent/unintelligent people in Beverly Hills using a paid PR firm (centurycitysubway.org) to get to Waxman and other officials and misquoting their own studies. Their own studies even suggest Constellation is safer than Santa Monica boulevard. This is absolute BS.
What's Waxman's contact information? Please post. I'm struggling to find it on the Internet.
|
|
|
Post by simonla on Apr 14, 2012 12:08:28 GMT -8
Henry Waxman:
Washington, DC Office
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3976
Fax: (202) 225-4099
Los Angeles Office
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
Phone: (310) 652-3095
Fax: (323) 655-0502
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Apr 14, 2012 18:06:59 GMT -8
I've seen phone and fax numbers everywhere for Waxman, but c'mon..we're in 2012, where's his e-mail address?
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 14, 2012 23:17:19 GMT -8
I've seen phone and fax numbers everywhere for Waxman, but c'mon..we're in 2012, where's his e-mail address? You have to go through an online form, and you have to live in his district. Go to this webpage: waxman.house.gov/ and click contact->email. Just follow the instructions on the page.
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on Apr 16, 2012 10:01:29 GMT -8
Metro Offers Carrot To Beverly Hills, But Dirt-Eating Tunnel Machines AwaitPosted Friday, April 13, 2012-6:12 PM After a repeated pattern of lies and rebuffs toward the city of Beverly Hills, Metro pledged Friday to examine a new alternative to the contentious Constellation subway station that has raised the ire of the community. Metro said it will now consider an elevated subway station at Santa Monica Boulevard and Century Park East, according to Councilman Barry Brucker, who was among four city representatives at what he called “a very frustrating meeting” put on by Metro at Los Angeles City Hall for elected officials on the Final EIS/EIR for the Westside Subway Extension. Also in attendance from the city were City Manager Jeff Kolin, Public Works Director Dave Gustavson and Deputy Director of Transportation Aaron Kunz. “I will hold them to it,” he said. “I said, this community feels very frustrated that within a tenth of a mile...our reports indicate there's no active fault line...so Santa Monica could be an option.” However, Metro's repeated history of ignoring the city's findings – such as its 44-page slight and insult on Tuesday to professional colleagues Exponent, the environmental consulting firm hired by the city – makes it hard to know for certain what Metro's next move will be. Metro continues to refuse to extend its deadline to ensure accuracy of its calculations and information and is charging forward to present staff recommendations to the Metro Board of Directors on April 26. At press time, it's unknown whether the city council will be sending another letter to Metro to request a delay. www.bhcourier.com/article/Local/Local/Metro_Offers_Carrot_To_Beverly_Hills_But_Dirt-Eating_Tunnel_Machines_Await/87272
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Apr 16, 2012 10:49:39 GMT -8
No. Just no.
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on Apr 16, 2012 11:27:26 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on Apr 16, 2012 12:39:18 GMT -8
It would serve Beverly Hills right if the MTA had an alternative that carved an open trench along the ROW to run the HRT trains. And it would only be fitting if it blocked through traffic on the majority of their streets. I guess it is true: the whims of the wealthy outweigh the pragmatic needs of the poor.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 16, 2012 12:59:14 GMT -8
It would serve Beverly Hills right if the MTA had an alternative that carved an open trench along the ROW to run the HRT trains. And it would only be fitting if it blocked through traffic on the majority of their streets. I guess it is true: the whims of the wealthy outweigh the pragmatic needs of the poor. I expect many of the people that would be taking the train around there would in fact be reasonably wealthy people who work in Century City and Westwood. And there would be a lovely view of the golf course from an aerial station. I hope Metro doesn't screw this one up, but after seeing the VA station and the plans for the 405 line, I don't have much faith in them. Hopefully they're just doing what's necessary to avoid a lawsuit and they'll still be able to conclude that an underground station in the heart of Century City is the best option, which we all know it is.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Apr 16, 2012 15:12:33 GMT -8
It would serve Beverly Hills right if the MTA had an alternative that carved an open trench along the ROW to run the HRT trains. And it would only be fitting if it blocked through traffic on the majority of their streets. I guess it is true: the whims of the wealthy outweigh the pragmatic needs of the poor. I expect many of the people that would be taking the train around there would in fact be reasonably wealthy people who work in Century City and Westwood. And there would be a lovely view of the golf course from an aerial station. I hope Metro doesn't screw this one up, but after seeing the VA station and the plans for the 405 line, I don't have much faith in them. Hopefully they're just doing what's necessary to avoid a lawsuit and they'll still be able to conclude that an underground station in the heart of Century City is the best option, which we all know it is. The problem is there is this "spin machine" called centurycitysubway.org, which is paid $400K from BHUSD to prevent tunneling under BHHS. Centurycitysubway.org has gotten to the heads of scared parents by using fear/mistruths. That's the root of the problem. How do we combat this?
