poor Metro

August 04, 2004 by Eric Richardson

Metro's having a rough little run of late. First they have an appeals judge order work stopped on the valley busway, and now today's LA Times has an article talking about how South Pasadena residents hate the Gold Line and want to file a lawsuit (South Pasadena residents hate everything, but I'll get to that).

Though it shares its naming convention with Metro's rail, the Orange Line is actually a busway. The 14 mile long route runs west from the North Hollywood Red Line station, and includes only one mile of city streets. The remaining miles are dedicated lanes, built along former railroad right of way. Construction began last year, and the plan was to have the line open sometime in 2005.

But sometimes the legal system comes back to haunt you. A few years ago a group of Valley residents filed a lawsuit against Metro, alleging that the environmental report filed failed to adequately examine the possibility of just adding more Rapid buses instead of building anything dedicated. The lawsuit was thrown out. But they filed an appeal, which at the end of July the appellate judge granted. Now busway construction has to stop while the case takes its course. A Daily News article on the shutdown includes this quote:

Residents said all they wanted is for the MTA to study putting in a network of red Rapid buses as an alternative to the costly busway a study now being done by MTA.

"We truly believe more Rapid buses is a better alternative for transportation," said Valley Glen resident Diana Lipari, chairwoman of Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the group that filed the lawsuit.

How can you say that without laughing? Now, I think Metro's Rapid bus program is cool, but let's look at what Rapid buses can and cannot do:

• Plus: Rapid buses make limited stops, cutting down on the stop-and-start that contributes to much of the running time of any sort of transit. The buses have special transmitters that can signal lights to hold green if a Rapid is coming, allowing it slightly less obstructed travel.

• Minus: They run on city streets. This is Los Angeles. City streets suck. City streets are too crowded all ready, without more buses clogging them up. If you're going nowhere in stop-and-go traffic none of the Rapid improvements are going to help you, at all.

Bottom line: Rapid buses are an improvement over normal buses in a lot of cases (they don't replace normal buses, just overlay their routes). But what they aren't is a transit plan. No person who has a choice is going to give up sitting in traffic in their car to just sit in the same traffic in a bus. And I think that's where people like Diana Lipari just don't get it. For them just adding some Rapid buses is cool, 'cause I'm sure she sees public transit as a necessary evil that exists for the mobility of those people without cars who come and work the Valley's low-income jobs. Something that people might choose because separated right-of-way makes it a better choice? Never.

South Pasadena's at it again, too, according to an article in today's LA Times titled "Residents Plan Gold Line Lawsuit." The people of South Pasadena (surely not all of them, but those that do are vocal) have been complaining for a while now. When the Gold Line first opened they had signs up along the route, demanding that the trains slow to 25mph (or was it 15?) and quiet the bells at crossing gates. Never mind the fact that Metro can only obey Caltrans rules for marking intersections and runs the line slow enough most of the way already, these South Pasadena people are really just getting annoying. From the LA Times article:

Residents who have fought the extension of the Long Beach Freeway through their town see the Gold Line as another front in the war to guard their "Mayberry" way of life. The line threatens to ruin South Pasadena's quiet atmosphere, said David Margrave, a city councilman who owns a plumbing business near the line and who promised while he was campaigning to press the MTA to reduce the noise level.

"We don't want to be L.A.," he said. "We don't want to be Pasadena. We hate the idea of Alhambra."

Dude, not to spoil your illusion or anything, but you're right in the middle of the Los Angeles metro area. You are LA, like it or not. You can't sit in the middle of the road, plug your ears, and pretend it's not there. If you want your peace and quiet, move somewhere rural. Don't keep being the guy chained to the tree. Your little town stopped the 210 from connecting to the 710, or the 110, and left that weird little spur that ends so abruptly. I know you're proud of that, but do you understand that the rest of LA doesn't like you messing up our roads? But ok, I understand that a lot of houses would be displaced by construction, etc. I'd make the utilitarian argument that it's for the greater good, but ok. But the train? It's already there. It's already had to do enough for you. Adapt, or sell your house to someone who likes living right by transit. Those people are out there, you know...

variety covers downtown cinema

August 03, 2004 by Eric Richardson

As noted today in LA Observed, last night downtown held its first premiere in decades when the Orpheum played host to Tom Cruise and Collateral. Variety had a good article run in advance talking a bit about the revitalization of cinema downtown, focusing on this premiere, the Laemmle Grande, and the Linda Lea.

I wasn't here last night to snoop around down by the Orpheum, but driving by there in the last few days it's been a scene of much activity, with the parking lot in the rear transformed into a sea of white canopies covering all manner of production details.

When visiting the Orpheum a few weekends ago on the LA Conservancy's Broadway theatre tour, the guy at the Orpheum was talking about the back and forth they were having with the premiere people, who wanted to hang a larger screen than the Orpheum's stage would support (and therefore larger than what was installed). I can't remember the exact details, but I think they wanted a 60ft screen where the Orpheum only had a 43ft one (the largest that would accomodate viewing angles from all of the seating). At that point the theatre was confident they had talked the movie people into doing the logical thing and using the house screen, but with Hollywood you never know.

