City Officials, Residents Rally to Fight Metro's Plan to Tunnel Under BHHS

Opponents of the Constellation Boulevard station chant "Schools and subways do not mix. Metro needs a better fix!"

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority held an Open House Thursday at that attracted vocal resident protesters who oppose plans to tunnel under as part of the .

Earlier this month, the Metro Board of Directors for the Century City stop if the subway—an extension of the Purple Line from downtown Los Angeles to the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Westwood. A stop a Constellation Boulevard routes the subway under Beverly Hills' only high school.

"Schools and subways do not mix. Metro needs a better fix!" was the rallying cry of many in attendance at the meeting.

An organized group consisting of city leaders, school board members, residents, parents and their children voiced disapproval of the plan. Although the meeting did not officially have a public comment period, questions were answered and strong emotions were displayed. A main point of contention for the Beverly Hills community is that tunneling under the high school could affect plans to as part of the , as well as create an unsafe environment for students.

City Councilwoman Lili Bosse was able to arrange a question and answer session with David Mieger, the Westside Subway Extension project manager, in an effort to debate specific sections of (EIR).

Bosse asked about the proposed subway line's daily schedule, and how the existing bus routes that served Century City and Santa Monica Boulevard would integrate with it. Her concerns were focused on rush hour traffic and the subway's projected ridership. 

"Most people are going to Century City to work, because it's a job center," Mieger replied. "What we're trying to do is get people off the roads, into the subway, to go to those jobs in Century City."

Bosse rebutted that "to get people off the road and use the subway...there isn't any 'park-and-ride' proposed for the Constellation station," adding that according to Metro's EIR, there is "no parking within a half-mile" from the proposed Century City stop. The councilwoman's point was that people typically drive to a park-and-ride lot so they have a place to leave their vehicle before getting on the subway.

Mieger answered that Metro would "allow people to come by transit" and gave figures that projected the new subway would service "150,000 to 200,000 people every day who aren't going to be on the surface roadways." According to Mieger, less drivers meant more available parking in Century City. 

"We're going to work with those parking lot operators," Mieger added, referring to the many high-cost parking garages in Century City.

"Thirty-eight dollars a day! Thirty-eight dollars a day!" Bosse said about the cost of parking at a Century City garage.

Mieger then suggested a plan for a shuttle tram service that could "take people around," using UCLA's shuttle trams in Westwood as an example.

"So why can't you take people from Santa Monica [Boulevard] to Constellation?" Bosse said, referring to Metro's originally proposed Century City stop. "That seems like a perfect solution! Get those trams, stick to your promise! Take them from the promised route and get them to where they belong. Not underneath our high school!"

Cheers broke out from the crowd after Bosse's comments.

Metro Deputy Executive Officer Lynda Bybee interrupted the impromptu debate by taking control of the microphone lent to Bosse for the session.

Bybee's reminder that the meeting was an "open house" drew loud boos from the crowd. Residents angrily yelled, "We are home! You're not at home! We're home!" She then made suggestions for the crowd to speak with Metro staffers at the display tables, prompting others to yell, "We're here for answers! We're not here to look at your diagrams!" 

Bybee continued by telling the attendees that they could "speak about safety with the experts," which was quickly mocked with, "No they're not! They're not experts!" She then informed the crowd that there was a . Bosse then said to Bybee, "We are entitled to ask our questions."

Bybee didn't address Bosse's comment, but concluded the question session by giving the microphone over to awaiting L.A. Sheriff deputies, which caused some surprise and anger in the crowd.

Beverly Hills Unified School District board member Lisa Korbatov, riled by Bybee's shutdown of the debate, rounded up residents and told them to "go outside" and that they were "leaving this dog and pony show." 

Korbatov called for residents to gather in front of the Temple, where a news truck awaited, and where they could continue to demonstrate their opposition.

BHUSD board member Noah Margo was standing in front of the Temple wearing a self-made T-shirt that read: "Our students are more powerful than your locomotive." 

Margo said he only had one comment about the issue.

"I hope this doesn't have to go the distance," he said. "I just don't want to see a tunnel under the high school for all the wrong reasons."

Among the dozens of vocal protesters against the Constellation Boulevard station, a few "pro-subway" activists attended the open house.

