# Beverly Hills Subway Route OKed, saving millions



## WhoozOn1st (Apr 3, 2014)

Take _that_ NIMBYS!! (but it still ain't over 'til it's over)

"Westside subway extension survives legal challenge by Beverly Hills"" -- http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-subway-lawsuit-ruling-20140403,0,2491628.story#ixzz2xqvJXgHP

"Knocking down one of the last hurdles for Los Angeles' long-awaited Westside subway extension, a judge ruled late Wednesday that transit officials followed environmental laws when they chose a route that would require tunneling under Beverly Hills High School."

"The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's five-year, $13.8-million environmental review process was thorough and fair, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge John A. Torribio wrote in a 15-page decision."

"The route Metro chose includes a station near Constellation Boulevard in Century City, two blocks west of Beverly Hills High School. It will require tunneling under parts of the campus. Metro considered an alternative route along Santa Monica Boulevard but discarded it after agency studies found a complex earthquake fault zone in that area.

"'The Constellation Station is located in the middle of high rise office buildings that house thousands of potential subway riders,' [L.A. County Superior Judge John] Torribio wrote. The Santa Monica Boulevard station favored by Beverly Hills 'would require these same riders to walk a considerable distance to access the subway,'" the judge wrote.

Not final, but a significant and grand victory to be enjoyed by all favoring good transit on a sensible route in a timely manner.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Apr 4, 2014)

Stop hating on NIMBYs, guys. Do you want your house torn down for a subway?


----------



## MikefromCrete (Apr 4, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Stop hating on NIMBYs, guys. Do you want your house torn down for a subway?


If they paid me enough money, why not?


----------



## Eric S (Apr 4, 2014)

What if it was torn down for a bus garage instead?


----------



## MattW (Apr 4, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Stop hating on NIMBYs, guys. Do you want your house torn down for a subway?


As near as I can tell, this wouldn't have even required that! They just didn't want anything to happen, so maybe instead of NIMBYS, they were BANANAs.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 4, 2014)

NTMH (Not Through My House) is reasonable. The NIMBY/BANANA attitude is different.


----------



## George Harris (Apr 4, 2014)

"You can't cook breakfast without breaking eggs"

No matter what you do or how hard you try there is no such thing as a transportation project that does not have some negative effect on somebody. That is why there are paymetns for these effects. It is to as much as practical "make whole" those affected.


----------



## Aaron (Apr 4, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Stop hating on NIMBYs, guys. Do you want your house torn down for a subway?


That's not really the issue for these people.

When using the term, the classic NIMBY is not someone whose house is being purchased for right of way. I can understand that someone who's being forced through the process of eminent domain would be bound to have some disagreements about how to value the property they're losing. Instead, when the pejorative NIMBY is thrown about, it's usually talking about those who are complaining just because they don't want something _near them_. Not because they're losing a piece of their property or directly losing a view or something that could directly impact the value of their specific property. No, it's usually complaints about changing the character of their community coupled with complaints about increasing traffic or potential safety. Quite often, there's a undercurrent of concern about bringing the wrong kinds of people to their part of town. Basically just assuming that they should have the power to control everything about their community to keep it exactly the way it was when they decided to live there while doing nothing to help others who've decided to live there or (_shudder_) might decide to live there in the future.


----------



## George Harris (Apr 4, 2014)

Aaron said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > Stop hating on NIMBYs, guys. Do you want your house torn down for a subway?
> ...


Aaron has it right. It also applies to a lot of people that go a step further. That is those that complain about or want to or try to change things that existed BEFORE they were in the area. One that is a constant recurrance in our area of interest are those that complain about train noise affecting their lives or the value of their property. For 99.99999% of these people these trains were there long before the people were. Of course there are similar complainers about airport noise, road noise, etc., etc. There are many people that weem to want the benefits of living in an urban area without any of the normal negatives such as traffic noise, lights, etc. This sort of mental defect is hopeless. Then I have run into people that have moved to rural areas that complain about the farm equipment noise, particularly it starting very early in the morning. Get a clue, idiots. The farmer is not up before daylight for the fun of it. During planting and harvest season you have very short work windows requiring maximum effort that determine your sucess or failure for the year.

One of the dumbest responses that I see regularly from the train is in the new houses that are above the tracks where they follow the bay shore between Richmond (CA) and Martinea. They have this 10 feet high noise wall between them and the railroad. This does not block their second floor windows, but what it does block is their view of the bay. I would far rather be able to see the bay. You can get used to the train noise.


----------



## JayPea (Apr 4, 2014)

George Harris said:


> Aaron said:
> 
> 
> > Swadian Hardcore said:
> ...



Regarding people who move into rural areas then complain about the farm equipment noise, I live in a rural area, and it's amazing just how clueless some of these folk who move out of the city to "experience the rural lifestyle" really are. In addition to the equipment noise, they complain about the dust. *Gee, in an area that gets about 15 inches of rainfall a year, ya think??*

They complain about "being buzzed by low-flying aircraft" *And what are crop dusters supposed to do?? Drop their spray from thousands of feet up, thereby insuring it will fall anywhere but where it was intended??*

They complain about it taking so long for emergency vehicles to respond. *Then don't live in the middle of nowhere, miles from the nearest town. All but a couple of our county's fire districts are volunteer, which means firefighters/EMTs aren't at the fire station, ready to go at a moment's notice.* *They have to respond from their homes and businesses to the local fire station first.*

They complain about the noise and smell from farm animals. *Cows moo and crap. Get over it. Pigs oink and crap. Get over it. Horses neigh and crap. Get over it. Sheep bleat and crap. Get over it.* Farmers do muck out stalls, etc, but don't like the smell??? Don't move to an area where the prevailing winds blow the odor your direction.

At one point, so many negatives were poured into local officials about the above "nuisances" from urban transplants that our area's welcome brochure about rural living deleted all mention of those things, saying they didn't want to portray a negative image about our area. But that move was quickly reversed when it was pointed out those who had no clue about rural living needed to have some idea about what to expect when they chose our rural area to live.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Apr 4, 2014)

I used to live in an area that would sometimes be downwind of mushroom farms.


----------

