LOS ANGELES | METRO Project Rundown 2.0 (non-downtown)

[bobcat]

I think Lacma West is currently used for offices, storage, and temporary exhibition space so it's definitely not "abandoned," although I believe not all of the floors have been renovated.

The more I think of AMPAS moving into that space the more I like it. As already stated it's in decent condition as is and probably won't require all that much money to bring it up to snuff. When you consider that Eli Broad's downtown museum is supposed to cost $120 million just imagine what could be done to Lacma West with a similar amount of money.

And the great thing about refurbing an existing building is that the project can be completed in phases as funding comes in. For a entirely new museum they'd need to have almost all the funds committed before they could break ground.

[pesto]

The building already has a Hollywood Golden Age look about it, which could certainly be elaborated. Let's do some glamour.

And don't forget a memorial for Biggy Smalls across the street. A little violent history always grabs the crowds.

[dktshb]

Monarch Group must be going forward with their mixed use development on LA Brea and Fountain. The Jons cleared out about a month ago and now I think they're getting ready to tear down the building.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by dktshb

Monarch Group must be going forward with their mixed use development on LA Brea and Fountain. The Jons cleared out about a month ago and now I think they're getting ready to tear down the building.

Yeah, I think curbed mentioned that a few weeks ago. Glad to hear it's actually happening.

[DistrictDirt]

I'm shocked that this happened 24 hours ago, and no one's posted it here yet:

Rest In Peace: Santa Monica Blvd. Subway Station


by Damien Newton on October 19, 2011

LA Streetsblog


Streetsblog (via the Source)

Earlier this afternoon, the Metro Board of Directors Planning Committee held a wake for the Westside Subway Station at Santa Monica Boulevard. The Station had been on life support for some time now, but the testimony of two teams of geologists finally put the beleaguered proposal to rest.

Testifying that a station anywhere along Santa Monica Boulevard would be dangerous because it would lie in an active fault zone, Dr. James Dolan of USC, Dr. Lucy Jones of the U.S. Geological Survey and the California Institute of Technology, Dr. Harvey Parker, an engineer and former President of the International Tunneling Association, and Dr. Paul C. Jennings, a Professor of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics, Emeritus, at the California Institute of Technology all agreed that it would be irresponsible for Metro to build a station along Santa Monica Boulevard. Their studies also showed that a station at Constellation Avenue and Avenue of the Stars would fall outside active fault zones.

According to these experts, the best route for the Subway is underneath the south wing of Building B of the Beverly Hills High School. The experts all agreed that there is no reason to believe that the deep trench tunnel, running 70 feet underground, will endanger students or any planned development for the high school including an underground parking garage.

Despite the well funded organizations that have longed pushed for a subway stop on Santa Monica Boulevard (remember the “Century City Subway” website?), this should mark the end of the campaign for a Santa Monica Station. After all, even if the team hired by Beverly Hills Unified School District comes up with different conclusions than the pair of teams hired by Metro, it is wildly unlikely that Metro would every build a station at a location deemed unsafe by teams contracted for by Metro.

Thus, the political battle shifts from comparing the two station proposals to a focus on the process that has led to today’s findings and whether or not the Constellation Avenue Station and route underneath Beverly Hills High School is appropriate and safe. The battle over process began immediately after the geologists presentation was completed.

Metro staff gave no advance information on today’s presentation to anyone, Metro Board included, leaving Supervisor Mike Antonovich annoyed that he wasn’t prepared for a robust question and answer session with the presenters. He compared the process to a “professional wrestling match” with a predetermined outcome and called the process “flawed from the beginning.”

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who’s district includes Beverly Hills, and Santa Monica City Council Woman Pam O’Connor both defended the process noting today was just an oral presentation and no decisions would be made by the Board until there was much deeper review, more public hearings, and a formal presentation to the Planning Committee and Full Metro Board of Directors.

Which is probably a good thing. Despite being the Board Member most prepared to quiz the presenters, Yaroslavsky stumbled at times reminding the presenters that he, and most of the people in the room, were laymen on earthquakes and geology. Later, he had trouble remembering what some of the lines on the geological maps meant. This isn’t to pick on Yaroslavsky, just to point out that while the presenters, especially Dolan and Jones, did an admirable job translating science to English, the presentation was still technical and dense. It’s going to be sometime before the Board can get in to all the details.

Also questioning the politics and methodology of today’s announcement was the Beverly Hills Unified School District which released a scathing statement wondering why Metro hasn’t released all of the data for the project as it became available and demanding their experts have a chance to review everything:

With its seismic data presentation, Metro has opened a veritable Pandora’s Box that potentially impacts many dozens of existing buildings and future projects in the region, including Beverly Hills High School, future station locations for the Westside Subway Extension as well as currently entitled development projects. It is unfathomable that Metro has had this important seismic data available for such a long time without providing it to the BHUSD or other interested parties in the purported earthquake zone.

