By TED WINTERER
I gripe a lot about civic affairs in this column, for a variety of reasons. The foremost is my preternaturally gloomy temperament, which springs from an unhealthy blend of German and Irish DNA. Then there’s my belief that journalism, even the inferior variety such as this, serves a vital role as a watchdog over government.
Finally, carping and kvetching is what grabs readers’ attention. If folks wanted only sanitized happy-speak about how everything’s honky-dory in Santa Monica, I assure you the city would make its “Seascape” house organ a daily paper, sell ad space and make a few bucks. So if “Our Town” is ever going to be nationally syndicated, it seems prudent to keep on whining.
But just for a change I thought I’d sing the praises of a couple of City Hall’s initiatives. The first is the November opening of the long-aborning Virginia Avenue Park expansion. After years of planning and construction, and after the city spent millions on the Palisades, Douglas and Reed parks north of Wilshire, the under-served Pico neighborhood will soon get its own grand public space. Is it too optimistic to hope that our city leaders might next spend some money on upgrading other parks south of the freeway where Mercedes and Beemers don’t line the streets?
Then there’s the equally fine notion to upgrade the ramp from Ocean Avenue to the Pier. In dire need of a seismic retrofit, the bridge is also patently unfriendly to any mode of transport but cars. I’ve spent enough time running, biking and pushing a stroller up and down the ramp to want to invest in Kevlar body suits, for the minuscule sidewalks afford scant protection from autos.
So I’m all for widening the walkways on the ramp. I’m a little more skeptical about the concept of an additional ramp leading down to the 1550 lot just north of the pier, which would allow visitors immediate access to parking when the 277 spaces on the Pier itself are full and spare us the traffic snarls which result from confused tourists navigating our surface streets. I’d prefer to first try a pilot program in which the existing bridge is closed to all cars save for one lane for emergency and delivery vehicles and parking on the Pier itself is eliminated to spare the waters below from leaky oil pans and the like. Why not experiment with the low-cost, low-impact option until the Circulation Element is revised, so traffic to and from the Pier can be evaluated as part of a comprehensive downtown plan?
But the saving grace of a second bridge is the clever idea to make it only for one-way access into the 1550 lot, so that cars must exit by the PCH and the 10 freeway. If the environmental analysis for this project shows that such a ramp will substantially reduce traffic on surrounding streets, then the tradeoffs involved will be worth-while, even if a new ramp tends to perpetuate the auto-first planning paradigm.
So much for the plaudits for City Hall. I now must revert to form if I’m ever to get that coveted spot in the “Wichita Standard.”
Another scheme to improve parking at the Pier is expanding the 1550 lot by paving over more of the beach. Even if such a cockamamie caprice could pass muster with the Coastal Commission, it seems foolhardy to roll more asphalt over our greatest natural resource. We’re in the midst of a spirited public debate about using a small part of our beach for an off-leash dog run. So what sense does it make to consume part of that beach for the benefit of visitors and businesses when residents are so passionate about the usage of every square foot of sand? And by what bizarre calculus is it appropriate to demolish the RAND Z building because of the city’s need for more open space and to then consider paving open space? And doesn’t the Sustainable City Plan require preservation of natural resources?
I happen to believe Santa Monica is our town, that it belongs to the residents and not to business and government. So new parks for citizens are always a great idea. And while an upgraded bridge to the Pier and a ramp to the parking to the north may stimulate sales by lessees and revenues to the city, there are enough public benefits to make these projects worth-while. But pave over our beach just for the sake of merchants and City Hall’s tax coffers? I don’t think so. (Ted Winterer is a writer who lives in Ocean Park. He)
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 22, 2005. Read the original PDF.