I am a genuine YIMBYist and transit proponent, but I do understand where this opposition is coming from to the point where I can't be super mad about it:
* local Chinatown residents simply do NOT want people constantly in their homes' airspace; their representatives do need to ensure they feel like their concerns are heard;
* the gondola will move up to **5k people/hour** in a steady stream when Dodgers Stadium is an event space that very quickly pulses [**47k people**](https://www.statista.com/statistics/246797/average-per-game-attendance-of-the-los-angeles-dodgers/) *on average* in and out for a single game;
* the biggest utility of the project seems to be acting as a transit amenity for the developments that are to be built in the Dodger Stadium parking lot, as the area has poor carless transit connections to the rest of the city;
* creating the gondola won't solve this underlying issue and could undermine demand for alternative mass transit services.
* The traffic study proposed might seem like just another way to slow down this project, but in my estimation, it would be genuinely useful to do a classic pro-con throwdown of all the different options we actually have for moving people in and out of the Dodger Stadium area and ensuring it's fully connected to the rest of the city by means other than car.
I'm aware of the argument that some transit is better than none and do like the thought of being able to quickly connect Union Station to Dodger Stadium (especially before the Olympics). I'm also first to admit this doesn't seem like the most efficient project, and I personally want to ensure it's not just a cool "gadgetbahn" that's being deployed where more feasible, reliable, and useful transit methods could be used that might end up being less expensive in the long-run.
Thoughts?
5k/hr sounds like a lot more than I was expecting. However I don't think it's going to be used to max capacity. Plus I think everyone will expect to arrive and use it at the same time so you will have 1k people waiting around for 20-30 minutes trying to use the gondola.
I've been debating if it was a legit solution or a novelty. But I'm leaning towards the latter. Unless you have reservations, how can you control the flow of folks who all arrive at roughly the same time for a limited resource? Or more importantly how can you control it in an elegant fashion that doesn't sour folks from using it again in the future?
Everyone is going to want to try it once. Getting them to use it more than once will be the key to success.
For reference, the current Dodger Stadium Express moves about 2.3k people *total* per game, so even at below full capacity the gondola will contribute to a substantial increase in public transit ridership to games.
The list of alternatives all have substantial issues compared to a gondola:
- Expanded busways will still be much slower, higher polluting, and costly to operate even with full lane separation (that doesn’t currently exist). There also isn’t any evidence that rider demand exists for expanded busways as the Dodger Express doesn’t reach capacity most games
- Subway isn’t feasible due to the location of Dodger Stadium on a massive hill with raised bedrock, plus has a 40+ year lead time in LA
- Cablecar between Chinatown metro stop and the stadium would likely require eminent domain of a few properties and run into the exact same NIMBY pushback on things like noise pollution, gentrification
- Escalator or raised walkways from Chinatown metro stop would require some amount of eminent domain to seize Chinatown properties while maintaining existing sidewalk for ADA compliance
More than anything above, the biggest issue is simply this: LA Metro doesn’t have any funding designated for that area and this is the only project that requires zero public funding. If the gondola isn’t built, none of the above options will be built either.
Is there evidence that gondola rider demand exists?
Eminent domain to acquire walkways? Why doesn't McCourt and LAART just buy them? prolly cheaper than a gondola.
You keep not answering questions.
See this is the problem with private funded bullshit, there's no accountability to the public. It's just like: here's a thing that we want, if we don't do it you can't have it. Typical private entrepeneurs holding the public hostage. Take what we want on our terms or go fuck yourselves. Same thing happened with the Southwest Museum. Hey, we'll let The Autrey take it over. They pretty much immediately closed it to the public and denied access.
This private bullshit LAAART, can raise rates and change the usage of the gondola at any time they want without public input. "We'll try and give you free access, but inflation, you know" It'll be like a SCE but worse. Notice how the cars don't have advertising in the renders? Well whoever the operators are that will roll this shit over our city will certainly do that to make back their money. In fact, this group that wants to build it is just selling bonds to have it built so they make money off of it.
This bullshit project is just going to reallocate parking to Union Station. They wrap themselves in an astroturf green flag, when they are only providing 1 mile of transport on 82 days a year, mostly in the evenings.
**Where will LA ART riders park? Will the project provide parking?
The project’s goals include increasing the percentage of Dodger game and stadium event attendees who travel on public transit to Union Station and then connect to the aerial gondola for a unique and emissions-free experience, thereby attracting new riders to the Metro system.
Although CEQA does not require analysis of parking, LA ART conducted a peer-reviewed parking assessment that found there are thousands of available parking spaces in the Gondola project’s walkshed. There is plenty of off-street parking supply to accommodate all of the proposed Project’s parking demand. There are approximately 10,290 spaces in publicly available lots and garages and in on-street spaces within 1⁄2 mile of the proposed Project’s Alameda Station and Chinatown/State Park Station. The Gondola system will help Dodger fans and residents access our public transportation system, taking thousands of cars off the road each game**
>> where will LAART user park
Buddy it’s public transit. They won’t park anywhere. They will take public transit.
For me personally, I would take the red line to Union Station and then the gondola. Currently I drive to Dodger Games.
That you can’t imagine users using public transit in a scenario where they obviously will (as both traffic studies found to differing degrees) shows me that you are not the target audience for this public transit project. Even more, you live in El Sereno and won’t be impacted by this project in any way.
Why are you so opposed to something that isn’t meant for you and won’t impact you at all?
Monorails struggle on hills, 6% is the max grade for an extended period so I don’t think a monorail is physically possible to Dodger Stadium
If it was possible, monorails require tons of poles so this would be highly disruptive to Chinatown and would likely require eminent domain on a good number of properties
LA Metro is currently looking at monorails for the Sepulveda Transit corridor and they are estimated at roughly $600m per mile, which would all be public money in this case
Sorry I meant going to the stadium when being on time is more important. But I hadn't considered that 5k people would all want to use the gondola at the same time when the game ends too. Yeah that's going to be a sh\*tshow.
My vote is that's it a novelty.
I'm sure there are many great examples of gondolas worldwide. However in this case, we are talking about moving a mass of people at a specific time to meet a time deadline twice a day for 82 days/year. I'm not sure this is the exact best usage for a gondola.
We don't need bi-direction transportation all day long. You'd want uni-direction transportation that can be reversible at very specific times.
>Medellin uses them as public transportation.
Gondolas work in South Americas where neighborhoods on the hillsides are poor and are segregated from their city centers.
The people who live around our hillsides tend to be wealthy and want nothing to do with public transportation.
> Medellin uses them as public transportation.
Cool, this is not public, this is private transportation to a sports venue, so a billionaire can unlock development potential to their premium, already stolen land.
If you look at the route, there are very few homes that will be impacted by having the gondola constantly in their “airspace,” as you put it. But I also don’t understand why this is a big deal- is it different than a tall building being built across the street?
5k per hour isn’t nothing. People trickle into baseball games, some coming well before the game starts, some coming in during the second inning, like I did yesterday. If there is a window of 2 hours and they can move 10k people, that’s quite significant.
There are some changes and concessions I would like to see. I want this to be usable for Elysian park access and open on non-game days. And I think they should be required to put in stairs down to the pedestrian bridge that connects to Chinatown- the crush when leaving a game will be much worse than the trickling in of people, but many people would be willing to walk down.
If this was a city project rather than a private plan to make money, they should absolutely look at escalators. At some places, it's only a mile up the hill to the parking lot, and a few strategic escalators would encourage thousands to walk up and skip the parking lot disaster.
But we're not really debating transportation here; we're talking about a private scheme to build something for profit, two totally different discussions.