Much of the data presented today has been available for almost a year. The fact that Metro held it for so long poses many questions that Metro cannot answer. If the fault is so dangerous, the information should have been more forthcoming. We urge Metro to fully disclose all of the data as soon as possible. Our independent experts will immediately begin evaluating the findings and will weigh in as this process moves forward.

While the BHUSD readies their rebuttal, it’s hard to picture an outcome where a station is constructed on Santa Monica Boulevard at any time in the near future leaving BHUSD with two options: arguing that the Constellation Avenue Station is also dangerous and Metro needs to go back to the drawing board for a stop for the area or that the Westside Subway should just skip this area and head right from Beverly/Rodeo Drive to Westwood.

Today’s presentation will be available on Metro.net/westsidesubway later today or tomorrow morning.

###

[colemonkee]

^ Awesome. I love it when reason and science trump irrationality and xenophobia.

[DistrictDirt]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

^ Awesome. I love it when reason and science trump irrationality and xenophobia.

Isn't it awesome? Suck it, Beverly Hills.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

best new of the month. BHUSD can eat a fat one. i hope they dont sue (unlikely, i know) because they have no grounds what so ever and would only waste time and money

[JDRCRASH]

^ Which is why, if the courts somehow miraculously allow the suit, Metro should counter-sue for lost labor and added expenses.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

best new of the month. BHUSD can eat a fat one. i hope they dont sue (unlikely, i know) because they have no grounds what so ever and would only waste time and money

It's a waste of resources, because the potential magnititude of this lawsuit would be ginormous (sp?). In that, it would affect EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY in the United States. It would set a very dangerous precedent that would hurt CTA, NYMTA, BART, Washington Metro, SEPTA, NJ Transit, PATH, MBTA, etc... So the chances of their court case going anywhere is like .002%. Imagine if you start limiting subway drilling, then every homeowner group would be able to use the Beverly Hills v. Metro as a precedent (if BH were to prevail). So, due to the heightened restriction that would affect each transit agency, this is going to be a non-starter.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

It's a waste of resources, because the potential magnititude of this lawsuit would be ginormous (sp?). In that, it would affect EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY in the United States. It would set a very dangerous precedent that would hurt CTA, NYMTA, BART, Washington Metro, SEPTA, NJ Transit, PATH, MBTA, etc... So the chances of their court case going anywhere is like .002%. Imagine if you start limiting subway drilling, then every homeowner group would be able to use the Beverly Hills v. Metro as a precedent (if BH were to prevail). So, due to the heightened restriction that would affect each transit agency, this is going to be a non-starter.

I hope MTA hasn't already played into BH's hands by creating an "earthquake scare" along the subway. Releasing a map saying that there is a significant earthquake issue a few hundred feet from a proposed station raises issues about the whole line.

And remember that the study was put together by MTA's "hired guns". BH would love to get them on the stand and get their comments about safety of stations in general in an earthquake zone. And finally get ahold of the internal studies that MTA has refused to release. And, of course, they will bring in their own hired guns to say that neither route is safe.

And, best of all the public pays for everything: plaintiff, defendant and the judge. It's win, win, win for the legal profession and lose, lose, lose for the taxpayer.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by pesto

I hope MTA hasn't already played into BH's hands by creating an "earthquake scare" along the subway. Releasing a map saying that there is a significant earthquake issue a few hundred feet from a proposed station raises issues about the whole line.

And remember that the study was put together by MTA's "hired guns". BH would love to get them on the stand and get their comments about safety of stations in general in an earthquake zone. And finally get ahold of the internal studies that MTA has refused to release. And, of course, they will bring in their own hired guns to say that neither route is safe.

And, best of all the public pays for everything: plaintiff, defendant and the judge. It's win, win, win for the legal profession and lose, lose, lose for the taxpayer.

I dont think you can call the scientists from JPL hired guns. its just truth. the BHUSH can go fuck themselves. im tired of this shit.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by pesto

I hope MTA hasn't already played into BH's hands by creating an "earthquake scare" along the subway. Releasing a map saying that there is a significant earthquake issue a few hundred feet from a proposed station raises issues about the whole line.

And remember that the study was put together by MTA's "hired guns". BH would love to get them on the stand and get their comments about safety of stations in general in an earthquake zone. And finally get ahold of the internal studies that MTA has refused to release. And, of course, they will bring in their own hired guns to say that neither route is safe.

And, best of all the public pays for everything: plaintiff, defendant and the judge. It's win, win, win for the legal profession and lose, lose, lose for the taxpayer.

Geez pesto, you don't trust anybody do you? First, Donald Shoup and now the best scientific seismologists in California? Do you have any credible say in this arguement? No. We're all just board commentators. Leave it up to science and people with education. We don't have the degrees those people do.