Beverly Hills resident Jessica Youseffi was seen sporting a "Subway: Yes" sticker on her clothing. She said that she was associated with Clergy & Laity United for Economic Justice, a group that supports the Constellation Boulevard stop.

"We want a subway, we want job creation," Youseffi said. "I'm ashamed of the way the Beverly Hills community acted tonight."

She cited their "rowdy display and yelling."

Youseffi was noticed by a small group of protesters, who then questioned her about her stance on the subway. They asked, "Why are you for this?"

"I'm going to personally use this. I would love to use all the subway lines as they get built," Youseffi answered. "This is going to transform the way the city works."

During the post-open house demonstration, a large banner was displayed that read, "No Subway Under BHHS."

Korbatov encouraged the activists to "stay engaged," telling them that "this is the fight of our city's life!"

"They're not waiting to hear our report from the school district. They didn't have the courtesy to really digest the ," she said. "They just want their subway where they want it."

Korbatov added, "They should just go back to Santa Monica [Boulevard], or anywhere else they want—but they're not going under that high school!"

When asked about Beverly Hills' chances of winning the fight against Metro's recommended plan, Korbatov said she has no doubt the city will prevail.

"Losing isn't an option when it comes to kids," she said. "We should never be the first school in the state of California to have heavy rail under instructional buildings."

Councilman Barry Brucker said that he met with the director of the Department of State Architecture, who confirmed that, "There is no public school in the state, that [we] know of, where a subway has tunneled underneath." 

Brucker said he wants Metro to "do a comprehensive trenching study on Santa Monica Boulevard and determine whether that is a safe option to use as an alternative alignment."

In repose to the community's strong opposition, Metro spokesman Dave Sotero highlighted the transit authority's experience. 

"We've been operating the subway for more than 20 years already, through the downtown L.A. area, into North Hollywood," he said. "They're concerned about tunneling underneath Beverly Hills High School. We can safely tunnel underneath the high school without affecting their modernization plans, as long as they coordinate with us."

According to Metro's findings, one of the major reasons for the Constellation Boulevard recommendation is that "seismic issues" are lessened in comparison with the Santa Monica Boulevard alignment.

"You can tunnel through fault zones, but nobody in North America has built a [subway] station in an active fault zone," Metro Community Relations Manager Jody Litvak said. "The area at Constellation is not an active fault zone—and Santa Monica Boulevard is."

Litvak was asked if the protesting residents had enough sway to make Metro change its plans. 

"The staff recommendation stands," Litvak said. "It's up to the Metro Board of Directors to decide what to do now."

Did you attend Thursday's meeting at Temple Emanuel? What are your thoughts?

Be sure to follow Beverly Hills Patch on Twitter and "Like" us on Facebook.

