He did it again.
Seven years after CD5 Councilmember Paul Koretz blocked proposed bike lanes on Westwood Blvd, he singlehandedly killed a proposal for a much-needed makeover of Melrose Blvd.
One that had overwhelming community support, both from the general public and Melrose business owners.
A project that could have once again made Melrose the destination street it was decades ago. And one that excited virtually everyone who saw it, with a few notable NIMBY exceptions.
Starting with Koretz himself.
.@PaulKoretzCD5 is killing Uplift Melrose. Despite a majority of residents, businesses, both schools, religious institutions & both NCs supporting. If that’s not enough to get a transformation project done in LA w/free $50M from CA, nothing is. It’s why we can’t have nice things. pic.twitter.com/xCWf51uVgs
— Michael Schneider (@schneider) September 9, 2020
The self-proclaimed environmentalist and climate advocate caved to a NIMBY minority to stop a project that would improve safety on one of LA’s High Injury Network streets, while giving a significant boost to a once-thriving business district that has been in decline for decades.
Kind of like Westwood, where empty storefronts nearly outnumber occupied ones.
Yet in both cases, Koretz personally blocked bicycle and pedestrian improvements that could have revived them.
In this case, he cited his unsupported belief that the project wouldn’t get anyone out of their cars — as he drove the street in his own.
I have done much soul searching, and even driven down Melrose one more time to try and envision the results. Many factors contributed to my decision to not move forward with this process…
I don’t believe that this action will get anyone out of their cars, except for immediate neighbors on short trips who could walk or bicycle. However, it will make it more difficult for potential customers to access Melrose shops by car. The loss of parking could also reduce access by customers, unless the BID is able to cut long-term deals with several locations for large numbers of cars. This is likely to happen, but not a certainty.
I also believe that this will result in a short-term loss of more marginal businesses during construction. Longer term, I think it is likely to raise rents once it is completed, knocking out remaining smaller businesses that give Melrose its charm, for better funded, more chain-like businesses.
Maybe if he actually got out of his car, he could see what wonderful street it could be for walking. Even if it isn’t now.
But bottom line, he makes the anti-environmental, anti-climate choice to keep Melrose a sewer for pass-through drivers, while making it virtually impossible to access the area any other way.
It must be all those boarded up storefronts and Going Out of Business signs that pass for charm in his estimation.
He also ignores the fact that a project like this would once again make the street a draw for people from across the city, and not just out-of-town tourists relying on outdated guidebooks.
Not to mention that the plan actually results in a net increase in available parking, despite the loss of spaces on Melrose itself.
L.A. City Councilmember Paul Koretz has effectively killed Uplift Melrose, a plan to invest in making Melrose Avenue greener, safer, and more welcoming. Uplift Melrose was initiated by the Melrose Business Improvement District and enjoyed broad local support, including from the Mid-City West Community Council and the Greater Wilshire Neighborhood Council.
He goes on to cite bizarre opposition from representatives of both the police and fire departments.
LAPD Wilshire Area Commanding Officer Shannon Paulson’s August 25 email to Koretz staff states that Uplift Melrose “would undeniably have a direct impact on the ability of PD to respond along this (previously) primary accessway to emergency locations on this stretch of Melrose, as well as… emergencies in adjacent residential neighborhoods.” She asserts that the proposed Melrose lane reduction would “undeniably” create “traffic congestion and delays” on Melrose and “this would also result in more north/south traffic in those nice residential streets north and south of Melrose” where she forecasts “more calls for unsafe speed… and a higher likelihood of vehicle vs pedestrian accidents, stop sign violations, more people feeling not as safe walking their dogs and pushing their strollers on those streets.”
Never mind that the project was still in the early discussion phase, and that most, if not all, of those objections could have been easily mitigated.
She went on to offer this doozy, making her anti-bike windshield bias even more apparent, while broadly dismissing bike lanes all over Los Angeles:
I would also suggest a comprehensive study of the bike lanes. I have seen a lot of money and energy and planning go into some of these bike lanes in the City– which are fantastic for those who use them. But I think in many LA communities the use of these bike lanes have been exceptionally minimal (to almost zero) – this after surrendering very valuable vehicle traffic lanes to create them. I have also been part of conversations regarding their safety, as they design the lanes to be “two way” which results in some dangerous scenarios. I think immediately of the “two way” bike lane currently on Main Street downtown – where you have City Hall employees pulling out of that CH garage near Temple and they look right only as the traditional vehicle traffic on Main St is northbound, yet that bike lane along the curb is two -way. So you have a southbound bicycle coming along at 25 mph crossing them that the driver never see.
Evidently, in addition to being a cop, Paulson is also an expert in traffic engineering and urban planning.
Or at least thinks she is.
And as Linton points out, we’re still waiting for all that money for bike lanes she talks about. Maybe it got diverted into the LAPD’s coffee and donut fund.
As for the objections from the fire department,
Koretz’ staff received Streets L.A. Landscape Architect Alexander Caiozzo’s response to all of the points raised by Getuiza. Caiozzo’s September 3 email emphasizes that the Melrose design represents a “preliminary plan” and, when funding is secured, further refined designs will address all the specific Fire Department concerns.
Never mind that Linton explains that much of the objections raised by the fire department were the result of a fundamental misreading of what was being proposed.
He goes on to point the finger at a self-proclaimed watchdog group that has worked to block progress throughout the city.
One source is the “notorious Nimby” group Fix the City. In 2015, Fix the City filed a lawsuit to block L.A.’s multi-modal Mobility Plan, asserting that the city was “stealing” lanes from drivers, who do not “have the luxury of being able to ride to work on a bike or bus.” The lawsuit was settled by an agreementbetween L.A. City and Fix the City that mandates extensive outreach and analysis before safety improvements can be implemented. Fix the City then uses this agreement to kill safety projects.
The settlement requires the city to evaluate LAFD response times at the station level for all mobility projects of significant scale. If safety improvements degrade LAFD response times, then Fix the City boardmember Jim O’Sullivan waves the settlement around, badgers the city Transportation Department (LADOT) and City Council, and threatens further lawsuits.
Personally, I’d take it a step further, and question whether it’s the soft corruption of campaign contributions and promises of support for the career politician’s next run for office.
Or something worse.
In the aftermath of the Jose Huizar and Englander bribery scandals, any single-handed action like this is immediately suspect. So the question becomes, not just whether someone inappropriately influenced Koretz, but who might have, how and why.
It could be as simple as Linton’s suggestion that Koretz kowtowed to the notorious NIMBYs at Fix the City.
Or it could be something much worse.
The real problem is that Los Angeles has a failed system of government in which each councilmember rules as a king or queen in his or her own district, enjoying near dictatorial power over what gets built, from upscale condo towers to streetscape improvements.
Something we’ll have to change if we ever want to see real progress in the city.
4/working on charter reform, so LA has more like 30 or 40 councilmembers (NYC, for example, has over 50) instead of 15. For far too long has power been concentrated in so few, and they act as democratically elected dictators.
— Michael Schneider (@schneider) September 9, 2020
Meanwhile, Mid City West Community Council President Scott Epstein — leader of one of the city’s better neighborhood councils — offers his own insights into the project, and Koretz’ open betrayal of the community.
This week in a spectacular failure of leadership @PaulKoretzCD5 killed a game changing project for the Fairfax District and our city, Uplift Melrose. Developed by @BSSLosAngeles & @LADOTlivable, it could have potentially won $50 million from the state's active transpo program (1) pic.twitter.com/qdpC8TBWhK
— Scott Epstein (@seepstein) September 10, 2020
Bike Talk will be discussing the whole Melrose mess tonight.
— Bike Talk (@biketalkpfk) September 10, 2020