First of all, has everybody forgot that Metro was not legally required to release any documents during an EIR process? Something that Beverly Hills sued and lost? (http://thesource.metro.net/2011/09/1...xtension-case/). Or has that just been forgotten? That's the law, so don't get all emotional on Beverly Hills favor. Beverly Hills is costing the County money.

So, using your logic of Metro's "hired guns", this is something EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY does, in which they bring in scientists, experts, etc.. to disprove emotional pleas with no rationale substance. Are you saying that EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY in the United States has lied to its people? Are you saying that EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY is propagandizing its own "facts" and ignoring the truths? If you cannot believe the experts that were brought in, than who can you believe? By the way, these people were questioned by Beverly Hills and Mike Antonovich at the meetings, but the scientists disproved their theories. Also, the scientists said that building a subway tunnel perpendicular to a fault is OKAY.

Pesto, you sound very Tea Partyish who just gets annoyed at rationale arguments and people of "reason". No wonder you were banned a couple of months ago on the SSP....... That's not picking on you, but when people come here and discount people with education degrees, experts (people who have done YEARS and YEARS of studying) and think as a commentator you can dispute your facts, well, you're wrong.

[202_Cyclist]

LAofAnaheim:

Pesto, you sound very Tea Partyish who just gets annoyed at rationale arguments and people of "reason". No wonder you were banned a couple of months ago on the SSP....... That's not picking on you, but when people come here and discount people with education degrees, experts (people who have done YEARS and YEARS of studying) and think as a commentator you can dispute your facts, well, you're wrong.

As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

And regarding parking from the downtown LA thread, I read a quote today, "No place is worth visiting that doesn’t have a parking problem.”

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by pesto

I hope MTA hasn't already played into BH's hands by creating an "earthquake scare" along the subway. Releasing a map saying that there is a significant earthquake issue a few hundred feet from a proposed station raises issues about the whole line.

It shouldn't, since Tokyo and Mexico City are BOTH at greater risk for more powerful earthquakes than Los Angeles, yet they have hundreds of miles of subways.

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

the BHUSH can go fuck themselves. im tired of this shit.

I think the majority of Angelenos are as well. Let's just hope some biased LA Times writer doesn't actually believe their crap.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Geez pesto, you don't trust anybody do you? First, Donald Shoup and now the best scientific seismologists in California? Do you have any credible say in this arguement? No. We're all just board commentators. Leave it up to science and people with education. We don't have the degrees those people do.

First of all, has everybody forgot that Metro was not legally required to release any documents during an EIR process? Something that Beverly Hills sued and lost? (http://thesource.metro.net/2011/09/1...xtension-case/). Or has that just been forgotten? That's the law, so don't get all emotional on Beverly Hills favor. Beverly Hills is costing the County money.

So, using your logic of Metro's "hired guns", this is something EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY does, in which they bring in scientists, experts, etc.. to disprove emotional pleas with no rationale substance. Are you saying that EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY in the United States has lied to its people? Are you saying that EVERY TRANSIT AGENCY is propagandizing its own "facts" and ignoring the truths? If you cannot believe the experts that were brought in, than who can you believe? By the way, these people were questioned by Beverly Hills and Mike Antonovich at the meetings, but the scientists disproved their theories. Also, the scientists said that building a subway tunnel perpendicular to a fault is OKAY.

Pesto, you sound very Tea Partyish who just gets annoyed at rationale arguments and people of "reason". No wonder you were banned a couple of months ago on the SSP....... That's not picking on you, but when people come here and discount people with education degrees, experts (people who have done YEARS and YEARS of studying) and think as a commentator you can dispute your facts, well, you're wrong.

Well, let's shift the facts. If a private corporation were suing a private corporation over a technical issue, would they hire experts who agreed with their analysis or disagreed? And would the other side hire the guys who disagreed with them or agreed with them? This is just real life. Lawyers keep comprehensive lists of "experts" who are "plaintiff witnesses" or "defense witnesses". Any large, prestige university will have some on either side. Pure science is fairly objective as long as you stick to models; engineering much less so because applying the models to facts is always messy.

Same for public agencies. They are just human beings and they act in their own benefit. Of course, you normally want to do things that make sense, since you may end up in court; that's the beauty of openness and transparency. But there are often are multiple choices all of which are reasonably acceptable.

My suspension on the other site was interesting. Somebody who was a China worshipper said a variety of completely non-sensical things about how great Chinese technology, building methods, organization, etc., were. Someone else cut him to shreds, and the first guy told him if you continue to be argumentative I will have you banned from this site.

I posted a very short note saying ironic that you not only admire Chinese technology but their system for winning arguments. In the US we tend more toward open argumentation and criticism.

I can only assume that he has some connections at the site, because I was then banned for some period of time.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

I think the majority of Angelenos are as well. Let's just hope some biased LA Times writer doesn't actually believe their crap.

The LA Times isn't believing their crap.........it's LA Weekly that is.

[pesto]

A couple of comments.

I suggested above that the new study from MTA could be used as a double edged sword, but I had no idea how quickly it would be used. Curbed is already reporting comments like the new study will effect all future subways, high-rise and other projects on the westside; that new zoning and regulations are needed; and that there is now proof of faults extending through Century City and BH almost to Sunset and all along SM Blvd. A loaded gun handed to every NIMBY in west LA.

I am a huge supporter of Purple. My point has always been that MTA is making a disastrous strategic decision, not that I don't want a subway. But, in all honesty, a number of other posters seem to be much more interested in dumping on BH (often in obscene ways) than in getting Purple to the sea.

A basic rule of closing complex deals: focus on what is essential and let the rest go (especially personal grudges). You never get everything; make sure you get what is essential. What is essential for MTA is to get a subway built to the sea. What is not essential is which stop in BH to go to. This is somewhere between irrelevant and mildly important. But you don't risk the essentail for the non-essential.

For whatever reason, MTA decided to bring in experts to support their location as the only one possible. Does anyone think this made the completion of the Purple more likely than if a year ago they had said that either station in BH was acceptable? After all, MTA was already committed to the BHHS station (it was their second best choice after years of review) so it sounds strange that it is too unsafe to build.

Once again, I have minimal interest in which station is chosen. But this is truly a study in mis-handling. Let's hope it doesn't slow Purple or anything else.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by pesto

A couple of comments.

I suggested above that the new study from MTA could be used as a double edged sword, but I had no idea how quickly it would be used. Curbed is already reporting comments like the new study will effect all future subways, high-rise and other projects on the westside; that new zoning and regulations are needed; and that there is now proof of faults extending through Century City and BH almost to Sunset and all along SM Blvd. A loaded gun handed to every NIMBY in west LA.

I am a huge supporter of Purple. My point has always been that MTA is making a disastrous strategic decision, not that I don't want a subway. But, in all honesty, a number of other posters seem to be much more interested in dumping on BH (often in obscene ways) than in getting Purple to the sea.

A basic rule of closing complex deals: focus on what is essential and let the rest go (especially personal grudges). You never get everything; make sure you get what is essential. What is essential for MTA is to get a subway built to the sea. What is not essential is which stop in BH to go to. This is somewhere between irrelevant and mildly important. But you don't risk the essentail for the non-essential.

For whatever reason, MTA decided to bring in experts to support their location as the only one possible. Does anyone think this made the completion of the Purple more likely than if a year ago they had said that either station in BH was acceptable? After all, MTA was already committed to the BHHS station (it was their second best choice after years of review) so it sounds strange that it is too unsafe to build.

Once again, I have minimal interest in which station is chosen. But this is truly a study in mis-handling. Let's hope it doesn't slow Purple or anything else.

Keep in mind Pesto, the Constellation station was the CLEAR favorite of Los Angeles residents and yes, developers. But if you attended meetings outside of Roxbury Park, you'd hear from the LA County residents that they want Constellation. The "center of the center" in Century City is Constellation, there's no denying that. Now, if Metro wanted to truly push Constellation over SM boulevard, why did their ridership studies show better boardings at SM boulevard over Constellation? They could have fudged those numbers to prove Constellation (after all, there are more buses that go to Constellation than SM boulevard with CC # 3, BBB # 5, Metro Rapid 728, 28, 316, 16, AV Express and LADOT 534).

The process of Metro is to listen to concerns of ALL RESIDENTS not the minority screaming the loudest (Beverly Hills). So denying Constellation is actually ignoring the residents of Los Angeles. Homeowner groups, developers, business interest AND LA residents SUPPORT IN GREATER NUMBERS Constellation over SM boulevard. Now, to quelch the fears of Beverly Hills, which is primarily the only area supporting SM boulevard, they brought in those independent experts to review the findings. You can discount their years and years of studies, but they know more than all of us.

Metro did the best it could do to prove that SM boulevard is not a good option. Also, Metro only started the Alternative Analysis in 2007 when Mayor Villaraigosa approved $10 million worth of studies (something a lot of politicians in LA were against, but somehow quickly embraced, funny). So to say that SM boulevard was studied before (which BH claims) is false. The original Red Line was to go west to Fairfax ONLY. There is no studies to previously support a SM boulevard. It was just a drawing on a map, nothing more.

P.S. Metro changed their name officially to "Metro" in 2008. MTA no longer exists.

[BrandonJXN]

So that apartment on Wilshire and La Brea is now finally under construction.


http://curbednetwork.com/cache/galle...783e91f7_o.jpg