Simon April 03, 2012 at 01:25 AM
But Joe, Metro is building a subway (Miracle Mile), and has already built a subway (Downtown), through methane districts. Geologists verified years ago that it can be built safely.
Chris Loos April 03, 2012 at 01:58 AM
Simon, they've just looking for reasons to back up their preconceived notions that they don't wait rail under the school. You might as well argue with a stone. Nevermind that the subway would be 70' underground and wouldn't interfere with any expansion plans the school may have. Nevermind that Metro actually offered to work with the school to ensure that tunnel would not preclude any future plans. Nevermind that there's already subways in methane districts all over LA. Nevermind that modern tunnel-boring machines are pressurized, and leave the would leave the earth under the school MORE stable, not less. Nevermind that there's subways in earthquake prone cities all over the world. Nevermind that there's subways under schools in cities all over the world. Nevermind that ridership would be higher with a station in the heart of Century City. They just don't want it. Facts have nothing to do with their decision...they just "know" that a subway under the school would be bad. You're dealing with people acting solely on their emotions. This dispute will play itself out in the courts, at great expense of money and time. Hopefully BHUSD will be held accountable for Metro's legal costs (i.e. the taxpayer's of Los Angeles county's legal costs) when all is said and done. It's just a shame that nothing can be done to get back everyone's time that BHUSD will have wasted. The Westside has waited 30 years for rail already. Enough is enough.
John Mirisch April 03, 2012 at 03:36 AM
As you suggest, methane supposedly isn't an issue. Yet if this is the case, why did Metro move the interim transit station from Fairfax to La Cienega? Oh, that's right: it's concerns with methane. Oh, well, never mind that Metro is constantly contradicting itself without regard to such niceties as logic, internal consistency or common sense. Never mind the principles of good government and that it is unseemly -- to put it mildly -- for public agencies to engage in "bait-and-switch" maneuvers, saying one thing to gain community support and doing another when the political winds blow in another direction. One shouldn't have to be a Kremlinologist to keep pace with a massive public agency which sucks up billions of taxpayer dollars. Never mind that there are no heavy rail tunnels under any public school instructional buildings in the state of California. Never mind there is a viable alternative which respects the principles of local control. Never mind that Metro's studies are suspect. Never mind the hypocritical disregard for "the center of the center" when it comes to Westwood and the total disregard of the needs of the UCLA students. Never mind that process matters and Metro has shown what happens when a public agency runs amok, arrogant with its own sense of power. That's right, Chris: never mind. But the people of BH do mind and we will do something about it. And, yes, it's a shame.
Rachel 57 April 03, 2012 at 04:30 AM
Let's be clear, people can disagree on the subway. And they can speak up about it. They can even hire lawyers and PR consultants to help them better communicate their message. That's their right. The open house was well accepted the other 2 evenings without a question & answer session or microphone in the rooms. Beverly Hills folks decided they wanted it to be different for them and, somehow, got a microphone into the room. What happened on Thursday night was planned, orchestrated and carried out by Beverly Hills elected officials -- perhaps with the input and advise from their PR firm, perhaps not. For all the righteous indignation, I can just imagine how the Beverly Hills City Council or School Board would react if a group of people showed up, refused to follow and disrupted the format of one of their events, and resisted efforts to bring the proceedings back to order.
Alex B April 03, 2012 at 05:11 AM
I just don't understand what the issue is here. I can't think of a logical reason why there should be opposition to the subway. Hell, L.A. Metro already has a subway under a school, at Wilshire and Vermont, and as far as I know, there are no issues with that. If someone can explain to me what the issue is here, then that would be great.
John Mirisch April 03, 2012 at 05:56 AM
The opposition is not to the subway per se, but to the alignment. And, no, there is no heavy rail under any public school instructional buildings anywhere in California. The Wilshire and Vermont tunnel goes under a playground of a new school, which was built after the subway -- as opposed to 85-year old Beverly High. The debate goes far beyond the alignment itself and has to do with a host of issues including local control, good government, and, yes, common sense and logic.
Simon April 03, 2012 at 05:58 AM
Mr. Mirisch, I love how you say Metro is a "massive public agency which sucks up billions of taxpayer dollars"--they actually do provide a service to hundreds of thousands of people everyday, even if those people don't matter to you. And no I don't work for them, I just utilize their services. And please stop with your false Westwood argument, I work at Wilshire and Westwood and there are dozens of towers near that corner with office workers going in and out of them all day. To insinuate a stop at Wilshire and Westwood wouldn't serve anybody is a complete fallacy.
Alex B April 03, 2012 at 06:03 AM
