|
Post by metrocenter on May 17, 2012 13:21:54 GMT -8
Damien managed to get something done at farmdale when folks here were saying there isn't a problem with trains crossing near schools and said he would lose and metro would just build a pedestrian bridge. No Damien did not manage to get anything done. He certainly didn't win, in any real sense. Let's not forget the historical facts. Goodmon did not favor any outcome except total grade separation. In the end, he opposed the CPUC settlement, negotiated by Metro and LAUSD. Mr. Goodmon succeeded in three things. Delaying the Expo Phase 1 project. Temporarily getting people excited about a non-existent case of discrimination. And getting himself some positive (if temporary) publicity to overshadow his domestic assault charge. None of these "achievements" did the public any good at all.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 17, 2012 13:32:15 GMT -8
I'm not entirely convinced of this "Dump Crenshaw" movement.
When Metro added LAX to the line, Crenshaw suddenly became much more useful. Add to that the possibility of a Phase 2 to Wilshire or Phase 3 to Hollywood or Torrance.
If we're rattling sabers just to get back at Goodmon and his ilk, then the same could be said for Beverly Hills, which has been more of a pain in Metro's side with their Michael Bay-directed madness.
Finally, Metro has been marching forward on Crenshaw because for the most part, the support is still there.
There's no guarantee that the money spent on Crenshaw would go to Vermont or any of your other pet projects, especially not ones which weren't included in Measure R at all.
|
|
|
Post by hooligan on May 17, 2012 14:10:22 GMT -8
um no this crossing was going to be at grade and the trains were going to zoom by at what ever speed was allowed. We can argue about my wording but acting as if he didn't affect the outcome comes off as being a bit pompous.
they guy with questionable tactics caused the issue to be examined. Something did happen! We got a station which added millions of dollars to the cost and screwed up the opening schedule.
he may not be happy with the results but something happened.
If that isn't accomplishing something i don't know what to tell you.
Had Damien kept his mouth shut about the crossing do you think we would even be talking About a farmdale station?
Again i don't agree with his race baiting and fear mongering. You can quote me and ill eat crow if the following doesn't happen:
Don't be surprised when the Chrenshaw battle is all said and done. That the line is slowed down by some measure in the area in dispute, to appease the small minority of people he has riled up.
I don't think it will be grade separated but i believe they will run the trains at grade with no signal priority and it will stop at every light. thus giving the line the perception that it is slow.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 18, 2012 13:29:51 GMT -8
I'm not entirely convinced of this "Dump Crenshaw" movement. When Metro added LAX to the line, Crenshaw suddenly became much more useful. Add to that the possibility of a Phase 2 to Wilshire or Phase 3 to Hollywood or Torrance. If we're rattling sabers just to get back at Goodmon and his ilk, then the same could be said for Beverly Hills, which has been more of a pain in Metro's side with their Michael Bay-directed madness. Finally, Metro has been marching forward on Crenshaw because for the most part, the support is still there. There's no guarantee that the money spent on Crenshaw would go to Vermont or any of your other pet projects, especially not ones which weren't included in Measure R at all. For a long time, I thought Crenshaw was a terrible idea and would be a waste of resources. I have come around some on that. At this point, I just assume they get along with it and start building it, although I wish we would have gone with Vermont way back when. The concern I have is that Goodmon and his people want a $2B+ project, while Measure R only allocates a lower amount for it, which means they are going to have to go after other projects' funding. People said I was crazy when I first suggested this, but lo and behold MRT tried some form of this last year. I think it would be great if this went all the way to Hollywood, but we are a long long ways from that. It is first going to have to go to Wilshire and the Purple Line and that will take billions that aren't available right now. Goodmon isn't getting the press for this as much as he did on Expo. For the most part, people outside of this corner of Southwest LA don't really care much about this line either way. Hopefully, this line is better than I think it will be, but I don't think the airport hookup is going to be great, the connection at Expo may not be very smooth either. I just don't have a lot of faith. HOpefully, I am alive to see it hit the Purple Line, which would make it a fairly strong line.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 18, 2012 15:00:23 GMT -8
um no this crossing was going to be at grade and the trains were going to zoom by at what ever speed was allowed. We can argue about my wording but acting as if he didn't affect the outcome comes off as being a bit pompous. The crossing is still at-grade ("ground level"), as originally planned. It's just that now it's slow as molasses. Yes, Goodmon certainly did make something happen. If ruining the Expo Line between La Brea and Crenshaw was his goal, then yes, mission accomplished. I will repeat: Damien did not "win" on Farmdale. He failed at his primary goal of getting the line grade-separated. That's not pompous: it is simply holding him to his own criteria. I will say, your warning about Crenshaw is spot on. I wouldn't be surprised if FixCrenshaw's next step is to throw every obstacle in the way of the Crenshaw Line's success, to allow Damien to say, "I told you so."