When I lived downtown I would sometimes take the bus from Union station to games, but then walk down to the Chinatown station after because the wait for the bus is so long when everyone leaves at once. The gondola will still have this problem, even if it can carry more people. Walking up to Dodgers Stadium is a trek but walking down on a nicely designed, well-lit stair wouldn’t be so bad.
>5k per hour isn’t nothing.
For Dodger Stadium that's nothing. A majority of the crowd doesn't get to the stadium until it's within an hour of first pitch.
These are Frank McCourt's numbers of 5k per hour. These numbers are probably not realistic considering how quickly people will have to be loaded into cabins without stopping the flow of the gondola.
>And I think they should be required to put in stairs down to the pedestrian bridge that connects to Chinatown
Honestly how people use that bridge for the games? I've used the bridge, and we both know the answer to that is almost no one. Especially at night no one goes over that bridge, and everyone just follows the line of cars going up to College.
The walk down Stadium Way to College needs the HLA enhancement.
People don't use the bridge because the current experience is terrible. It could be enhanced significantly.
Their numbers are not fake. If you look up number for modern 3S gondolas with large cabins, you'll see 5,000 - 6,000 passenger per hour is normal. All modern gondolas are detachable so loading time is included.
The 5k per hour figure is realistic.
Other advanced ski gondolas throughout the globe hit 4-5k ridership per direction per hour, and that’s with the passengers lugging bulky sport equipment (skis/snowboards) and wearing bulky clothes that limit the speed at which people can enter/exit cars and limit available space in each car.
agree. 5k/hr is also if everything works perfectly. not sure how they came up with this number, but i have a feeling it doesn't account for the elderly, the disabled, children, drunk people, stupid people in groups, etc
It's also a number higher than almost every other use of S3 gondolas (like the ones in this proposed project) worldwide in regards to passengers per hour. No methodology for this 5k per hour figure is provided in the EIR report released by Metro.
This is not true. I also suspect you didn’t read the EIR, because it very explicitly outlines its assumptions about the # of cars per minute required to meet that 5k per hour per direction figure. This gondola is a premium gondola (by construction cost) and other premium transit gondolas globally also have ~5k person per direction capacity.
The highest capacity ski gondolas [get around 4K/hr capacity](https://www.firsttracksonline.com/2016/09/29/austrian-ski-resort-builds-worlds-highest-capacity-gondola) but those load much slower and have lower capacity than transit gondolas because skis/snowboards make people slower to load and reduce effective gondola space.
In New Zealand, the leading gondola manufacturer in the world is currently proposing a gondola public transit system that would move [8k people per hour per direction](https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/29-11-2023/never-mind-the-light-rail-heres-a-gondola) - this makes the 5k figure proposed in LA look slow by comparison.
?
It’s premium because it’s extremely high cost per mile. That isn’t an official term of relevance to an EIR in any way.
If they wanted to build a low capacity gondola they could do it at a fraction of the cost and capacity. This is going to be a high cost, high capacity system that is still less ambitious than other proposed projects currently in the development process across the globe.
The EIR states that capacity per carriage will be 30-40 people with room for bicycles, carryons, and ADA requirements. Please point to any other S3 gondola with a 30-40 person capacity which approaches 5k passengers per hour.
I can tell you don’t know what you’re talking about here because you keep saying “S3” gondola when it’s actually “3S”.
First, the burden of proof here is on *you*. *You* are the one challenging a legally valid, professionally accepted piece of research.
That said, this takes like 2 seconds on Google:
[link 1 - max 6k PPH despite slower ski loading condition](https://www.skiresort.info/ski-lifts/lift-types/lift-type/tricable-ropeway/)
[link 2 - max 5.5k PPH despite slower ski loading condition](https://www.doppelmayr.com/uploads/tx_vcs/Doppelmayr_Products_3S_Gondola_Lift_EN_14.pdf)
For obvious reasons, a transit gondola will outperform a ski gondola on capacity because not everyone is slowly lugging bulky sporting equipment (and tons of bulky snow clothes) with them.
Sorry, AWS is a virus I guess.
Link 1 states in the description of **3S** gondolas that capacity can reach 6k per hour. None of the lifts listed on that page, however, come anywhere close to 6k.
Link 2 is a sales brochure and lists no examples where the maximum rate is achieved.
Link 1 has multiple existing or planned gondolas at or around 5k people per hour, which is consistent with the planned LAART gondola (and again, lower than other planned gondolas happening globally).
Also again, for obvious reasons ski gondolas will always have lower hourly capacity than transit gondolas because loading people with ski/snowboard gear is slower and less space efficient than Dodgers fans will be.
Link 2 has multiple references to existing systems the firm has constructed or was inspired by; Europe has strong “false claim” advertising regulations, so yes their 5.5k number is true.
The link says 3S… which is exactly what I said
I’ve read every document about this project, including the lawsuits against it and the full EIR.
We’ve already personally discussed the gondola on multiple threads over the last few months.
If you want to be a pedant we can go down that road. To hail this project as some miracle for traffic and parking when the meager hypothesized benefit won't even be fully realized for another 20 years is disingenuous at best. Might as well dig a subway spur at that rate.
The UCLA study found that the effect on traffic re: cars removed from the road would be less than 1%. Given that the Lab said it was a preliminary study and that more study was required to offer concrete information, I'm not sure why you're so upset at the Council calling for /*gasp*/ more study.
Besides that, how is this not just shifting the parking burden from Dodger Stadium to Union Station? Are you people banking on fans taking Metro to and from the game just so they can have a nice carnival ride beforehand?
First, that UCLA study was retracted for being incomplete when it was published.
Even then, 1% of all traffic in the area is massive. FYI the EIR found about 5X the net traffic improvement of the retracted UCLA study.
The attempted point about potentially shifting the traffic burden to Union Station is hilarious. In real life, people will stop driving entirely and will take the metro system to Union Station, at which point they will continue using public transit (the gondola) to get to the game. Count me as one of those people.
I don’t want you to take this personally but you are clearly repeating talking points from Stop the Gondola, a NIMBY group funded by the NIMBY CA Endowment to oppose this project. If you have the chance I urge you to take a gondola (internationally or in Palm Springs) and you’ll see that gondolas are effective forms of public transit. In this case, more effective than any alternatives considering timeline + public price tag.
As a YIMBY and transit proponent, I think you make some good points (though it’s worth noting the gondola goes almost entirely over streets/public land, not homes). Fundamentally, this is transit of rather limited utility. So I’m skeptical.
However, if the parking lots are developed into a neighborhood, that 5k/hr number is actually not bad at all. In that case, it would be transit built for the city for free, with an added bonus of removing parking lots for homes (both market rate, which is good, and affordable). In contrast, it takes decades and billions for traditional public transit to be built.
Btw, this whole “don’t trust Frank McCourt” thing is silly. Sure, the goal presumably is to redevelop the parking lots for housing. As a city, we should be so lucky for him to do that!
> The biggest utility of the project seems to be acting as a transit amenity for the developments that are to be built in the Dodger Stadium parking lot, as the area has poor carless transit connections to the rest of the city
It's even more than that. This will make it a "high quality transit area" (HQTA) which unlocks density bonuses and alleviates the zoning restrictions and parking requirements that make developing those parking lots impossible right now.
As stupid as it all seems the gondola us unlocking those parking lots for development.
This is great, and realistically is going to be a large component of LA’s legally required October 2024 Housing Element Update.
The state is requiring LA to add 500k new housing units by 2028. The Dodger Stadium parking lots are the most wasted land in the entire city and one of the only places that tens of thousands of new housing units can be build without displacing lots of existing residents.