The Laemmle Grande bit is an interesting read that sums up well what I'd been hearing. Where Laemmles in locales such as Santa Monica and Pasadena run almost exclusively indie films, the Grande runs mostly normal first-run fare. This always struck me as odd, until I saw a great explanation from Greg Laemmle posted to the newdowntown list. Apparently indie prints are so hard to come by that they just have a hard time getting anyone to want to show an indie downtown, a place not known to be all that great for artsy movie audiences. With the new loft crowd moving downtown, though, that could be beginning to change. The Grande is currently showing Maria Full of Grace, a film that I'm only a bit interested in seeing, but probably will go check out at the Grande just because I love the idea of a theater that's within walking distance showing indie movies.

The Linda Lea is going to be a bit more work. I bike by the building on Main, and though the outside clearly shows a theater, it shows one that needs lots of work. Hopefully the interior is better preserved than the exterior, but that's hard to believe since it last showed movies over twenty years ago and doesn't look to have even benefited from the location shooting that has kept the Broadway theaters afloat.

It's always good to see publicity for the revitalization of downtown, especially such a complimentary piece in a trade like Variety.

more on the Caltrans building

August 02, 2004 by Eric Richardson

I just wanted to follow up my post from last week about the new Caltrans building downtown. I rode by the building again this morning and also had dinner the other night with a friend who's an architecture major at USC, so both of those events brought to light additional thoughts.

First, this morning I got a bit of a late start, so I ended up riding past the Caltrans building at about 9:30am. The light was hitting the building favorably, and it seemed less imposing. Some of the fencing was also removed along Main, allowing my first view into what will be the courtyard space. That courtyard will add a lot to a sense of balance for the building, I think. It helps to see the building connected to earth, breaking up its massive flat surface while interacting with the ground. I haven't been by the building on any of the other three sides, but I'll probably wait until the rest of the fencing is gone before I make the circuit.

Saturday night a few of us went to El Cholo for dinner. While waiting for a table I was talking to the aforementioned architecture student about the Caltrans building. He hadn't seen it in person, but we got to talking about how buildings interact with their environments. In particular we discussed the Walt Disney Concert Hall, another brand new downtown structure by a big name architect (in this case Frank Gehry). Gehry's structure is unarguably beautiful and organic, but one big complaint is how poorly it interacts with the urban landscape. Several sides of the structure face the sidewalk with blank inpenetrable walls. Matt said that a big topic of discussion in architecture classes is the choice between flattening a space and making a design that can fit into any environment, or taking the environment you're given and crafting a building to that space. Now, think what you want of Gehry and his designs, but it's clear that at times his design has come at the expense of interactions with the world around it (see the whole thing where they had to put screens over part of the building because, wait, polished shiny metal reflects light directly into people's apartments?)

Both Gehry and Mayne are doing important things right now, but it feels to me like they're designing to show off to their peers rather than worrying about the people that come into contact with their buildings.

That's just me, though, and I'm a communications major / programmer, and definitely not an architect.

Music: Jim Bianco at the Knitting Factory

July 31, 2004 by Eric Richardson

I've been taking lots of little one day absenses over the past few weeks. Not intentional, they just sort of happen.

Anyway, Thursday night Kathy and I took the Red Line over to Hollywood and Highland to see Jim Bianco at the Knitting Factory. It was the first time I'd been to the Knit in a good two years, and they've changed some stuff up. The show was in the front bar, which meant that they actually had three events running at the same time (Main Stage, Alterknit Lounge, and Front Bar). Crazy. Anyway, the show was great, the sound was great, the crowd was large... It was a fun time.

I bought Jim's new cd, Handsome Devil. Good stuff. Not quite as good as the live performance, but few things really are.

the CalTrans Building and understanding architecture

July 29, 2004 by Eric Richardson

This week's Downtown News is their Best of Downtown issue. One story presents reader answers to the question, "Who Would You Vote Off the Downtown Island?" Top voter-getter was the still under construction CalTrans Building. From the article:

Some have complained that, with 13 stories of metal and steel, the building resembles a futuristic fortress out of step with its Civic Center surroundings. As one critic commented, if architect Thom Mayne - who, it must be noted, is frequently praised and is winning high-profile commissions across the country - was going for the "totally impenetrable" look, he nailed it.

I can't help but agree. The building rises 13 stories shrouded in a black metal mesh. The otherwise flat surface features various protruding panels that seem like they were partially ripped back by some rogue hurricane. Riding my bike to work I pass the building's site on Main and it just feels absolutely dominating.

Opinion on this Archinect forum thread is somewhat split. Some applaud the green features, while others (rightfully, in my opinion) decry the building's very poor interaction with the street and surrounding neighborhoods. All are interesting reading.

What I find most interesting, though, is a quote from an article about lead architect Thom Mayne that ran last year in Metropolis Magazine (the quote's on the second page). The author questioned Mayne about a concept he had done for the Ground Zero site in New York:

I told Mayne I was confused by all this. His plan for Ground Zero seemed to be exactly what he was condemning at the UCLA conference: a paper fantasy that doesn't speak to the concerns of the average person. It was fairly clear that the people of New York were not clamoring for a critique of Modernism in Lower Manhattan. Mayne's answer surprised me. The average person's understanding of his projects is "irrelevant," he told me. "There's layers and layers of ideas that go into a piece of work. It can be engaged at many levels. Probably most people are engaged at a very direct level: how it affects them. Others will recognize that there's an organizational or conceptual tissue."

That's the feeling I get from the CalTrans building. I walk by it and I feel like I'm missing out on something. More than disliking the building, I simply don't understand it. Which is all good and well on paper, but not nearly as cool when I'm standing beneath 13 stories of Borg-like metal.