@ John That didn't actually answer any of my questions. Is it because the school is old? I mean, there are subways in almost every major European cities, and all of those cities have buildings far older then 85 years. Also, local control, good government, common sense, logic, all great buzzwords, but they don't actually mean anything without context.
John Mirisch April 03, 2012 at 06:15 AM
I guess it's also Metro's "right" to put on a dog-and-pony show, but don't fault BH residents for calling Metro out on this. You make it sound like "question & answer" is such a bad thing. Think about it for a moment: you're seriously faulting BH residents for wanting answers to their questions? What, then, is the purpose of such an open house. Just how is the "format" of an open house such that it would preclude getting answers to questions, with or without a microphone? What happened, as I understand it, is that a Beverly Hills Council Member, duly elected to her position, asked Metro bureaucrats specific questions about the EIR. These questions were of interest to the larger gathering and they were asked in a calm, professional manner. Yet rather than answer these questions, another Metro bureaucrat ripped the microphone from the hands of the elected representative. Just what does this say about Metro? You can imagine how the Council would react if a group of people showed up at a Council meeting? Let's end the speculation here and now. You don't have to imagine or wonder or surmise: you are welcome to our City Council meeting tomorrow at 2:30pm in the City Hall chambers where you will be afforded the opportunity to do something Metro denied a Beverly Hills Councilwoman, namely to speak, ask questions and make your views heard. And we'll even give you a microphone. For some, the contrast might even be considered a lesson in democracy...
John Mirisch April 03, 2012 at 06:32 AM
I understand. Metro exists to serve Simon because Simon is so much more important than the tens and thousands of students and faculty who go to UCLA each day. I'm not insinuating that a Wilshire and Westwood station "wouldn't serve anybody," but that a better option would be a station in the heart of Westwood Village which could serve both UCLA and those in the high-rises. And there are "dozens of towers"? Maybe only if you count in Base 3. The fact is that Metro never did the advanced ridership studies which would allow for the best station location to be picked in Westwood because they were never going to place a station closer to UCLA. And why? Because they didn't want to tunnel under a cemetery. Very ironic that Metro has no issue with tunneling under a school with real, live children, but they won't tunnel under a cemetery. And weren't you one of the chorus who suggested "it's all about the science"? Subways are not just to shuttle workers back and forth among overdeveloped areas of town. The function of mass transit is also to provide access to major public institutions, including universities. And Metro may provide a service to some (though ask the bus riders what they think of Metro's "service" and I fear you may find less enthusiasm), but does that mean that resources are being spent in the most responsible manner? You clearly seem to think that "Metro can do no wrong" and "government bureaucrats are the source of all wisdom." Clearly, I disagree.
John Mirisch April 03, 2012 at 06:48 AM
Sure thing Alex. Among the following articles, I believe, you may find what you're looking for, which will put a little meat on the bones of my bullet points. In short, there's a better, less expensive and less intrusive alignment; in fact, it's the alignment which Metro used to gain support within the Beverly Hills community, before they instigated their bait-and-switch maneuver. If you've ever been on a subway in Europe, you will have noticed that most subway stations have multiple portals. Yet this isn't the plan for most of the Westside Subway stations. So just what is it that Metro has learned from the great transit systems of Europe? http://www.laweekly.com/2011-07-14/news/beverly-hills-versus-the-westside-subway/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mirisch/westside-subway-press-conference_b_877387.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mirisch/middleamerica-and-the-wes_b_902267.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mirisch/constellation-blvd-is-the_b_774427.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mirisch/fight-on-for-ucla-rejecti_b_994284.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mirisch/faulty-towers-dont-mentio_b_1102430.html http://www.jewishjournal.com/los_angeles/article/just_what_is_jewish_mass_transit_20110223/
Alex B April 03, 2012 at 07:11 AM
@ John (again) I still don't understand why there is opposition against tunneling under BH High. If Metro wants to spend 50 million more dollars to change the route, why not let them? 50 million out of six billion is not a very large change. Does it really warrant an entire community to come out in opposition? And I looked up online some ridership numbers, and it says that the Constellation/Ave of Stars station would have more riders then an Ave. of the Stars and Santa Monica Blvd station. Wouldn't that make the Constellation/Ave of Stars choice the better choice? And BTW, you are right about there not being enough portals (though, interestingly enough, the subway in Copenhagen only has one portal per station) but I don't see how that necessarily factors into the whole BHUSD argument.
centurycitysubway.org April 03, 2012 at 12:30 PM