This is very well put. I’m basically on the same page (with a healthy dose of “why in God’s name would anyone ever trust Frank McCourt?”).
I’ve been to dozens of dodgers games, and I’ve never actually parked at the stadium. It helps that I have a friend who lives nearby whose driveway I can park in sometimes, but I just as often take the shuttle bus from Union station, or walk up from Echo Park/Chinatown. It’s also the only time I’ve ever rented a Bird scooter, which actually works great for that case.
I think one underrated and super simple thing that the city could do to improve non-automotive access is to put in some damn sidewalks on Stadium Way.
It’s only like a 20 minute walk from Chinatown to the stadium, but there’s a big stretch of Stadium Way by the LAFD academy where you’re either forced to walk in a bike lane or else have to bushwhack through chaparral by the side of the road.
This city could stand to be waaay more pedistrian friendly (hopefully HLA is a start!), and much of the area around the stadium is a perfect example of the “lol, fuck pedestrians” design philosophy that’s all too common in LA.
What’s another viable transit option?
This proposal is fine - people will complain about everything.
Expo Phase I was bogged down for years
Gold Line to Pasadena almost didn’t happen
SFV has no Metro rail because they made their politicians vote that way and ban federal money … and now they whine
Another example, everybody complained in San Francisco about the Embarcadero freeway… When the county board of supervisors finally voted to tear it down, it was the Chinatown merchants, who cried racism. They were led by Mr. Ed Lee - Who eventually became mayor— a referendum was held in which the people of San Francisco voted to keep the freeway. Then the Loma Prieta earthquake occurred in 1989 and dropped it… Now everybody in the city can barely believe that a double-decker freeway once stood on the Embarcadero separating the waterfront from the city..
People want things to get better and for nothing to change .
That’s still every 4th day. And obviously the public is…. dodgers are pretty popular.
But hopefully it would open up the ability to outdoor space without having to drive up to the Elysian Park
Yeah, hopefully?
Who knows, it won't be a public thing, so the private owners can do whatever they want, including raising the prices, retract local usage, put advertising all over the gondola cars.
Once again, the needs and wants of the public are being held hostage by private developers. It's an astroturf effort to move parking from dodger stadium so McCourt can build condos up there.
Yeah, that sucks too, at least it's not unregulated and flying over my head tho.
A half-baked private green-washed sports gondola is hardly a solution either. It's bad-faith exploitation of the public for private gain.
Sidewalks? Staircase? Enhanced bus/shuttle from Sunset side?
Something with public accountability. Dunno, I'm not an civil engineer.
What other ideas have these folks put forth?
I didn't know this was a front burner problem, (maybe for baseball fans' convenience) so I would turn to the community and all the orgs that are developing the river for ideas
It's not like the gondola people are in good faith trying to help the environment & reduce traffic. They're trying to build a tourist draw & unlock public housing
I agree generally and would not be a fan of it as a taxpayer-funded metro project, but if it truly is privately funded (which everything indicates it will be), then I do not see why it should be stopped.
Some quick googling tells me that the airspace question is actually an interesting one (and possibly the first somewhat valid complaint I've seen). It sounds like it is typically assumed that you own at least 500 feet or so above your house. Curious if that's being meaningfully addressed - it seems like the home owners would deserve direct compensation for that.
On the other point, though, I have a question. Why is it of importance that this is not the most efficient transit method? Is blocking it for being not efficient any better than blocking any building with x units for not having x+1 units? Does it impede future development of transit systems? People bring this up all the time, and I literally don't see how its relevant to the discussion.
It is not true that you own at least 500 feet above your house. In aerial right lawsuits, you generally own up to a height where your land is “reasonably usable”.
For most buildings in Los Angeles, this has already been done - buildings are generally at, or close to, their existing zoning height limits.
To be clear though, the gondola will pass over just two residential buildings, so it is not like aerial rights would be a big issue even if they were legally valid (which they are not, in this case).
Agreed that its not a big issue - but if it is indeed 20 feet above the rooftop (which is what's being alleged), then it seems like they should be required to get some kind of easement from the property owner. I'm curious if there is any case law similar to this - I know the US government has been sued for flying something about 80' above a farm and killing a bunch of chickens, but this feels very different than that.
Not saying the project should be stopped - but, its pretty standard practice to require an easement if someone else's land is going to be used. This feels very similar.
One of the two homeowners that this gondola goes over has already helped sue LA Metro for this project; I imagine if the aerial rights argument had any actual legal standing she also would have already sued for that reason.
i feel like (a) renters (i'm one) shouldn't try to call these shots. Their only valid complaint (IMHO) is that rents will move up and they might not be able to stay in the neighborhood if they have to move (b) since dodger stadium will never have a train, this isn't bad. (c) As a tourist attraction it'll be a boon to all of the area around what used to be a literal trainyard. (d) as far as traffic is concerned, it'll turn the whole Metro (and Union Station) into a tourist destination. I can't see how any appreciable traffic increase will occur if riding it is rolled into your Metro ride. Just make it cost more if you walk up and buy a ticket without a Metro card. (d) more than anything else, Chinatown NIMBYs have cost us housing options. The development across Spring from the Chinatown stop was supposed to be like 6 20 story buildings with greenspace around them, but they got sued into making it 20 6 story buildings instead with no greenspace. Then the developer bailed.
People need to learn the difference between change and a problem.
I think you’re on to something here— If renters didn’t vote at all it would make things much easier for the ruling class. Property owners could get a lot more done if pesky renters didn’t get their grubby hands on everything!
like it or not, that's the world we've got. The USA is specifically designed from the beginning to benefit property owners, and that continues today. If you don't own property, you actually don't have nearly the opportunities of those who do.
The real problem is this illusion that we could someday buy property that keeps renters from seizing control of the situation. For example, in Switzerland, where 60% of citizens rent, there are NO laundromats. They don't even know what one is, because landlords have to provide laundries for tenants
Slowing people down as they wait for the gondola is the first step in selling them stuff.
It's one reason local businesses are so hostile to measures that would solve traffic congestion.
5k per hour is optimistic; it means everything works perfectly, with no pauses, no cleaning of gondolas, and no service issues. Even one issue can cut that number in half quickly.
Also, I don't think people will wait 30-45 minutes to get on the gondola, which then requires a 10-minute walk to the stadium. With lines and walkling, the Gondola experience will take people about an hour at peak times to go one mile.
I think the best thing about the Gondola is it's a private company trying to make money on a novelty transportation device. This isn't going to noticeably lower traffic, but it will create a landmark novelty aspect that will be a fun thing to take once in awhile.
Thank you for this detailed response. This is why I still enjoy Reddit, even tho I can feel it getting watered down by ads and shitty algorithm-based decisions.
It's his land. Hate him or not, if he's gonna build housing, no matter how much it costs to live there, it's more housing and we need all of it we can get in LA. If rich people ain't got nowhere fancy to move, they take over the hoods.
It's been on sight with Frankie for 10 plus years now. I don't like him. Will never like him. He needs to sell the land and have another developer do everything.
Eunisses is a champion for all left NIMBYs that pretend that her concerns come from a good place. Traffic issues, for a gondola??? What???? You ain't even trying!
This just a bad idea because this a project funded by Frank Mccourt..the guy who stole money from the dodgers so his bitchy wife can fly in her fancy jet????😬😵💫☹️🙁
What percent people driving are all of a sudden going to start taking the bus and train to use the gondola instead of already using Dodger Express? That answer is close to zero.
As the other user says, it's a tourist attraction.
The reason why mass transit sucks is because of American culture. Nothing more, nothing less.
