I live on 171st. and Firmona. I've been rooting for placement where there are tracks used by a freight train every day. Obagi is advocating that the least able to defend themselves pay the freight (pun intended) as when the interstate highway system in the 60s routed poor people out of their neighborhoods. No interstate ramps into Beverly Hills, Palos Verdes and the Palisades. To run it on elevated track through Hawthorne would be a full employment act for the attorneys. Eminent domain actions, environmental swat teams and disruption for the general population would be the name of the game. Remember when a discount grocery and a pharmacy were going in on Artesia? Protestors kicked and squealed. For the life of me I couldn't figure out what was objectionable about a grocery and a pharmacy. Then it dawned on me. The great unwashed from Lawndale would cross the line of demarcation on Inglewood Blvd. and there goes the neighborhood. I suspect Obagi is of the same mentality.
Wow, all that outdated, obsolete data and commentary.... Anyone up on the facts of these routes can clearly see the advantage in Metro servicing businesses and stopping at true destinations like the soon to be re-developed South Bay Galleria and the apartments coming with it, but also the increased ridership that Metro now touts.
Other than the Metro stop at Hawthorne & Artesia potentially luring shoppers away from the Del Amo Mall, there is nothing for Torrance residents to complain about, as this route brings a station closer to potential North Torrance riders. And Torrance could have asked for the tracks to go all the way down Hawthorne (elevated) so their mall could also be a destination for shoppers. But they didn't, and that's all on them.
And BTW, even Metro now says the elevated Hawthorne option would be less expensive than the trenching option that goes under 182nd St. Without that expensive trench, the emergency response vehicles stationed just east of the ROW tracks would be unacceptably obstructed with a train crossing every 6 or 7 minutes, so that original plan is effectively of the table now, leaving the elevated Hawthorne option as the best in ridership, in delivery of riders to shopping destinations, in reducing the many negative local resident impacts, and in cost.
I live in Lawndale and oppose this intrusion and dangerous option ROW C.
I believe we are in the year 2022 not 2017 so any of that financial data is obsolete especially as new problems come into light.
The cost of removing all the hazardous gas pipes wasn’t even a consideration 5 years ago. Me. Meiter of Metro said they are in discussions with Shell for removal. Even if the gas pipes are removed, there have been thousands of train derailments in the last decade resulting in fires and death. The residents are in an extremely congested area where ROW C is and with 2 trains every 6 minutes they are facing a grave danger.
This unsafe situation wouldn’t exist without the waiver from the environment impact. Those affected weren’t allowed any voice as this was bulldozed through the legislation.
Your concern is about parking spaces and cost saving while mine is about safety and our quality of life.
If they proceed with ROW option and build barriers to prevent people from entering then I predict many costly lawsuits.
Metro must know from prior experience people will want to cross to the other side. They probably had a special budget for repairing fences with big holes made by pedestrians making their own shortcuts.
Children, teenagers, taggers, and homeless people will climb over the barrier. They will face the peril of 2 roaring trains every 6 minutes.
This will be an expensive choice in more ways than money.
I live on 171st. and Firmona. I've been rooting for placement where there are tracks used by a freight train every day. Obagi is advocating that the least able to defend themselves pay the freight (pun intended) as when the interstate highway system in the 60s routed poor people out of their neighborhoods. No interstate ramps into Beverly Hills, Palos Verdes and the Palisades. To run it on elevated track through Hawthorne would be a full employment act for the attorneys. Eminent domain actions, environmental swat teams and disruption for the general population would be the name of the game. Remember when a discount grocery and a pharmacy were going in on Artesia? Protestors kicked and squealed. For the life of me I couldn't figure out what was objectionable about a grocery and a pharmacy. Then it dawned on me. The great unwashed from Lawndale would cross the line of demarcation on Inglewood Blvd. and there goes the neighborhood. I suspect Obagi is of the same mentality.
Wow, all that outdated, obsolete data and commentary.... Anyone up on the facts of these routes can clearly see the advantage in Metro servicing businesses and stopping at true destinations like the soon to be re-developed South Bay Galleria and the apartments coming with it, but also the increased ridership that Metro now touts.
Other than the Metro stop at Hawthorne & Artesia potentially luring shoppers away from the Del Amo Mall, there is nothing for Torrance residents to complain about, as this route brings a station closer to potential North Torrance riders. And Torrance could have asked for the tracks to go all the way down Hawthorne (elevated) so their mall could also be a destination for shoppers. But they didn't, and that's all on them.
And BTW, even Metro now says the elevated Hawthorne option would be less expensive than the trenching option that goes under 182nd St. Without that expensive trench, the emergency response vehicles stationed just east of the ROW tracks would be unacceptably obstructed with a train crossing every 6 or 7 minutes, so that original plan is effectively of the table now, leaving the elevated Hawthorne option as the best in ridership, in delivery of riders to shopping destinations, in reducing the many negative local resident impacts, and in cost.
I live in Lawndale and oppose this intrusion and dangerous option ROW C.
I believe we are in the year 2022 not 2017 so any of that financial data is obsolete especially as new problems come into light.
The cost of removing all the hazardous gas pipes wasn’t even a consideration 5 years ago. Me. Meiter of Metro said they are in discussions with Shell for removal. Even if the gas pipes are removed, there have been thousands of train derailments in the last decade resulting in fires and death. The residents are in an extremely congested area where ROW C is and with 2 trains every 6 minutes they are facing a grave danger.
This unsafe situation wouldn’t exist without the waiver from the environment impact. Those affected weren’t allowed any voice as this was bulldozed through the legislation.
Your concern is about parking spaces and cost saving while mine is about safety and our quality of life.
If they proceed with ROW option and build barriers to prevent people from entering then I predict many costly lawsuits.
Metro must know from prior experience people will want to cross to the other side. They probably had a special budget for repairing fences with big holes made by pedestrians making their own shortcuts.
Children, teenagers, taggers, and homeless people will climb over the barrier. They will face the peril of 2 roaring trains every 6 minutes.
This will be an expensive choice in more ways than money.
This will be called Death Row in the future.