@ Alex B Recent studies commissioned by the City of Beverly Hills and the BHUSD have identified numerous safety issues with tunneling under Beverly Hills High School. Metro has failed to consider or address thase serious concerns. Another issue is that the citizens of Beverly Hills passed a bond measure to modernize and expand BHHS that could be seriously impacted by the proposed tunnel; especially considering the fact that the construction of public school buildings falls under the Field Act. Finally, with regard to ridership, according to the Draft EIR the Santa Monica/AveofStars station had higher ridership numbers than the Constellation. Metro moved that proposed station in September (prior to the release of their seismic studies) without explanation to Century Park East. The Final EIR did not even consider ridership for the SM/AOS location.
JH McMath April 03, 2012 at 01:43 PM
John, without taking stand on this, I have to say that many of your arguments sound specious. Even if MTA is an out of control bureaucracy that instigated a bait-and-switch maneuver here, comments like tunneling under "real, live kids" come across as non-sensical. Are you implying that no tunneling should be performed anywhere where kids (or people in general) are present? This seems to imply that MTA should not even tunnel beneath roads because of the danger to "real, live" motorists. Does this further mean that construction of the Second Avenue line in Manhattan should be halted because of the threat to thousands of people above ground? Also you mention that nowhere in the State of California does a heavy rail line pass under a school. OK, but why is California the specific frame of reference here? Is it due to specific local conditions such as earthquakes, methane, etc.? If so, there are examples throughout the world of subway lines being safely constructed and operated under schools and also in earthquake and methane prone regions. Again why is it that the BHHS case is unique in this regard? Nobody seems willing to answer these types of questions head on. MTA malfeasance aside, can you articulate the key argument(s) for why tunneling under BHHS is so problematic while you don't seem to think it is elsewhere in LA County or the rest of the country or the world for that matter?
centurycitysubway.org April 03, 2012 at 03:15 PM
@ JH McMath Recent studies commissioned by the City of Beverly Hills and the BHUSD have identified numerous safety issues with tunneling under Beverly Hills High School. Metro has failed to consider or address these serious concerns. Another issue is that the citizens of Beverly Hills passed a bond measure to modernize and expand BHHS that could be seriously impacted by the proposed tunnel; especially considering the fact that the construction of public school buildings falls under the Field Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_Act). In other words and to answer your question, California is the specific reference point because California has a long-existing and stringent law called the Field Act that mandates the construction (and modernization) of public school buildings.
centurycitysubway.org April 03, 2012 at 03:34 PM
To learn more about how the proposed subway tunnel could impact Beverly Hills High School, please click: http://centurycitysubway.org/storage/BHUSDMasterPlanImplications.pdf
Chris Loos April 03, 2012 at 03:39 PM
I love how Mirisch's sources are 5 articles he wrote himself, and one from the LA Weekly- a bastion of unbiased transit news. Get real John.
Chris Loos April 03, 2012 at 03:47 PM
From your link: "The Field Act was introduced with other laws that banned unreinforced masonry construction, and required that earthquake forces be taken into account in structural design (specifically, a new requirement for a base shear calculation, and that school buildings must be able to withstand lateral forces equal to at least 3% of the building total mass). The Act also established the Office of the State Architect (now Division of the State Architect or DSA) which developed design standards, quality control procedures, and required that schools be designed by registered architects and engineers. These professionals must submit their plans and specifications to the State Architect for review and approval prior to construction. The same professionals were also required by the Act to periodically inspect the construction while underway and verify that the actual work completed is in compliance with the approved drawings. Peer review was also introduced as another quality control procedure." So the Field act specifies minimum earthquake safety building standards for new schools, and specifies minimum standards for reinforcing older schools. Great. Sounds like something to consider when BHUSD expands their school. Explain to me again how this anything to do with a subway line that runs 70' feet underground?
centurycitysubway.org April 03, 2012 at 04:03 PM
@ Chris Loos Aside from safety issues, Metro has certain restrictions and easements over tunnels that could have a significant impact on BHHS and the $300+million bond measure passed by voters. There are also concerns with the DSA because a tunnel under a school building is unprecedented in California. Please read for more information http://centurycitysubway.org/storage/BHUSDMasterPlanImplications.pdf Here is a small sampling of what is contained in the report: “Beverly Hills Unified School District is not aware of any public school in the state that has been built over a subway tunnel; Metro has not identified such a project, if it exists. It is unclear how the Division of the State Architect would treat the presence (or even the potential presence) of a subway tunnel and what modifications to the school design would be required under the Field Act. Note that the Field Act requires that school facilities be constructed to a higher safety standard that is more comparable to essential structures codes than to commercial structure codes. It is certain that because the Metro potential tunnel alignment is common knowledge, the Division of the State Architect will not approve any Beverly Hills High School design that has not addressed the engineering complications raised by the Metro Proposal to tunnel under the campus."