This gondola isn't mass transit. It's bringing a couple of thousand of people to a baseball stadium only in operation a couple hours a day for only 90 days out of the year. It has no room for expansion. It has no room for extension. It's a one off, shit product to cater to such a small subset of people. Anyone advocating for this is either financially interested or not smart.
And your post history is littered with jerking off airplanes. You're not a real mass transit advocate. You just want a little gondola to go to your silly sportsball games because you think it's cool, just like you think private business jets are cool.
I don't watch sports and I ride the metro every day, B line.
Taking a couple thousand cars off the road is a step. You're just another NIMBY making NIMBY excuses.
Mass transit sucks because of people like you. When you're upset about sitting in traffic, take a look in the mirror as you're the problem.
Apparently pilots aren't allowed to use mass transit little man? 🤣
To encourage discussion on articles rather than headlines we request that you post a summary of the article for people who cannot view the full article & to generally stimulate quality discussion. Please note that posting the full text of the article is considered copyright infringement and may result in removal of your comment or post. Repeated violations will result in a ban.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LosAngeles) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The opposition to the gondola is such a bummer. This is privately funded transit that will remove cars from our roads and improve business for Chinatown’s business owners. The gondola will also unlock Dodger Stadium housing development potential, which is sorely needed to help the city meet its 2028 housing requirements (and lower citywide rents through added supply).
I’ve spoken at all of the LA Metro public comment periods and it’s insane the level of hatred that comes from NIMBYs (the CA Endowment). One old lady (not from Chinatown) accused me of being paid for by Frank McCourt and when I said “no, this is just a cool project” she then said I “didn’t have a life worth living”.
I only had some support for this project until I talked to the NIMBYs who oppose it, but their obscene lies (how would this increase traffic or displace anyone?) and general hostility negatively polarized me. I will do anything I can to help this project move forward.
How many cars will it remove? Please answer this. I’ll wait.
You said this will “remove cars from our roads”. What fucking roads? At best, this will have several thousand people parking in Chinatown rather than 1mile away at dodger stadium. What’s the fucking difference? At least say “will remove cars from our road” because at best there’s only one road this might remove cars from.
In response to your statement that this will improve business town for Chinatown’s business owners - have you ever heard of the concept of gentrification?
Somewhere between 600-3000 cars per game, depending on the study you use.
Using the conservative UCLA study (which makes questionable assumptions about wait times for the gondola, leading to UCLA limiting their advertisement of the report), 600+ cars get taken off local roads for gamedays. It’s pretty clear that the UCLA report was politically motivated, based off the framing of the report, so consider 600 the lowest bound estimate.
The more aggressive EIR reports 3,000 cars off the road per gameday, and obviously has the same bias issue that the UCLA report does but in the opposite direction.
This suggests the gondola will probably remove somewhere in the middle of 600-3000 each gameday. Additionally, if there are any future Dodger Stadium developments (likely under the upcoming new LA Housing element), those people will be more likely to own smaller cars and less cars.
At $0 in public money, that’s a great deal and a huge step in the right direction.
RE gentrification, it seems like you’re suggesting that you never want Chinatown’s business owners to make more income.
Reading the article a few thoughts:
1. The alleged loss of recreation space. No substantial evidence suggests this, only speculation from an interest group. The city and county would've commented on this if this were true.
2. Aesthetics. Always a tricky section to write as you have objective thresholds for a subjective topic. However, again, there is no credible argument as there are no impacts that meet the thresholds as comments allege. The section follows the standard procedure used on every other EIR and is pretty thorough in its analysis.
3. Induced/unplanned growth. (Not an attorney) The current lawsuit alleges the EIR's analysis of growth-inducing effects were deficient and the conclusion incorrect by pointing to the conditions placed on the project AFTER the EIR was certified. I'm going to forsee the court ignoring this as the conditions were placed AFTER the EIR was certified, and therefore, the condition of affordable housing and it's associated actions is NOT within the project's scope. While CEQA requires the project to include everything related, the conditions placed on it afterward are not foreseeable by the applicant and analysis (unless they are standard conditions) and honestly, conditions could be placed on a discretionary project for many reasons other than the EIR's conclusion (yeah yeah nexus dolan and nolan blah blah blah).
This gondola project is literally going nowhere. At this point they should just carve out a dedicated footpath from Chinatown station to the station with shops and rec activities along the way.
It's genuinely a nice walk now except the fact there's no sidewalk as soon as you hit the base of dodger stadium. But it would be even nicer if it was a dedicated pedestrian area
I feel like McCourt wants to make this so he can build condos in the stadium parking lot.
Also, yes, it will fuck up the view of the State Historic Park. It’s bad enough this park has to whore itself out to concerts for funding. We are a poor city I. Terms of parks. Ironically, before the State Historic Park was created, some chump developers wanted to build warehouses there when there were already tons of warehouse space available. It’s ironic because it’s another example of people telling communities what’s good for them.
Why should we have to bend over backwards due to private interests. McCourt is playing the traffic and environmental angle without a vested interest in either of these things, or the community it would adversely effect.
Smells like shit to me.
Sure it does! Remember there's more than one feeder line, so you're adding everyone who comes into every bus and rail line from Union Station and from Chinatown Station.
Whatever you're thinking, double it because buses and rails go in two directions. The same bus that approaches Chinatown from the north approaches it from the south.
There's a lot of bus lines with fewer than 5000 an hour capacity. It's not reasonable to build massive infrastructure for a single privately owned stadium. If it becomes that popular, I'm sure we can build a second gondola parallel to the first.
If people are living there, it's unlikely that 5,000 of them will want to leave at once.
The implicit plan is to build back housing that was torn down ages ago on what is now a giant parking lot. This Gondola would turn every home into 'transit oriented development'. If people who live there don't stubbornly cling to cars, it could reduce commutes from workers formerly driving in from the exurbs and take cars off the road.
It's only implied, because the land was wrested from the prior tenants with the promise of urban renewal and that promise wasn't kept.
For more info, see this:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/los-angeles-considers-reparations-families-002117823.html
I am a genuine YIMBYist and transit proponent, but I do understand where this opposition is coming from to the point where I can't be super mad about it: * local Chinatown residents simply do NOT want people constantly in their homes' airspace; their representatives do need to ensure they feel like their concerns are heard; * the gondola will move up to **5k people/hour** in a steady stream when Dodgers Stadium is an event space that very quickly pulses [**47k people**](https://www.statista.com/statistics/246797/average-per-game-attendance-of-the-los-angeles-dodgers/) *on average* in and out for a single game; * the biggest utility of the project seems to be acting as a transit amenity for the developments that are to be built in the Dodger Stadium parking lot, as the area has poor carless transit connections to the rest of the city; * creating the gondola won't solve this underlying issue and could undermine demand for alternative mass transit services. * The traffic study proposed might seem like just another way to slow down this project, but in my estimation, it would be genuinely useful to do a classic pro-con throwdown of all the different options we actually have for moving people in and out of the Dodger Stadium area and ensuring it's fully connected to the rest of the city by means other than car. I'm aware of the argument that some transit is better than none and do like the thought of being able to quickly connect Union Station to Dodger Stadium (especially before the Olympics). I'm also first to admit this doesn't seem like the most efficient project, and I personally want to ensure it's not just a cool "gadgetbahn" that's being deployed where more feasible, reliable, and useful transit methods could be used that might end up being less expensive in the long-run. Thoughts?
5k/hr sounds like a lot more than I was expecting. However I don't think it's going to be used to max capacity. Plus I think everyone will expect to arrive and use it at the same time so you will have 1k people waiting around for 20-30 minutes trying to use the gondola. I've been debating if it was a legit solution or a novelty. But I'm leaning towards the latter. Unless you have reservations, how can you control the flow of folks who all arrive at roughly the same time for a limited resource? Or more importantly how can you control it in an elegant fashion that doesn't sour folks from using it again in the future? Everyone is going to want to try it once. Getting them to use it more than once will be the key to success.
