The fallout from Wednesday night’s turbulent City Council meeting continues to roll in waves across Culver City, and this morning it was the mayor’s turn to speak out.
The noisy — you will hear that word a lot — argument that poisoned the air for (a probably unprecedented) 270 minutes centered on the proposed installation of an automated car wash at Jin Kwak’s neighborhood gas station that was born before most residents were.
Too noisy, complained 10 neighbors. Besides, they beefed, the car wash will knock the bottom out of our property values.
Truth or Consequences?
The noise will be provably less than the present level, countered the business owner’s representatives, displaying a trunk full of presumably convincing but utterly arcane scientific data. Property values will be unaffected, Mr. Kwak’s experts said.
Enter Mayor Alan Corlin.
Palms turned upward, he asks, “Whom do you believe?” and “How do you know that side is — or those persons are — correct?”
Clearly, cool, reflected wisdom is required.
Not the First Time
More than usual, the City Council has been faced with a number of similar scenarios in the past year, pitting nearly shouting, anti-change residents against builders/business owners who believe their requests are reasonable.
“Ninety percent of what we do on the City Council,” said Mr. Corlin, “is to separate the emotional from the analytical.
“Sometimes it is difficult to figure out whether the emotional information by one side is as accurate as the analytical information given by the other side.
A Few Questions
“You have to ask yourself the following questions:
“Is the emotion of the opponents based on fact or supposition?
“Or is it pure emotion?
“You have to balance that analysis against the statistics and scientific facts by the petitioner. Does this data mirror the fears and concerns that the people have?”
What Is the Difference?
Then Mr. Corlin turned to another truly esoteric dilemma.
“I can’t say that Jin Kwak’s car wash will bring moré noise or less noise than his present set up,” the mayor said.
“I think it will have different noise than exists now. Mr. Kwak’s people made the argument that their research showed the noise level will fall below the threshold established by the city’s published rules and standards.”
The Final Score
Which still does not provide a clear-cut resolution, the mayor said.
Mr. Corlin joined the onesided majority in voting 4 to 1 approve Mr. Kwak’s million-dollar expansion plans.
“It is reasonable to assume that a city will uphold its own rules,” the mayor said.
As for the neighbors who have formed a wall of (now defeated) resistance against Mr. Kwak, Mr. Corlin said of their attitude:
“It is unreasonable to think things will not change.”
More or Less or Different?
Does the mayor believe the incorporation of the car wash will bring louder sounds to the neighborhood?
“This requires a subjective analysis,” Mr. Corlin said. “It is very difficult to legislate laws about people’s emotions.
“It is easier to legislate compliance with quantifiable rules and regulations than it is emotions.”
In the midst of this storm-tossed ocean of emotion, Councilman Gary Silbiger pleaded with Mr. Corlin to arguably break with Council policy and grant a wider speaking berth to opponents of the car wash in the name of fairness and balance.
Mr. Corlin acceded to his colleague, although he later maintained that Mr. Silbiger got his way because of a Council vote rather than his own unilateral decision.
Unknown and Unknowable
Reasoning his way to a decision was challenging, the mayor said, “because there are so many unknown factors.”
Further, for all of the thunder raised by protesting neighbors, “they did not offer any empirical evidence.”
Mr. Corlin conceded that “the angst” of Mark Langston, spokesman for the neighbors, “was not unfounded. But in the end, the facts spoke for themselves.”