Regarding the June 3 issue,
First, I read on the front page, “One Beverly Hills given green light” by reporter Cameron Kiszla, and then on page 11 my letter (“Mobility options must be balanced. . .” and the letters by Marcy Kelly, “One Beverly Hills will have major impact on city,” and Robert Cherno, “Plan for church property would harm neighborhood.” All deal with real estate development and road mobility in our communities.
Kiszla describes an extended overview of what the developer plans for the One Beverly Hills project focused on economic benefits that the city could receive, but so little on any negatives. Letter-writer Marcy Kelly recognizes the likely impact of the project, rising 32 stories into the sky (100 feet taller than the Statue of Liberty), far exceeding Beverly Hills’ height limit of 45 feet. “The traffic will be a nightmare,” she predicts.
My letter congratulates the Beverly Hills City Council on its efforts to balance the needs of bicyclists, pedestrians, transit riders and motorists. I agree, but caution is the order of the day. Do we need more empty bicycle lanes, as they now are? Will transit ridership improve or are we just dreaming? And what about the project’s impact on traffic congestion and limited parking spaces, barely enough to accommodate our present car drivers? We certainly want to do more good than harm.
As letter-writer Cherno hints, bribery and collusion involving developers are not things we would like to be factors in our city’s growth and well-being. Recent findings of corruption by elected local leaders is not what we want for our communities.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.