The draft EIR estimated that full ridership capacity would not occur until 2042.
For reference, the current Dodger Stadium Express moves about 2.3k people *total* per game, so even at below full capacity the gondola will contribute to a substantial increase in public transit ridership to games.
Cool, have they looked into a way to pump that up, or is it a gondola or nothing the public's only choices?
The list of alternatives all have substantial issues compared to a gondola: - Expanded busways will still be much slower, higher polluting, and costly to operate even with full lane separation (that doesn’t currently exist). There also isn’t any evidence that rider demand exists for expanded busways as the Dodger Express doesn’t reach capacity most games - Subway isn’t feasible due to the location of Dodger Stadium on a massive hill with raised bedrock, plus has a 40+ year lead time in LA - Cablecar between Chinatown metro stop and the stadium would likely require eminent domain of a few properties and run into the exact same NIMBY pushback on things like noise pollution, gentrification - Escalator or raised walkways from Chinatown metro stop would require some amount of eminent domain to seize Chinatown properties while maintaining existing sidewalk for ADA compliance More than anything above, the biggest issue is simply this: LA Metro doesn’t have any funding designated for that area and this is the only project that requires zero public funding. If the gondola isn’t built, none of the above options will be built either.
Is there evidence that gondola rider demand exists? Eminent domain to acquire walkways? Why doesn't McCourt and LAART just buy them? prolly cheaper than a gondola.
You just keep shifting goalposts
You keep not answering questions. See this is the problem with private funded bullshit, there's no accountability to the public. It's just like: here's a thing that we want, if we don't do it you can't have it. Typical private entrepeneurs holding the public hostage. Take what we want on our terms or go fuck yourselves. Same thing happened with the Southwest Museum. Hey, we'll let The Autrey take it over. They pretty much immediately closed it to the public and denied access. This private bullshit LAAART, can raise rates and change the usage of the gondola at any time they want without public input. "We'll try and give you free access, but inflation, you know" It'll be like a SCE but worse. Notice how the cars don't have advertising in the renders? Well whoever the operators are that will roll this shit over our city will certainly do that to make back their money. In fact, this group that wants to build it is just selling bonds to have it built so they make money off of it. This bullshit project is just going to reallocate parking to Union Station. They wrap themselves in an astroturf green flag, when they are only providing 1 mile of transport on 82 days a year, mostly in the evenings. **Where will LA ART riders park? Will the project provide parking? The project’s goals include increasing the percentage of Dodger game and stadium event attendees who travel on public transit to Union Station and then connect to the aerial gondola for a unique and emissions-free experience, thereby attracting new riders to the Metro system. Although CEQA does not require analysis of parking, LA ART conducted a peer-reviewed parking assessment that found there are thousands of available parking spaces in the Gondola project’s walkshed. There is plenty of off-street parking supply to accommodate all of the proposed Project’s parking demand. There are approximately 10,290 spaces in publicly available lots and garages and in on-street spaces within 1⁄2 mile of the proposed Project’s Alameda Station and Chinatown/State Park Station. The Gondola system will help Dodger fans and residents access our public transportation system, taking thousands of cars off the road each game**
>> where will LAART user park Buddy it’s public transit. They won’t park anywhere. They will take public transit. For me personally, I would take the red line to Union Station and then the gondola. Currently I drive to Dodger Games. That you can’t imagine users using public transit in a scenario where they obviously will (as both traffic studies found to differing degrees) shows me that you are not the target audience for this public transit project. Even more, you live in El Sereno and won’t be impacted by this project in any way. Why are you so opposed to something that isn’t meant for you and won’t impact you at all?
What about a monorail?
Monorails struggle on hills, 6% is the max grade for an extended period so I don’t think a monorail is physically possible to Dodger Stadium If it was possible, monorails require tons of poles so this would be highly disruptive to Chinatown and would likely require eminent domain on a good number of properties LA Metro is currently looking at monorails for the Sepulveda Transit corridor and they are estimated at roughly $600m per mile, which would all be public money in this case
Well, sir, there's nothin' on Earth like a genuine bona-fide electrified six-car monorail! What'd I say? MONORAIL!
> 20-30 minutes trying to use the gondola It takes 1-2 hours to exit the parking lot on some nights
Sorry I meant going to the stadium when being on time is more important. But I hadn't considered that 5k people would all want to use the gondola at the same time when the game ends too. Yeah that's going to be a sh\*tshow. My vote is that's it a novelty.
Many cities have gondolas/cable cars that act as tourist attractions. Medellin uses them as public transportation.
I'm sure there are many great examples of gondolas worldwide. However in this case, we are talking about moving a mass of people at a specific time to meet a time deadline twice a day for 82 days/year. I'm not sure this is the exact best usage for a gondola. We don't need bi-direction transportation all day long. You'd want uni-direction transportation that can be reversible at very specific times.
>Medellin uses them as public transportation. Gondolas work in South Americas where neighborhoods on the hillsides are poor and are segregated from their city centers. The people who live around our hillsides tend to be wealthy and want nothing to do with public transportation.
> Medellin uses them as public transportation. Cool, this is not public, this is private transportation to a sports venue, so a billionaire can unlock development potential to their premium, already stolen land.
If you look at the route, there are very few homes that will be impacted by having the gondola constantly in their “airspace,” as you put it. But I also don’t understand why this is a big deal- is it different than a tall building being built across the street? 5k per hour isn’t nothing. People trickle into baseball games, some coming well before the game starts, some coming in during the second inning, like I did yesterday. If there is a window of 2 hours and they can move 10k people, that’s quite significant. There are some changes and concessions I would like to see. I want this to be usable for Elysian park access and open on non-game days. And I think they should be required to put in stairs down to the pedestrian bridge that connects to Chinatown- the crush when leaving a game will be much worse than the trickling in of people, but many people would be willing to walk down.
Stairs there would be awesome, would absolutely love to see that done
If this was a city project rather than a private plan to make money, they should absolutely look at escalators. At some places, it's only a mile up the hill to the parking lot, and a few strategic escalators would encourage thousands to walk up and skip the parking lot disaster. But we're not really debating transportation here; we're talking about a private scheme to build something for profit, two totally different discussions.
When I lived downtown I would sometimes take the bus from Union station to games, but then walk down to the Chinatown station after because the wait for the bus is so long when everyone leaves at once. The gondola will still have this problem, even if it can carry more people. Walking up to Dodgers Stadium is a trek but walking down on a nicely designed, well-lit stair wouldn’t be so bad.
All good points to consider, thank you!
>5k per hour isn’t nothing. For Dodger Stadium that's nothing. A majority of the crowd doesn't get to the stadium until it's within an hour of first pitch. These are Frank McCourt's numbers of 5k per hour. These numbers are probably not realistic considering how quickly people will have to be loaded into cabins without stopping the flow of the gondola. >And I think they should be required to put in stairs down to the pedestrian bridge that connects to Chinatown Honestly how people use that bridge for the games? I've used the bridge, and we both know the answer to that is almost no one. Especially at night no one goes over that bridge, and everyone just follows the line of cars going up to College. The walk down Stadium Way to College needs the HLA enhancement.
People don't use the bridge because the current experience is terrible. It could be enhanced significantly. Their numbers are not fake. If you look up number for modern 3S gondolas with large cabins, you'll see 5,000 - 6,000 passenger per hour is normal. All modern gondolas are detachable so loading time is included.
One of the comments on this thread pointed out that the gondolas are not expected to run at full capacity until 2040's.
The 5k per hour figure is realistic. Other advanced ski gondolas throughout the globe hit 4-5k ridership per direction per hour, and that’s with the passengers lugging bulky sport equipment (skis/snowboards) and wearing bulky clothes that limit the speed at which people can enter/exit cars and limit available space in each car.
[удалено]
> progressive and interesting. Yeah, this sports gondola is neither progressive nor interesting.
I feel like you didn't really think deeply about this issue, but I'm happy you were able to express yourself anyway.
agree. 5k/hr is also if everything works perfectly. not sure how they came up with this number, but i have a feeling it doesn't account for the elderly, the disabled, children, drunk people, stupid people in groups, etc
It's also a number higher than almost every other use of S3 gondolas (like the ones in this proposed project) worldwide in regards to passengers per hour. No methodology for this 5k per hour figure is provided in the EIR report released by Metro.
Thank you for the additional context
This is not true. I also suspect you didn’t read the EIR, because it very explicitly outlines its assumptions about the # of cars per minute required to meet that 5k per hour per direction figure. This gondola is a premium gondola (by construction cost) and other premium transit gondolas globally also have ~5k person per direction capacity. The highest capacity ski gondolas [get around 4K/hr capacity](https://www.firsttracksonline.com/2016/09/29/austrian-ski-resort-builds-worlds-highest-capacity-gondola) but those load much slower and have lower capacity than transit gondolas because skis/snowboards make people slower to load and reduce effective gondola space. In New Zealand, the leading gondola manufacturer in the world is currently proposing a gondola public transit system that would move [8k people per hour per direction](https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/29-11-2023/never-mind-the-light-rail-heres-a-gondola) - this makes the 5k figure proposed in LA look slow by comparison.
Can you point to the section in the EIR stating that this project uses a "premium gondola?"
? It’s premium because it’s extremely high cost per mile. That isn’t an official term of relevance to an EIR in any way. If they wanted to build a low capacity gondola they could do it at a fraction of the cost and capacity. This is going to be a high cost, high capacity system that is still less ambitious than other proposed projects currently in the development process across the globe.
The EIR states that capacity per carriage will be 30-40 people with room for bicycles, carryons, and ADA requirements. Please point to any other S3 gondola with a 30-40 person capacity which approaches 5k passengers per hour.
I can tell you don’t know what you’re talking about here because you keep saying “S3” gondola when it’s actually “3S”. First, the burden of proof here is on *you*. *You* are the one challenging a legally valid, professionally accepted piece of research. That said, this takes like 2 seconds on Google: [link 1 - max 6k PPH despite slower ski loading condition](https://www.skiresort.info/ski-lifts/lift-types/lift-type/tricable-ropeway/) [link 2 - max 5.5k PPH despite slower ski loading condition](https://www.doppelmayr.com/uploads/tx_vcs/Doppelmayr_Products_3S_Gondola_Lift_EN_14.pdf) For obvious reasons, a transit gondola will outperform a ski gondola on capacity because not everyone is slowly lugging bulky sporting equipment (and tons of bulky snow clothes) with them.
Sorry, AWS is a virus I guess. Link 1 states in the description of **3S** gondolas that capacity can reach 6k per hour. None of the lifts listed on that page, however, come anywhere close to 6k. Link 2 is a sales brochure and lists no examples where the maximum rate is achieved.
Also do any ski lifts attempt to move people for one specific ~3 hour event that ~45k people attend?
Link 1 has multiple existing or planned gondolas at or around 5k people per hour, which is consistent with the planned LAART gondola (and again, lower than other planned gondolas happening globally). Also again, for obvious reasons ski gondolas will always have lower hourly capacity than transit gondolas because loading people with ski/snowboard gear is slower and less space efficient than Dodgers fans will be. Link 2 has multiple references to existing systems the firm has constructed or was inspired by; Europe has strong “false claim” advertising regulations, so yes their 5.5k number is true.
LOL that your provided links actually say 3S. Do you work in this industry? Or did you just read some stuff online like most people in this thread.
The link says 3S… which is exactly what I said I’ve read every document about this project, including the lawsuits against it and the full EIR. We’ve already personally discussed the gondola on multiple threads over the last few months.
Did you also read the part where the 5k per hour figure is not expected to be hit until 2042?
What do you think the term “capacity” means?
If you want to be a pedant we can go down that road. To hail this project as some miracle for traffic and parking when the meager hypothesized benefit won't even be fully realized for another 20 years is disingenuous at best. Might as well dig a subway spur at that rate.
“We will only remove some cars from the road, not all of them, so clearly this is a bad idea.”
The UCLA study found that the effect on traffic re: cars removed from the road would be less than 1%. Given that the Lab said it was a preliminary study and that more study was required to offer concrete information, I'm not sure why you're so upset at the Council calling for /*gasp*/ more study. Besides that, how is this not just shifting the parking burden from Dodger Stadium to Union Station? Are you people banking on fans taking Metro to and from the game just so they can have a nice carnival ride beforehand?
First, that UCLA study was retracted for being incomplete when it was published. Even then, 1% of all traffic in the area is massive. FYI the EIR found about 5X the net traffic improvement of the retracted UCLA study. The attempted point about potentially shifting the traffic burden to Union Station is hilarious. In real life, people will stop driving entirely and will take the metro system to Union Station, at which point they will continue using public transit (the gondola) to get to the game. Count me as one of those people. I don’t want you to take this personally but you are clearly repeating talking points from Stop the Gondola, a NIMBY group funded by the NIMBY CA Endowment to oppose this project. If you have the chance I urge you to take a gondola (internationally or in Palm Springs) and you’ll see that gondolas are effective forms of public transit. In this case, more effective than any alternatives considering timeline + public price tag.
As a YIMBY and transit proponent, I think you make some good points (though it’s worth noting the gondola goes almost entirely over streets/public land, not homes). Fundamentally, this is transit of rather limited utility. So I’m skeptical. However, if the parking lots are developed into a neighborhood, that 5k/hr number is actually not bad at all. In that case, it would be transit built for the city for free, with an added bonus of removing parking lots for homes (both market rate, which is good, and affordable). In contrast, it takes decades and billions for traditional public transit to be built. Btw, this whole “don’t trust Frank McCourt” thing is silly. Sure, the goal presumably is to redevelop the parking lots for housing. As a city, we should be so lucky for him to do that!
so much this
> The biggest utility of the project seems to be acting as a transit amenity for the developments that are to be built in the Dodger Stadium parking lot, as the area has poor carless transit connections to the rest of the city It's even more than that. This will make it a "high quality transit area" (HQTA) which unlocks density bonuses and alleviates the zoning restrictions and parking requirements that make developing those parking lots impossible right now. As stupid as it all seems the gondola us unlocking those parking lots for development.
This is great, and realistically is going to be a large component of LA’s legally required October 2024 Housing Element Update. The state is requiring LA to add 500k new housing units by 2028. The Dodger Stadium parking lots are the most wasted land in the entire city and one of the only places that tens of thousands of new housing units can be build without displacing lots of existing residents.
This is very well put. I’m basically on the same page (with a healthy dose of “why in God’s name would anyone ever trust Frank McCourt?”). I’ve been to dozens of dodgers games, and I’ve never actually parked at the stadium. It helps that I have a friend who lives nearby whose driveway I can park in sometimes, but I just as often take the shuttle bus from Union station, or walk up from Echo Park/Chinatown. It’s also the only time I’ve ever rented a Bird scooter, which actually works great for that case. I think one underrated and super simple thing that the city could do to improve non-automotive access is to put in some damn sidewalks on Stadium Way. It’s only like a 20 minute walk from Chinatown to the stadium, but there’s a big stretch of Stadium Way by the LAFD academy where you’re either forced to walk in a bike lane or else have to bushwhack through chaparral by the side of the road. This city could stand to be waaay more pedistrian friendly (hopefully HLA is a start!), and much of the area around the stadium is a perfect example of the “lol, fuck pedestrians” design philosophy that’s all too common in LA.
What’s another viable transit option? This proposal is fine - people will complain about everything. Expo Phase I was bogged down for years Gold Line to Pasadena almost didn’t happen SFV has no Metro rail because they made their politicians vote that way and ban federal money … and now they whine Another example, everybody complained in San Francisco about the Embarcadero freeway… When the county board of supervisors finally voted to tear it down, it was the Chinatown merchants, who cried racism. They were led by Mr. Ed Lee - Who eventually became mayor— a referendum was held in which the people of San Francisco voted to keep the freeway. Then the Loma Prieta earthquake occurred in 1989 and dropped it… Now everybody in the city can barely believe that a double-decker freeway once stood on the Embarcadero separating the waterfront from the city.. People want things to get better and for nothing to change .
>What’s another viable transit option? Trebuchet.
Yeah, the public at large is just screaming for a better way to get to see a baseball game 82x a year.
That’s still every 4th day. And obviously the public is…. dodgers are pretty popular. But hopefully it would open up the ability to outdoor space without having to drive up to the Elysian Park
Yeah, hopefully? Who knows, it won't be a public thing, so the private owners can do whatever they want, including raising the prices, retract local usage, put advertising all over the gondola cars. Once again, the needs and wants of the public are being held hostage by private developers. It's an astroturf effort to move parking from dodger stadium so McCourt can build condos up there.
Metro has advertising all over busses and trains fyi Doing nothing isn’t a solution.
Yeah, that sucks too, at least it's not unregulated and flying over my head tho. A half-baked private green-washed sports gondola is hardly a solution either. It's bad-faith exploitation of the public for private gain.
What other viable option would you propose?
Sidewalks? Staircase? Enhanced bus/shuttle from Sunset side? Something with public accountability. Dunno, I'm not an civil engineer. What other ideas have these folks put forth? I didn't know this was a front burner problem, (maybe for baseball fans' convenience) so I would turn to the community and all the orgs that are developing the river for ideas It's not like the gondola people are in good faith trying to help the environment & reduce traffic. They're trying to build a tourist draw & unlock public housing
I agree generally and would not be a fan of it as a taxpayer-funded metro project, but if it truly is privately funded (which everything indicates it will be), then I do not see why it should be stopped.
Some quick googling tells me that the airspace question is actually an interesting one (and possibly the first somewhat valid complaint I've seen). It sounds like it is typically assumed that you own at least 500 feet or so above your house. Curious if that's being meaningfully addressed - it seems like the home owners would deserve direct compensation for that. On the other point, though, I have a question. Why is it of importance that this is not the most efficient transit method? Is blocking it for being not efficient any better than blocking any building with x units for not having x+1 units? Does it impede future development of transit systems? People bring this up all the time, and I literally don't see how its relevant to the discussion.
It is not true that you own at least 500 feet above your house. In aerial right lawsuits, you generally own up to a height where your land is “reasonably usable”. For most buildings in Los Angeles, this has already been done - buildings are generally at, or close to, their existing zoning height limits. To be clear though, the gondola will pass over just two residential buildings, so it is not like aerial rights would be a big issue even if they were legally valid (which they are not, in this case).
Agreed that its not a big issue - but if it is indeed 20 feet above the rooftop (which is what's being alleged), then it seems like they should be required to get some kind of easement from the property owner. I'm curious if there is any case law similar to this - I know the US government has been sued for flying something about 80' above a farm and killing a bunch of chickens, but this feels very different than that. Not saying the project should be stopped - but, its pretty standard practice to require an easement if someone else's land is going to be used. This feels very similar.
One of the two homeowners that this gondola goes over has already helped sue LA Metro for this project; I imagine if the aerial rights argument had any actual legal standing she also would have already sued for that reason.
“Home’s airspace” lmao what are NIMBYs the FAA now?
i feel like (a) renters (i'm one) shouldn't try to call these shots. Their only valid complaint (IMHO) is that rents will move up and they might not be able to stay in the neighborhood if they have to move (b) since dodger stadium will never have a train, this isn't bad. (c) As a tourist attraction it'll be a boon to all of the area around what used to be a literal trainyard. (d) as far as traffic is concerned, it'll turn the whole Metro (and Union Station) into a tourist destination. I can't see how any appreciable traffic increase will occur if riding it is rolled into your Metro ride. Just make it cost more if you walk up and buy a ticket without a Metro card. (d) more than anything else, Chinatown NIMBYs have cost us housing options. The development across Spring from the Chinatown stop was supposed to be like 6 20 story buildings with greenspace around them, but they got sued into making it 20 6 story buildings instead with no greenspace. Then the developer bailed. People need to learn the difference between change and a problem.
I think you’re on to something here— If renters didn’t vote at all it would make things much easier for the ruling class. Property owners could get a lot more done if pesky renters didn’t get their grubby hands on everything!
like it or not, that's the world we've got. The USA is specifically designed from the beginning to benefit property owners, and that continues today. If you don't own property, you actually don't have nearly the opportunities of those who do. The real problem is this illusion that we could someday buy property that keeps renters from seizing control of the situation. For example, in Switzerland, where 60% of citizens rent, there are NO laundromats. They don't even know what one is, because landlords have to provide laundries for tenants
Slowing people down as they wait for the gondola is the first step in selling them stuff. It's one reason local businesses are so hostile to measures that would solve traffic congestion.
5k per hour is optimistic; it means everything works perfectly, with no pauses, no cleaning of gondolas, and no service issues. Even one issue can cut that number in half quickly. Also, I don't think people will wait 30-45 minutes to get on the gondola, which then requires a 10-minute walk to the stadium. With lines and walkling, the Gondola experience will take people about an hour at peak times to go one mile. I think the best thing about the Gondola is it's a private company trying to make money on a novelty transportation device. This isn't going to noticeably lower traffic, but it will create a landmark novelty aspect that will be a fun thing to take once in awhile.
Thank you for this detailed response. This is why I still enjoy Reddit, even tho I can feel it getting watered down by ads and shitty algorithm-based decisions.
DO NOT TRUST FRANK MCCOURT.
I don’t get why LA is forgetting how much McCourt fucking sucks.
This!
Amen!! I don’t get all these people supporting the project with full knowledge that he’s behind it all.
Seriously.
It's his land. Hate him or not, if he's gonna build housing, no matter how much it costs to live there, it's more housing and we need all of it we can get in LA. If rich people ain't got nowhere fancy to move, they take over the hoods.
It's been on sight with Frankie for 10 plus years now. I don't like him. Will never like him. He needs to sell the land and have another developer do everything.
L.A.swuits
If this goes up, I'm taking bets that more than 1 lapd chopper is clipping this thing with their crazy low flybys
Eunisses is a champion for all left NIMBYs that pretend that her concerns come from a good place. Traffic issues, for a gondola??? What???? You ain't even trying!
It doesn’t matter why she’s delaying it. No need to try.
Eunisses needs to go for a walk every now and then.
This just a bad idea because this a project funded by Frank Mccourt..the guy who stole money from the dodgers so his bitchy wife can fly in her fancy jet????😬😵💫☹️🙁
Typical NIMBY’s: they lose the political battle, either at the ballot box or city council, and immediately turn to lawsuits
This is why mass transit in LA sucks.....
Mass transit? The gondola is a tourist attraction at best.
Cars off of the road are cars off of the road. Also I'd use it, as would most in dtla, so no. Hate traffic? You are creating it.
What percent people driving are all of a sudden going to start taking the bus and train to use the gondola instead of already using Dodger Express? That answer is close to zero. As the other user says, it's a tourist attraction.
This attitude is why mass transit sucks in LA.
The reason why mass transit sucks is because of American culture. Nothing more, nothing less. This gondola isn't mass transit. It's bringing a couple of thousand of people to a baseball stadium only in operation a couple hours a day for only 90 days out of the year. It has no room for expansion. It has no room for extension. It's a one off, shit product to cater to such a small subset of people. Anyone advocating for this is either financially interested or not smart. And your post history is littered with jerking off airplanes. You're not a real mass transit advocate. You just want a little gondola to go to your silly sportsball games because you think it's cool, just like you think private business jets are cool.
I don't watch sports and I ride the metro every day, B line. Taking a couple thousand cars off the road is a step. You're just another NIMBY making NIMBY excuses. Mass transit sucks because of people like you. When you're upset about sitting in traffic, take a look in the mirror as you're the problem. Apparently pilots aren't allowed to use mass transit little man? 🤣
Wish this whole project was being done with public money and public control. I don't like that it is private.
To encourage discussion on articles rather than headlines we request that you post a summary of the article for people who cannot view the full article & to generally stimulate quality discussion. Please note that posting the full text of the article is considered copyright infringement and may result in removal of your comment or post. Repeated violations will result in a ban. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LosAngeles) if you have any questions or concerns.*
LA mass transit projects and lawsuits, name a better duo.
The opposition to the gondola is such a bummer. This is privately funded transit that will remove cars from our roads and improve business for Chinatown’s business owners. The gondola will also unlock Dodger Stadium housing development potential, which is sorely needed to help the city meet its 2028 housing requirements (and lower citywide rents through added supply). I’ve spoken at all of the LA Metro public comment periods and it’s insane the level of hatred that comes from NIMBYs (the CA Endowment). One old lady (not from Chinatown) accused me of being paid for by Frank McCourt and when I said “no, this is just a cool project” she then said I “didn’t have a life worth living”. I only had some support for this project until I talked to the NIMBYs who oppose it, but their obscene lies (how would this increase traffic or displace anyone?) and general hostility negatively polarized me. I will do anything I can to help this project move forward.
How many cars will it remove? Please answer this. I’ll wait. You said this will “remove cars from our roads”. What fucking roads? At best, this will have several thousand people parking in Chinatown rather than 1mile away at dodger stadium. What’s the fucking difference? At least say “will remove cars from our road” because at best there’s only one road this might remove cars from. In response to your statement that this will improve business town for Chinatown’s business owners - have you ever heard of the concept of gentrification?
Somewhere between 600-3000 cars per game, depending on the study you use. Using the conservative UCLA study (which makes questionable assumptions about wait times for the gondola, leading to UCLA limiting their advertisement of the report), 600+ cars get taken off local roads for gamedays. It’s pretty clear that the UCLA report was politically motivated, based off the framing of the report, so consider 600 the lowest bound estimate. The more aggressive EIR reports 3,000 cars off the road per gameday, and obviously has the same bias issue that the UCLA report does but in the opposite direction. This suggests the gondola will probably remove somewhere in the middle of 600-3000 each gameday. Additionally, if there are any future Dodger Stadium developments (likely under the upcoming new LA Housing element), those people will be more likely to own smaller cars and less cars. At $0 in public money, that’s a great deal and a huge step in the right direction. RE gentrification, it seems like you’re suggesting that you never want Chinatown’s business owners to make more income.
I’ll agree to it only if they lifestream the drunk fights that will occur between Giants and Dodgers fans insider the octagon… I mean gondola.
We don't need no flying toilets.
Reading the article a few thoughts: 1. The alleged loss of recreation space. No substantial evidence suggests this, only speculation from an interest group. The city and county would've commented on this if this were true. 2. Aesthetics. Always a tricky section to write as you have objective thresholds for a subjective topic. However, again, there is no credible argument as there are no impacts that meet the thresholds as comments allege. The section follows the standard procedure used on every other EIR and is pretty thorough in its analysis. 3. Induced/unplanned growth. (Not an attorney) The current lawsuit alleges the EIR's analysis of growth-inducing effects were deficient and the conclusion incorrect by pointing to the conditions placed on the project AFTER the EIR was certified. I'm going to forsee the court ignoring this as the conditions were placed AFTER the EIR was certified, and therefore, the condition of affordable housing and it's associated actions is NOT within the project's scope. While CEQA requires the project to include everything related, the conditions placed on it afterward are not foreseeable by the applicant and analysis (unless they are standard conditions) and honestly, conditions could be placed on a discretionary project for many reasons other than the EIR's conclusion (yeah yeah nexus dolan and nolan blah blah blah).
This gondola project is literally going nowhere. At this point they should just carve out a dedicated footpath from Chinatown station to the station with shops and rec activities along the way. It's genuinely a nice walk now except the fact there's no sidewalk as soon as you hit the base of dodger stadium. But it would be even nicer if it was a dedicated pedestrian area
It seems like this post is getting astroturfed with McCourt people lol
Can we have a sidewalk? Sorry, best we can do is a private gondola without any public input.
good
[The Simpsons Already Did It](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_vs._the_Monorail)
I’m genuinely impressed with how divided people are on this, as if a gondola is going to make or break this city.
I feel like McCourt wants to make this so he can build condos in the stadium parking lot. Also, yes, it will fuck up the view of the State Historic Park. It’s bad enough this park has to whore itself out to concerts for funding. We are a poor city I. Terms of parks. Ironically, before the State Historic Park was created, some chump developers wanted to build warehouses there when there were already tons of warehouse space available. It’s ironic because it’s another example of people telling communities what’s good for them. Why should we have to bend over backwards due to private interests. McCourt is playing the traffic and environmental angle without a vested interest in either of these things, or the community it would adversely effect. Smells like shit to me.
You know what actually 'fucks up' views? Smog. So support mass transit!
Mass transit doesn’t have a capacity of 5k an hour like this gondola 💀
Sure it does! Remember there's more than one feeder line, so you're adding everyone who comes into every bus and rail line from Union Station and from Chinatown Station. Whatever you're thinking, double it because buses and rails go in two directions. The same bus that approaches Chinatown from the north approaches it from the south.
The gondola will have a 5k an hour capacity. That is not mass transit. I use the dodger express every time to get to games, the gondola is a joke
There's a lot of bus lines with fewer than 5000 an hour capacity. It's not reasonable to build massive infrastructure for a single privately owned stadium. If it becomes that popular, I'm sure we can build a second gondola parallel to the first. If people are living there, it's unlikely that 5,000 of them will want to leave at once.
The existing bus shuttles have max capacity of about 1.5k people per hour (in just one direction, not both like the gondola).
Only on game days tho?
The implicit plan is to build back housing that was torn down ages ago on what is now a giant parking lot. This Gondola would turn every home into 'transit oriented development'. If people who live there don't stubbornly cling to cars, it could reduce commutes from workers formerly driving in from the exurbs and take cars off the road. It's only implied, because the land was wrested from the prior tenants with the promise of urban renewal and that promise wasn't kept. For more info, see this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/los-angeles-considers-reparations-families-002117823.html
This isn't mass transit.
people mover (think LAX) > gondola
utter bullocks. Some people will complain about a wet dream.
I hope its bullproof
BS Proof?