|
|
|
Post by jamprit on May 18, 2012 15:09:46 GMT -8
This is slightly off topic, but whatever happened to Goodmon?
How did he go from Get LA Moving to his obstructionist position of today?
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Jul 17, 2013 8:24:21 GMT -8
Crenshaw underground got "approved" then defunded. MRT told Goodmon to just accept it and that's the last I've heard.
It seems Leimert Park will still get a station, which is great. Even with all the bitching and screaming, they'll soon realize that having thousands of eyeballs seeing Leimert Park every day will be good for business. Santa Monica specifically requested a street running mode for this reason.
Not sure if anyone else has seen this. It's Goodmon's video for the Crenshaw subway. It makes me sad. It's so over-the-top and fear-mongering that it's hard to take seriously, even for the casual viewer. Good production values though.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jul 17, 2013 8:40:42 GMT -8
"Danger -- high voltage." Lol
Except for the demand for the Leimert Park Station, which is understandable, it's all nonsense.
All businesses remain open during construction -- the claim that the businesses will die for good is totally nonsense.
School children will be endangered -- nonsense. There are school children around light-rail all over the county and no kid has ever got hit.
Why run a train in the median of Crenshaw? Because a six-car electric train (Los Angeles Railway) did run there in the past. That's why Crenshaw is so wide. Trees can be replaced. Having more car lanes is worse than having quality public transit.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jul 17, 2013 8:47:15 GMT -8
Crenshaw underground got "approved" then defunded. MRT told Goodmon to just accept it and that's the last I've heard. It seems Leimert Park will still get a station, which is great. Even with all the bitching and screaming, they'll soon realize that having thousands of eyeballs seeing Leimert Park every day will be good for business. Santa Monica specifically requested a street running mode for this reason. Not sure if anyone else has seen this. It's Goodmon's video for the Crenshaw subway. It makes me sad. It's so over-the-top and fear-mongering that it's hard to take seriously, even for the casual viewer. Good production values though. Crenshaw never got approved for underground in the Park Mesa area. It is not in the EIR. If they decide to do underground here, then they have to redo the EIR. You are looking at an almost 2 year delay in construction then.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jul 17, 2013 8:48:20 GMT -8
Word is also that Damien is running for an open state assembly seat. I suppose we'll see here shortly.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Jul 17, 2013 9:08:56 GMT -8
This is slightly off topic, but whatever happened to Goodmon? How did he go from Get LA Moving to his obstructionist position of today? It's a little more complicated than "obstructionist." Damien, like all of us, has his own ideas and opinions about what transit in L.A. should be like. He once was a frequent poster on the Transit Coalition board and if you look at some older topics, you can see where his perspective comes from. According to Bart Reed (and please, correct me if I'm wrong, Bart), Damien presented the "Get LA Moving Plan" at a Transit Coalition meeting way back in 2007. However, the plan called for a mostly subterranean system, unless otherwise noted (certain sections of his Red Line extension to Sylmar and Silver Line to Venice for example, were notated to run at-grade). It also included various changes to the existing system, like putting the Blue Line underground all the way to Washington station and several new junctions to accomodate various extensions. It's a neat map with a lot of good ideas, but the cost of such a system would have been through the roof and difficult to build politically. And then some of it was really pie-in-the-sky - like having Metro and Metrolink trains share tracks and tunnels in the Regional Connector (constructable perhaps, but would be very complicated to implement). So the truth is, Damien has always felt and acted this way about transit. The difference is now these projects are becoming a reality and they're not measuring up to his expectations. In his own way, Damien feels he's fighting for a just cause. The South L.A. community got a raw deal with the Blue Line and now "at-grade rail" is "evil." But the fact is the Crenshaw Line is not the Blue Line. Crenshaw is an incredibly wide street in an area that is nowhere near as dense as Downtown L.A. is. At over $200 million, it will be almost impossible (not to mention impractical) to fund putting the line underground in this area.