Erik Griswold April 03, 2012 at 04:51 PM
Westwood is an employment center. The students who do commute in are dropped off by bus at Wilshire/Westwood. No matter where you place station you will be convenient for some and distant for others, but the office towers and the retail core of Westwood is served well by the existing proposed station. A shuttle system like the current Bruin Bus will assist those who need to get to specific parts of the UCLA campus not within a short walk of the Purple Line station. Any other location will also require tunneling under the Veteran's Cemetary to get to the VA building or Wilshire/Federal, and that is a can of worms LA Metro wants to stay away from.
Erik Griswold April 03, 2012 at 04:57 PM
The "subway" in Copenhagen was built very recently. Older systems may have multiple entrances in part because when they were built the cost of adding a portal was not as high.
Erik Griswold April 03, 2012 at 05:09 PM
I sure hope Beverly Hills has never and will never build a new sewer. Because those are also tunnels and they are just as "potentially dangerous" as a subway tunnel. And stop calling the Purple Line "Heavy Rail". Yes its vehicles have a higher capacity than the typical "Light Rail" car, but this is not an FRA-regulated intercity freight/passenger railroad like BNSF, UP, Metrolink or Amtrak which is more correctly referenced as "Heavy Rail" In fact, the P2550 "Light Rail" cars used on the Gold Line are heavier (109,000 lbs.) than the A650 cars (82,000 lbs.) used on the Red and Purple Lines.
Chris Loos April 03, 2012 at 06:39 PM
SPOILER ALERT: The Division of State Architect will recommend zero modifications to BHUSD to comply with the Field Act, because the Purple line will introduce zero engineering complications. From your comments, one would think that you're talking about a rail line barrelling straight through the school and not SEVENTY FEET below the surface. You guys are really grasping at straws here. Then again, I probably would too if I was being paid $895/hr by the Beverly Hills Board of Education for my PR services. http://la.curbed.com/archives/2011/03/amid_subway_stop_fight_beverly_hills_group_launches_web_site_hires_sitrick_company.php
Simon April 03, 2012 at 07:18 PM
People supportive of mass transit and working Angelenos should show your support for Constellation by attending the Metro Board's meeting on April 26th at 9am. Or the planning committee's meeting on April 18, 2012, 1:00 PM. If you can only go to one, make sure it's the 26th! Their building is located at 1 Gateway Plaza on the east side of Union Station. Email supportive comments to WestsideExtension@metro.net
LAofAnaheim April 03, 2012 at 07:29 PM
Good comment! And with reason! Beverly Hills has NO CASE in court, this is their only way to change Metro's stance on Constellation. Beverly Hills would have to prove why their school is more special than San Diego State and other schools in which Metro agencies nationwide have drilled under. IF and I mean a big IF, judges were to side with Beverly Hills and not Metro......it would be disastrous for all transit agencies in America. Hence, they would set a new precedent that would disrupt SEPTA, NYMTA, CTA, Portland Trimex, etc.. Bascially, Beverly Hills is trying to change a precedent that has been working for a century. Good luck........you cannot change this provision in court......this would affect every transit agency in America.
Jyouseffi April 03, 2012 at 07:38 PM
Thanks for sharing that info, Simon. CLUE LA is joining with We Do Our Part LA to advocate for the subway. We will be at those meetings. If you're interesting in joining with us email, jyouseffi@cluela.org or my Google Voice: 213 986 6939.
Mr M April 04, 2012 at 08:35 PM
Bait and switch? Can you describe a time when the MTA officially committed to the Santa Monica Blvd alignment and then later reneged their decision and switched to the Constellation Ave alignment? I have trouble remembering events that didn't actually occur.
LAofAnaheim April 05, 2012 at 07:54 PM
Wow, a Beverly Hills funded report has the following conclusion about Santa Monica v. Constellation: Hey Patch, can you please detail this study? From the Shannon & Wilson report prepared for Beverly Hills: "In summary, we agree with the conclusions of the Fault Report that the Constellation Station location appears to be more favorable than the Santa Monica Boulevard location based on the exploration data that is interpreted to show no faulting in the station area." What's Beverly Hills arguement now?
Amy F April 18, 2012 at 06:35 PM
Off the top of my head ... BART tunnels run under Laney Community College (a moderately large public school campus) in Oakland, including under buildings and athletic fields. The school was there before BART and has obviously expanded since.
Joe Parker April 19, 2012 at 12:17 AM
The argument is simple. The MTA report is flawed. The MTA report says active faults are under the high school and thus the WBHL is active. The fact is no active faults are under the high school. Ergo, the WBHL is NOT active. Dr. Dolan trenched at the Veterans Hospital and could not draw a definite conclusion that the Santa Monica Fault was active (within the past 11,000 years). YET, he take coring samples and states that this fault IS active two miles away. Sounds fishy to me.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »