The back-room deal revealed in your article (Times, Aug. 30) underscores several serious obstacles for residents who wish to maintain control of the development within their communities.
Your article quotes that the developers are determined "to move ahead with their projects before the remaining traffic capacity in the Venice-Marina del Rey area is used up." What you failed to mention is, if indeed Los Angeles has determined that the traffic capacity of Lincoln Boulevard is not saturated, then how can they explain the slow bumper-to-bumper traffic on Lincoln and Washington boulevards that already exists? Why isn't the L.A. Times investigating the foolish methods of measuring traffic capacity?
(Jerry) Snyder claims that Ruth Galanter knew nothing of his negotiations, yet he also claims that he has been working on the planned negotiations for weeks, with Galanter providing the framework of the settlement. Seemingly blinded by the double talk, your article states: "One important player was apparently not a party to the negotiations: Los Angeles City Councilwoman Ruth Galanter. . . . " Obviously Ruth Galanter wants to have her cake and eat it too; hopefully her constituents will see through this web of deceit.
Snyder maintains that he advised Melvin Simon to "try being a goddamn responsible developer." I would advise Melvin Simon and Jerome Snyder to follow that advice. The surrounding communities don't need or want a Marina Place or a Channel Gateway. There are plenty of shopping centers, theaters, restaurants and exclusive housing close by. And we certainly don't need low-cost housing with time limits.