The $500 Million Gondola To Nowhere?
Residents Fight To Stop Another Dodger Stadium Debacle
Dodger Stadium has been a Los Angeles landmark for decades. You don’t have to be a baseball fan to know of Dodger Stadium, arguably the most iconic baseball stadium in the world. What casual observers familiar with the palm trees and rolling hill backdrops to images of the stadium don’t see are the clogged streets in surrounding neighborhoods that can turn the area into a giant parking lot on game days. Residents are familiar with the long backup of cars Sunset Boulevard waiting — sometimes for a hour — to turn onto Vin Scully Avenue to get to the ball park.
As environmentalism and traffic becomes an increasingly hot topic, what could reduce the notorious Dodger day jams?
The Los Angeles Aerial Rapid Transit (LA ART) proposed an aerial gondola system connecting Union Station to Dodger Stadium. For $500 million, the route would span a little over a mile above a dense area of Los Angeles. The plan boasts of possible environmental benefits such as reducing traffic by 3,000 cars, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and improving pedestrian safety.
The project is financially backed by Frank McCourt, former Dodger owner from 2004 to 2012. McCourt has partnered with Zero Emissions Transit, an offset non-profit of Climate Resolve—another non-profit organization — on the proposal. Despite being the former Dodger owner, McCourt still owns the the parking lots that surround the stadium like a moat as well as two adjacent plots upon which he plans to build two transit-oriented residential complexes.
The gondola proposal, though, has issues. Some of them echo historic displacements connected to Chavez Ravine and the original building of Dodger Stadium. Before the Dodgers left Brooklyn to make a new home in Los Angeles at Dodger Stadium, Chavez Ravine was the home of generations of Mexican-Americans. In 1950, a proposed public housing development was meant transform Chavez Ravine, which the developers believed the area to be a slum. The city’s housing authority used its power to purchase residents’ properties with the promise that they would be able to move into the new housing. However, Cold War tensions and the United States’ fear of communism affected the housing development. The Los Angeles Times, private developers, and CASH (Citizens Against Social Housing) fed this fear, which caused the housing development to fall through.
The city applied eminent domain to clear the residents in an ugly chapter of the city’s and Dodger’s history. By 1957, several families who resisted eviction and challenged the city’s seizure of their property remained in Chavez Ravine. The Brooklyn Dodgers wanted a new stadium and Los Angeles was ready to give them 315 acres of Chavez Ravine, which violated the city’s agreement that the land would only be used for public good. In 1959, the police and bulldozers enforced the evictions. Dodger Stadium opened on April 10, 1962.
In a sort of historical adding insult to injury, in the 1930s, the original Chinatown was destroyed to build Union Station. The displaced community moved to where we now know as Chinatown.
At the Los Angeles Country Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) board meeting in February, community members voiced their opposition to the gondola plan, fearing consequences for their businesses and residences. A community member whose family has been a part of Placita Olvera for generations said, “This whole project has issues. We have no guarantee that the construction of this thing on Alameda is not going to affect our buildings, our livelihoods. The traffic alone… is going to kill our business. And then when it’s built, where are they going to park?”
Fears that the gondola proposal would bring a rise in housing prices and potential displacement were major concerns at the meeting. A senior community member expressed worry that the gondola would cause houses and apartments to shake and increase traffic in her neighborhood. One person commented, “The people who live here should come first and they are fighting for their very place in Chinatown.”
The Los Angeles Parks Alliance, a group of public space advocates, has filed a lawsuit against Metro to stop the gondola project. The lawsuit states that the Final Environmental Impact Report violates the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by not offering full analysis or viable alternatives. It also argues the plan does not consider Frank McCourt’s other development plans for luxury entertainment at the parking lot in the stadium. This could also affect traffic and parking in the neighborhoods.
CEQA requires a study of viable alternatives, which the LA Parks Alliance says has not been provided. It believes a better option can be electric buses since there is already the Dodger Stadium Express from Union Station. Improving existing public transport would be more beneficial not only for the community but for Los Angeles as a whole, the alliance says.
A major tact of the LA Parks Alliance lawsuit hinges on what it says is the violation of Los Angeles State Historic Park’s land and air space. The Los Angeles State Historic Park near Chinatown encapsulates the history that made it. From the 19th century handmade paving stones to the Zanja Madre, which transferred water from the Los Angeles River to El Pueblo in Los Angeles (now commemorated at Placita Olvera). State parks are protected by law to preserve their natural, historical, and cultural values. According to the LA Parks Alliance, the gondola will take up a significant portion of land and air space from the park, destroying hundreds of trees and displacing wildlife. It says the gondola would exploit public land to economically gain from it.
Opponents of the plan also says it’s important to keep in mind is this is a private project. Once in operation, people paying to use the gondola service will benefit McCourt, his partners, and his investors. The best stadiums around the country usually include highly functional public transportation options. In many cases, it’s light rail for a speedy ride unaffected by car traffic. Fares paid using Metro are used—ideally—to improve public transportation and other public projects for the respective city. Privatizing the last mile of getting to a game benefits only a few while hurting thousands of residents, business owners, and natural landmarks. Opponents also say the city’s skyline would forever change for an unnecessary transportation that nobody in Los Angeles actually requested—except perhaps for Frank McCourt.
It is well known that Los Angeles once had the a comprehensive trolley and lightrail system before surrendering to freeways and car culture. More recently, the city and region have been trying to expand the subway system. Though it has a habit or stopping just short of the ultimate destinations. The subway finally made it to Santa Monica (though short of the beach) and the Wilshire/Western line has yet to get past Western. Most egregiously, the Expo/Crenshaw line pulls up short of Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) even though it was built alongside the 105 Freeway. Why? Pushback from private transportation lobbies such as rental cars, taxi services, or other transportation options.
In his book, Freewaytopia, author Paul Haddad says the following about the train not reaching LAX, “I can’t count how many times I explained to puzzled out-of-towners why they couldn’t take a train out of the airport.” He continues, “Both the train and the freeway are often mocked as routes from ‘nowhere to nowhere.’”
The gondola project, opponents argue, is another example of the city favoring a private transportation project when the real solution would be to improve public transportation. This could take the shape of a new subway route from Union Station (years to make it happen), or creating dedicated bus lanes or streets to get people to the stadium. Even transforming to electric buses would be a better option.
Is an aerial transport system spanning 1.2 miles to serve a stadium in operation a few months of the year worth $500 million? One that woudl require more parking and congestion around Union Station? Opponents of the gondola proposal sya Los Angeles, with it’s checkered history of public transportation and residential displacement, can do better.