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on Apr 16, 2012 16:36:20 GMT -8
Isn't what they're doing libel? Can't they be sued for that; it's total misrepresentation. They're creating frenzy and chaos that could potentially lead to bullying, assault, trampling, etc.!
I don't see the wealthy habitually using the subway if at all. They can afford to continue filling the tanks of their cars/limos and not think twice about it. Their hopes and goals are probably more in line with taking non-resident cars and traffic off their streets so they can continue driving unobstructed. The Beverly Hills mind-set is not too far from that of Cheviot Hills, except Beverly Hills has lots of resources to boast of.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Apr 17, 2012 5:49:46 GMT -8
Yesterday I read, and it must be false, that Metro is considering an above ground station in the area...any truth to this rumor?
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 17, 2012 7:05:25 GMT -8
Yesterday I read, and it must be false, that Metro is considering an above ground station in the area...any truth to this rumor? Maybe Metro can eminent domain BHHS
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Apr 17, 2012 8:00:04 GMT -8
Yesterday I read, and it must be false, that Metro is considering an above ground station in the area...any truth to this rumor? This cannot be true because wouldn't this require another EIR?
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 17, 2012 8:40:07 GMT -8
Yesterday I read, and it must be false, that Metro is considering an above ground station in the area...any truth to this rumor? This cannot be true because wouldn't this require another EIR? Maybe only a SEIR? Would that delay building to La Cienega? It might still be better than a bad decision in a lawsuit, and it's not like 30/10 has been signed into law.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Apr 17, 2012 9:14:26 GMT -8
This cannot be true because wouldn't this require another EIR? Maybe only a SEIR? Would that delay building to La Cienega? It might still be better than a bad decision in a lawsuit, and it's not like 30/10 has been signed into law. It may not even need that per say if this elevated design is built right on the fault line, then this could be (the experts need to figure this out) ruled out as being a non-starter by the seismologists.
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on Apr 18, 2012 7:37:31 GMT -8
No, Metro Is Not Really Considering an Aerial Station for Santa Monica/Century Park Eastby Damien Newton A May 2008 report by Metro looking at possible alternatives to a subway looked at an aerial design for soem stations. Read the powerpoint, www.metro.net/projects_studies/westside/images/2008_0505_presentation.pdf. On Friday night, I received two emails as an online subscriber to the Beverly Hills Courier concerning the Westside Subway. The first was a screed by the paper’s publisher urging Beverly Hills City Council members to vote for a proposal for the city to officially rescind its support for the subway project altogether. The second was far more interesting. The Courier announced that Metro “will now consider an elevated subway station at Santa Monica Boulevard and Century Park East.” The announcement seemed odd. Hadn’t Metro considered above-grade stations in its 2008 Alternatives Analysis and dismissed it? Wouldn’t changing station design from subterranean to elevated rail require scrapping the entire environmental process and starting again? The report raised more questions than it answered, something the reporter, who’s name is not included in the report, seemed to recognize. It turns out that the Courier got it wrong this time. Metro is considering an elevated heavy rail station as much as it considers any of the ideas proposed in reports issued on behalf of the city as it responds to these reports. An elevated station at Santa Monica and Century Park East, considered in the 2008 Alternatives Analysis, was again proposed in the report by Shannon and Wilson that poked holes in Metro’s methodology but also stated that tunneling under the high school could be completed without lasting damage to the students. So how did the Courier get the story so wrong? Last Friday, a private meeting was held between Metro staff and city staff and elected officials to discuss the agency’s response to the city’s reports. At the meeting were City Councilman (and former Mayor) Barry Brucker, City Manager Jeff Kolin, Public Works Director Dave Gustavson and Deputy Director of Transportation Aaron Kunz. The Courier sent a pair of reporters to the meeting, but were turned away as the meeting was a private briefing between the city and agency. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the agency’s response to the city’s reports. According to Metro staff, there was no discussion of changing the final environmental documents to include an aerial station. When Brucker raised the question of an aerial station, Metro staff conceded that their response to the Shannon and Wilson report would include a detailed response. Somewhere in translation, that statement was turned into “Metro is considering an elevated station.” For one covering this issue for years, it seemed wildly unlikely that Metro would be going back in time to study elevated rail, but that didn’t stop one news outlet from rushing the story to print based on one source. Still, the report created some hope amongst those opposing the current routing of the Westside Subway that Metro was moving from their original position that tunneling under the high school away from faults under Santa Monica Blvd. was the safest alternative. The Beverly Hills Unified School District responded to a query on whether the elevated station was a worthwhile compromise by writing, The BHUSD encourages the Metro board to examine all reasonable alternatives for the Century City Subway station. There are a number of options available that do not require tunneling under Beverly Hills High School.” In the coming eight days, starting with a meeting of Metro’s Planning and Programming Committee this afternoon the Metro Board of Directors is scheduled to vote on the Final Environmental Impact Report on the Westside Subway, which includes a plan to tunnel underneath a portion of Beverly Hills High School. Emotions will probably be high on both sides of the issue as each side has over 1,000 responses to petitions urging Metro to move forward and urging Metro to stop and study more. Streetsblog will due its best to report on the issues raised both accurately and dispassionately, and calls on other outlets to do the same. la.streetsblog.org/2012/04/18/no-metro-is-not-really-considering-an-aerial-station-for-santa-monicacentury-park-east/#more-71279
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on Apr 19, 2012 7:45:40 GMT -8
Metro Board committee sends Westside Subway Extension final study to full Board
The Metro Board of Directors Planning Committee today recommended that the full Board next week certify the Final Environmental Imapct Statement/Report for the Westside Subway Extension, a key Measure R-funded project. The vote was 3 to 1 with Board Members Diane DuBois, Richard Katz and Zev Yaroslavsky voting for and Mike Antonovich against. Board Member Pam O’Connor abstained, saying she first wanted to read Metro’s response to a second study commissioned by Beverly Hills. The Metro staff recommendation is for a 9-mile alignment mostly along Wilshire Boulevard with stations at La Brea, Fairfax, La Cienega, Rodeo, Constellation/Avenue of the Stars, Wilshire/Westwood and at the VA Hospital. The recommendation of the Constellation/Avenue of the Stars station has brought much criticism from Beverly Hills officials who are angry that station would require Metro to tunnel under parts of the Beverly Hills High School campus — which Beverly Hills officials say would threaten the safety of students and hinder future development on a campus they say is too small for a city with one high school. Metro studies have concluded that it is safe to tunnel under the campus and that it is not safe to build a station along Santa Monica Boulevard because of active earthquake fault zones in the area. “This is not a nimby, naysayer issue,” testified Lisa Korbatov, a member of the Board of Education of the Beverly Hills Unified School District. “You people don’t want to hear the truth.” Board Member Yaroslavsky made several pointed remarks in response to the criticism from Beverly Hills officials, who alleged that subway tunnels under schools in California is unprecedented (Metro disagrees) and asked for the full Board to delay their vote in order to see seismic studies that Beverly Hills plans to soon release based on trenching on the campus. “This project has already been delayed for a long time,” Yaroslavsky said. “If I thought that a 30 day delay would solve the problem I would consider it,” he said, adding that the differences between Beverly Hills and Metro were intractable. “We have had meetings with stakeholders to try to find middle ground. The instruction we got back from Beverly Hills was to talk to our lawyers,” Yaroslavsky said. Yaroslavsky said that in essence Metro has two choices: either tunnel south of Santa Monica Boulevard to avoid faults or completely avoid Century City and just have the subway run down Wilshire Boulevard — which he believes would be a big mistake that he likened to the Green Line not being built to LAX or the Red Line not including a Hollywood Bowl station. Yaroslavsky also took issue with complaints from Beverly Hills school officials saying that subway tunnels would prevent future development. He pointed out that even the most recent report by an engineering firm hired by Beverly Hills said that the tunnels would allow for development at least 40 feet underground and that it was unlikely the school would want to construct anything that deep below ground level. There was one change to the staff recommendations for the project with staff now saying that the station entrance for the Fairfax station should be at Wilshire and Orange Grove, which is directly across Wilshire from the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Staff had originally proposed an entrance on the northwest corner of Wilshire and Fairfax but noted that increased attendance at the museum plus the commitment of LACMA to raise money for a second portal on the north side of Wilshire made that entrance more desireable. thesource.metro.net/2012/04/18/metro-board-committee-sends-westside-subway-extension-final-study-to-full-board/
|
|
|
Post by simonla on Apr 20, 2012 11:40:47 GMT -8
|
|