The Expo Line Should Connect, Not Conquer, Neighbors (Source: Citywatch)

CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall

The Expo Line Should Connect, Not Conquer, Neighbors
Moving LA
By Ken Alpern

As both a physician and as a believer in the grassroots process, I’m always inclined to recognize how little I know or how open-minded I must be since I don’t have all the answers. NO ONE PERSON HAS ALL THE ANSWERS.
Still, I’ve been blessed with the opportunity to hear from many parties, both governmental and grassroots, in various planning and transportation issues--which helps me conclude what ideas are the most likely to succeed and what ideas (regardless of their merit) are the most likely to fail.

I believe we should give credit to regions and governmental officials who reach for the higher ground to serve the constituents, and who sincerely come up with ideas that offer more than just criticism.
Active Image
For years, I’ve always proclaimed that being FOR something, and not just against something, is the right way to go.

I’m noting with both fascination and concern how the Metro Crenshaw Corridor and Metro Downtown Rail Connector teams are working with the communities these lines will go through, even suggesting more expensive options (very expensive, in fact) to bypass the inevitable conundrums that will occur with these projects.

For example, Westchester and the Mid-City want more grade separations for the Crenshaw Corridor Project, so they’ll likely get them; Little Tokyo wants a completely underground way for the Downtown Connector/Gold Line link, and it’ll likely get that, too. They’re not NIMBYs, but the residents there do want their quality of life preserved, and their neighborhoods preserved as well.

So I’m also noting with both fascination and concern how this paradigm contrasts with the tone which the Expo Line Authority has taken with West LA and its political leadership, and how the major legal opponents of the Expo Line have appeared to ONLY allow the most expensive option to be allowed.

This confrontational approach bodes ill for all parties, and will probably put a much more bitter taste in the mouths of the Expo Line’s neighbors than the Crenshaw Corridor and Downtown Connector projects will for their neighbors.

I well remember the years of the Mid-City and Westside Expo advocates recognizing how traffic and political strife sundered those two regions from each other in a way that helped neither region, and how it closely worked with Metro staff to figure out how to create an Expo Line—and I also remember how this all changed when the Metro staff was yanked away from the Expo project when the Expo Authority was established to design and construct the line.

Which is not to decry the Expo Authority staff who’ve been very helpful for advice, speaking, discussions, etc. It’s just that their job descriptions—their marching orders, so to speak—are very different than the Metro staff they replaced. This is what changed when the Expo Authority took over the Expo Line from Metro.

I also well remember the years (decades, really) when the West L.A. and Mid-City political leadership, in particular Zev Yaroslavsky and Yvonne Burke, obstructed the Expo Line—which is why I’m surprised that Yaroslavsky and Burke’s successor, Mark Ridley-Thomas, aren’t recognizing the same West L.A. neighborhood concerns that now exist with the current at-grade design for much of the West L.A. portion of the Expo Line.

After all, both Yaroslavsky and Ridley-Thomas are both ex-LA City Councilmembers, so they should well understand how the City of LA allows rampant overdevelopment that overtaxes transportation and other infrastructure faster than it can be updated and expanded.

Yaroslavsky and Ridley-Thomas both know well how the City of LA Planning Department and political leadership (in ways we’d never see in Culver City, Santa Monica or West Hollywood) to hideously warp affordable housing laws, transit-oriented development, and now the state-authorized Accessory Dwelling Unit proviso to overdevelop faster than the overwhelmed and understaffed LADOT can possibly mitigate.

(The Accessory Dwelling Unit, or ADU, proviso, is being interpreted differently in each city, but in the Los Angeles it might allow EVERY single-family housing lot as low as 5000 sq ft the ability to build a granny flat, or second dwelling--thereby converting virtually every R1-zoned neighborhood into R2 zones)

Furthermore, Yaroslavsky and Ridley-Thomas both also know how offensive it must be to both Bill Rosendahl and Paul Koretz, the duly-elected CD11 and CD5 councilmembers, as well as their constituents, to not be on the Expo Authority Board as it weighs routing and contracting decisions for a light rail line that will go through two council districts.

So the question of whether the Expo Authority is a design/build entity, or a legal entity merely meant to slam through a region labeled and dismissed as “NIMBY’s”, is a fair one.

Similarly, the question of whether the concerns of these “NIMBY’s” aren’t being proven correct is also a fair question.

Of course, on the other end of the argument …

I fear that those who’ve opposed the Expo Line, particularly in the legal arena, have risked so much with their insistence on building the line in such an expensive way that the state Public Utilities Commission won’t take them seriously. Now they also risk the ability to mitigate and compromise altogether.

In a nutshell, a compromise or mitigation that costs $20-40 million or so will be taken much more seriously by all parties than one that costs $2-300 million. Usually. Certainly the same Mark Ridley-Thomas and Bernard Parks, who will fight to raise hundreds of millions of dollars to create a huge, long Crenshaw Line subway, should figure out how to do the same for the Expo Line Authority on whose Board they now sit.

The Dorsey High School situation (shut down Farmdale and build a pedestrian bridge, or create an Expo Line station there) should have been concluded quite some time ago, and I really blame ALL parties involved, but all that has little, despite the hideously-twisted and politically-correct arguments we’re going to hear, to do with the Westside.

Yes, the Expo opponents’ plan to create a Venice/Sepulveda diversion AROUND much of West LA (one that Zev Yaroslavsky once lionized, and which really would have jacked up the costs and traffic-worsening of the Expo Line) didn’t help their credibility. Furthermore, a $300-500 million plan to have it go UNDER West LA—unless we do the same with Crenshaw—won’t help anyone’s credibility, either.

(By the way, I’ve pushed for years for getting the Expo Line under Overland, longer than any person reading this... but I’m also a realist and am aware of what that probably entails)

So what am I FOR, since I always believe in being FOR something? Well, my scheme is as good or lousy as anyone’s, but based on what I’ve learned and heard from both advocates and opponents of the Expo Line alike—and with the understanding that the majority of West LA residents who questioned Westside Expo opponents are now beginning to sympathize with them, threatening the Expo Line’s future:

1) Sepulveda should be grade-separated with a rail bridge, and paid for either by Metro (which still funds the Authority, mind you!) or by the City of LA, and NOT by the adjacent Casden developers who would more likely be granted a variance to create a megaproject entirely out of character with that neighborhood, if not region

2) There should be more parking at the Sepulveda station, and none at the Westwood station, with the Sepulveda station being a regional station accommodating regional access to the line, and the Westwood station being a neighborhood station with only bus, bicycle and pedestrian access

3) A Regional Transportation Center accommodating rail, bus, car and all other transportation options, belongs at or adjacent to the Sepulveda station

4) An at-grade crossing with a traffic light belongs at Westwood, with lanes narrowed, bicycle lanes established, sidewalks redone and as many trees preserved as possible to retain the residential character of that neighborhood. If automobile commuters want quick north-south access between National and Pico, Sepulveda and Overland are much, MUCH better alternatives to be utilized.

5) With that in mind, Overland MUST be grade-separated, because history has shown that even the most optimistic Authority projections, and even with the widening/lane addition scheme of the Authority to squeak this street below Metro grade separation guidelines, the Authority cannot prevent the City of L.A.’s addiction to overdevelopment and there WILL be a traffic nightmare sooner, and not later

6) Dig a few feet down on Overland (as far as possible), if the storm drains below Overland prove too much of a disaster/nightmare for the Expo Line to go underneath Overland, build a rail bridge and accompanying sound walls for the neighbors, and be done with it; that’s what’s happening on Sawtelle to fit the line below the 405 freeway, so this is not without precedent. Similarly, the rail line might be dropped a few feet and Overland elevated over the line

7) Make the Expo Right of Way between Sepulveda and Overland a “Palms Park West” that is so green, tree-lined and attractive that the region will wonder why the hell anyone ever opposed the Expo Line to begin with.

I still very much believe in the Friends4Expo Transit slogan “Connecting Neighbors”, and I never wanted any neighborhood to feel “conquered” because of this line. I believe that the Expo Line is a quality project, and it deserves quality planning and mitigation for all regions impacted (and, likely, benefited) by this line.

I remain confident that Zev Yaroslavsky, Mark Ridley-Thomas, Bernard Parks, Bill Rosendahl, Paul Koretz and any other elected governmental leaders will do just that in order to properly serve their commuting, taxpaying and voting constituents.


(Ken Alpern is a Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) and is both co-chair of the MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and past co-chair of the MVCC Planning Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.) -cw


CityWatch Media Group
Vol 7 Issue 97
Pub: Nov 27, 2009