The city of Beverly Hills filed a lawsuit Wednesday in Los Angeles Superior Court, , asking a judge to set aside the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's .
The lawsuit says the project's Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report (Final EIS/EIR) violates the California Environmental Quality Act, a statute that requires state and local agencies to identify significant environmental impacts potentially caused by their actions, and how they plan to avoid or mitigate those impacts.
The Final EIS/EIR calls for tunneling under to reach a subway station on Constellation Boulevard in Century City, which due to safety concerns.
Beverly Hills' lawsuit argues that Metro should not be allowed to move forward with the extension, :
The certification of the Final EIS/EIR must be set aside due to Metro's failure to comply with certain requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")... a result of decisions that are not supported by substantial evidence, but that are the result of insufficient, incorrect and conflicting information and a rush to judgment that risks ... the health, safety and welfare of Petitioner's residents.
The city's lawsuit deals with the potential impacts the subway could have within Beverly Hills' municipal boundaries, while BHUSD's lawsuit pertains to the school district's property.
The controversial Westside Subway Extension is a $5.6 billion expansion of the Purple Line to Beverly Hills, Century City, Westwood and the Veterans Administration Medical Center.
At a public hearing requested by the city of Beverly Hills, attorneys hired by the city presented the Metro Board of Directors with for reaching a station on Constellation Boulevard that did not require tunneling under BHHS.
To read Beverly Hills' CEQA challenge against Metro, see the PDF file attached to this article.
Do you support the lawsuit filed by the city of Beverly Hills? Tell us in the comments below.
As for ridership, well, yes it is logical that SMB could have higher ridership because it is a "transit parkway" (as Comstock Hills HOA member Carol Spencer wrote). Certainly, the it seems reasonable that the ridership would be comparable -- Constellation might have more end-destination pedestrians, while SMB would have more transit passengers. The golf course will not add passengers, of course, but major arterial SMB will, and that's where much of the ridership will come from. If you want to look at an area of low density (your golf course argument seems to suggest that low density is an intuitive reason not to have a subway station), then look no further than the leafy VA campus, hardly a hub of urban activity. Why have a station there rather than, say, Wilshire and Barrington, which is along the same arterial?
In both cases, it was about protecting the property values of the neighboring Southwest Homeowners. And it's the same anti-development, anti-progress homeowner association who started this huge waste of our city's precious resources. This started out being about their property values and they misdirected our community once again by making it about the children.
We both know that "It's just too big" was the main point of the No on H campaign (and my blog postings): it was the slogan on the lawn signs and the URL was "justtoobig.com" not "thechildrenthechildren.com." I think one needs to distinguish between protecting property values and protecting the integrity of a Community and the quality of life which makes BH special. And there is a huge difference between "anti-development" and "anti-overdevelopment" stances, the latter which advocates for sensible, respectful, Community-appropriate development, the former for the kind of development which simply seeks to squeeze every cent out of a piece of property without regard for impacts, short- or long-term, on Community character or the residential quality of life. While greed-fueled "it's all about me" development very well might decrease property values, sensible development should have the opposite effect.
As for the golf course, Century City is a walled city with impassable barriers to the North at the golf course, to the East at Century Park East, to the West at Century Park West and a steep slope and bridge over Olympic, which has virtually no foot traffic. Santa Monica Blvd, next to the golf course, is a major thoroughfare that would be accessible to those outside Century City. Constellation is only two blocks that DEAD END at both a Century Park East and Century Park West, which would be very difficult for anyone outside of Century City to reach, among other things.
As for your "let's ban driving because there are risks associated with it" argument, we do take many steps to reduce the risks associated with driving, both for motorists and pedestrians. We now require motorcyclists to wear helmets; we require child seats for children; we have red-light cameras to increase safety and reduce risk; we have strict penalties against drunk driving. If in configuring an intersection, there is a way to avoid a possible risk, then we do (or should) take the less risky option. In such cases objective risk analysis should be performed. So while your point that "everything has risks" is a valid one, that's no reason not to mitigate or avoid additional potential risks. Assessing risk is not a zero-sum game, and in this case incremental risk could be avoided without going to the extreme of "just not building mass transit." Of course, the answer is finding another, less risky alternative by fully exploring all other options -- something which was not done by Metro.
This is the exact reason why the Forever Tax extension of Measure R should be opposed, even by those of us who are strong supporters of mass transit. Metro can't get the money from DC so they propose duping the voters of LA County into giving them a Forever Blank Check, borrowing against revenue more than 30 years into the future. Hopefully, BH voters (and all of LA County) will take all they've learned about Metro on board this time around.
I'm sure the MTA held a few meeting to discuss the environmental impacts and how it would mitigate those impacts. So, the court will combine the two lawsuits so they can be heard together. I'm sure the City of BH would accpet $$$ to settle the suit. I'm unsure about BHHS. Seems like BHHS really doesn't want to subway under their property.
http://www.geoprac.net/geonews-mainmenu-63/38-failures/464-cologne-tunnel-collapse-investigations-focus-on-tiebacks-and-groundwater http://www.imia.com/downloads/guest_presentations/GP19_2010.pdf I'm not saying that Metro's construction should not be done carefully. Clearly, the Westside project has challenges, which deserve due caution, and with the help of your watchful eye, I'm sure the project will get plenty of oversight. In addition to isolated failures, tunnels around the world have many success stories to tell. If that were not the case, underground construction would have ended long ago. A more balanced portrayal of the project, wherever it may go, would be so much more credible.
"Residents, school children and personnel at El Rodeo School are directly across the street. When the toxic air quality reaches dangerous proportions, who will notify and protect all these people? Is this Hilton expansion project so important that it justifies putting at rise so many of our people to these serious adverse environmental impacts?" The main opposition group to Measure H at the start was the Southwest Homeowners Association... out to protect their property values using school children as a wedge issue. The same group was the main opposition to the Constellation route at the start for the same reason – to protect their property values; fearing that tunnels beneath their homes will cause noise and vibrations every time a train passes beneath their homes – but again using school children as a wedge issue. Amazingly, all three alternative routes to Constellation which our city council and BHUSD proposed avoid going under these homes completely and rather opt to make a series of tight, awkward turns around that neighborhood. Had any of these alternatives eased off from Wilshire, passed under some of these homes, and headed straight for Constellation, I may have been less suspicious. But now it's clear whose interests you're really looking out for... and it's not the children.
i am so worried now .... i realize you are a premier ceqa/eminent domain attorney.. you have tried countless trials on this very issue.. why didn't we hire you? Yes, you went to the law school of "nimby" and you wrote the book on "frivolous lawsuits" and you teach a course in "biggest losers". Steve, leave this to the experts. We have a track record of winning. we aren't going to let developers and corrupt politicians decide the fate of our school district.
Just ask Ron Tutor about how our very own supervisor Zev waged a legal battle on Tutor- Saliba and in the end LOST! Yes , and thanks to Dear Leader Zev, the county paid out nearly 38 mm dollars on legal fees and other costs. Metro and that Board is run and run into the ground by Zev and his tools Richard Katz and all the other Mayoral appointees. I have no idea why Zev went to the mat for JMB or the Mayor . but he did. Wonder what is in it for him.. Time will tell. He strong arms his friends and his opponents even more so. He sat next to Supervisor Gloria Molina at the board meeting and after she was done listening to him.. she got up and disappeared and never returned to take a vote. Yes, leadership at it's finest. Then Zev goes on to say that Dolan/Parker/Jones were not at the hearing so as to give BH as much time as they needed. And who set that limit of 3.5 hours... Metro did. That was an arbitrary time limit set by the powers that be at METRO. This has been a dog and pony show from day one. The courts will have their say, and they don't take orders from METRO or Zev. I have no idea why they gave a vanity station to JMB but they did. I have no idea why they hire experts who aren't licensed in our state, but they did.
Actually, METRO's mantra can give pointers to the Kremlin. Lull a community to sleep, do a bait and switch, demonize a community that many have come to over and over for campaign donations.. happy hunting grounds at BH for money. i guess Zev and the Mayor did not mind taking our money and comments then.. then goose ridership numbers, create a boogey man fault system on a public right of way, and they wage a war against a school district. Yes, Putin could take pointers from these folks at METRO. Yes, considering how Zev burns through money taunting everyone to "Sue Us"... using the public's money to do it..so who is starving the kids and paying the lawyers. and nobody has a bigger PR machine on the public's dime than METRO. Simon, amazing how myopic your view finder is.
On the other hand, the main argument in favor of a project which sextupled (approximately, at least) the City's General Plan which has a height limit of 3 stories and 45 feet, was the dough that would be provided to the City and schools, including extra money promised to the BHEF. And this was backed by a multi-million dollar campaign.
It's the same strategy from the same playbook being made by the same players when it comes to the No on Constellation coalition — use children as a wedge issue to win over the hearts and minds of the people when in reality it's not about the children but homeowners trying to protect their property values (again, a point which you have not denied). Guess we are done here.
And as far as risks go, tunnel construction (under the school or elsewhere) has been evaluated by Metro and Shannon & Wilson (consultant for BH). Both entities say that tunneling can be done safely, as long as appropriate design and construction techniques are used. So, it seems the only ones saying construction can't be done safely are folks that are not experts in the field, and Exponent consultants (who actually are not experts in the field either). If risks can be properly managed, why should anyone object to where ever the tunnels go? Isn't it better to focus efforts (and $) on making sure that appropriate methods are in fact used, and that the tunnels are sufficiently deep so as to not adversely affect structures along the way, or future (resonable) BHHS development plans?