The New Battle for the Campo de Cahuenga, Part 2—The Universal Connection

FIRST READ: 

ALSO VIEW THE VERY DETAILED PDF BY JOHN WALKER ON HOW TO MAKE TOLUCA LAKE CONTIGUOUS IN THE PHOTO GALLERY ON THE RIGHT.

Why does Toluca Lake want to lay claim to the strip of land along the and the Universal Metro Station? Why do they want to remain in Council District 4? Why can’t there be some other contiguous line that simply connects Toluca Lake to the rest of Los Angeles?

The answer is a Universal one—or, more directly, .

The rallying cry offor remaining in Council District 4 is that they want to have an impact with what goes on with the proposed of the agrees with the and the that Universal is a primary concern, and submitted a seven-paged letter about the environmental impact of Universal.

Studio City Neighborhood Council vice president and n said, “It is ridiculous to think that Studio City will not be affected by any —if not even more. We are right across the street from it.”

And, city officials were impressed with the massive report with that members of the Studio City Neighborhood Council and Studio City Residents Association compiled to respond to the for the area.

Another argument presented was thatis part of Toluca Lake, and Council District 4. It is not, nor ever was. Universal Studios is predominantly on unincorporated county property and therefore under County Supervisor jurisdiction in its own ZIP Code—91608. Proposed are expected to impact communities within 50 miles, including over-the-hill into West Hollywood and Santa Monica as well as the north Valley.

Yet, the expansion that would most directly impact Toluca Lake is a proposed 3,000-unit development above Barham Boulevard above the . Schools affected by such a development would be tiny in the Cahuenga Pass and in Studio City. The feeder middle school for the area would be , also in Studio City.

Councilman Tom LaBonge, in a Feb. 7 letter to NBC Universal President Ron Meyer, said he could not support the 3,000 units on the backlot. But, in the letter, he suggested, “I would like to meet with you to discuss the future of the subway site with a housing component at that location. I also will be meeting with area residents to solicit their thoughts for the MTA site as the slate remains to be clean.” (See the letter above in the Photos under PDF).

Studio City locals don’t think a development over the Metro Line is a good idea at all. Nor do representatives of the nearby Campo.

“A residential project next to the Campo de Cahuenga is completely absurd,” said Guy Weddington-McCreary, who is on the Campo’s board. “I would be strongly against that.”

And Studio City Neighborhood Council President John Walker said such a project would impact Studio City residents much more than it would Toluca Lake residents—another reason why the Metro and Campo should remain with the rest of Studio City in Council District 2.

Sarkin said there is still a plan in the works to of the Universal City Metro station. “The land where the Metro Station is is officially in Studio City, we should have the name of the subway reflect that,” she said.

Another argument which forces the sections of Studio City to be split into two districts is that the district lines must be contiguous and there’s no way to do it around the Barham Boulevard side of Universal Studios.

Walker researched past redistricting map proposals and found a plan from 1986 that would have connected Toluca Lake to the rest of Los Angeles through Griffith Park. (See articles and maps in the gallery above.)

“When I found this map, it was like finding a pot of gold,” Walker said. “Now there is no argument that they can’t be contiguous around the other side of Universal.”

The Los Angeles City Council must approve a map by July 1. At least locally, the biggest sticking point is the Campo, and how the district snakes around Universal Studios.

In the meantime, two neighborhoods are fighting over this small piece of land where the Campo sits.

Part 1: 

also see:

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

*