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jul 18, 2013 9:20:14 GMT -8
Damien is an idealist, and his "Get LA Moving" map reflects this. It shows subway lines criss-crossing Los Angeles with a density to rival that of New York City. It was posted in the "dream" thread, and it had all of us salivating at the dream of such a thing.
At some point, a person has to move from ideals/dreams to reality. Of course, it's important to hold onto your ideals, so that you have a clear vision of what you're shooting for. But it's equally important to be willing to listen to other voices and accept compromises where necessary.
In a democracy, there are as many competing interests as there are people, and every person has a competing idea of the ideal outcome. In a society with so many "ideals" and limited resources, taking an taking an all-or-nothing stance usually results in getting nothing at all.
Metro Rail (80 stations and growing) was built because coalitions were built. People argued with each other, discussed ideas, evaluated the merits of these ideas, and compromised with each other. And from this, a vision of a rail transit network was born, funding was raised, and actual lines were implemented. Without these coalitions, nothing would've been built.
Damien has chosen to ally himself in a fundamental way with anti-rail NIMBYs. His approach is not coalition-based but us-vs-them based. And through this approach, he has accomplished nothing, except for adding Farmdale station, which did not increase safety but just slowed down the Expo Line.
(BTW, Damien gets no special credit for Leimert Park station. Yes, he supported it, but so did most of us. In the end, that station was added because the station had broad popular and political support, which the politicians were loath to ignore.)
|
|
|
Post by erict on Jul 18, 2013 9:33:45 GMT -8
My opinion is that Damion is a politician - using the issues of transit for political gain. Nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jul 19, 2013 9:03:54 GMT -8
^ Well if Damien is simply a politician, then he will never have a constituency bigger than a few people. We'll see if he can get elected.
"...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jul 19, 2013 10:39:33 GMT -8
Damien humiliated Ridly-Thomas with the whole Park Mesa subway debacle... I don't think he really has a political future. He turned a sure victory and a great success story (Leimert Park station) for the stakeholders (Ridly-Thomas first and foremost) into an embarrassing situation where Ridly-Thomas had to angrily tell his continents to "take what you can get".
If he really harbors any political ambition, he definitely did not display the kind political acumen or skills needed to get elected during the entire Crenshaw subway side show. No elected Black politician in South LA will go out of his or her way to support Damien... he is incendiary as Ridly-Thomas found out.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Mar 5, 2015 9:29:59 GMT -8
Does anyone know what happened to the Crenshaw Line lawsuit? It was supposed to be "It ain't over till its under", but it seems like it is just plain over. The Crenshaw Subway Coalition hasn't seemed to do anything since last year. It seems likely that they just couldn't raise the funds for the lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Mar 5, 2015 9:42:30 GMT -8
That's probably what happened.
The Leimert Park station always felt like the "real" fight when it came to Crenshaw. The Park Mesa tunnel certainly has its advocates, but there's simply no grassroots efforts for it, not to mention political support.
|
|