Expo Line Budget Derails The $640 million project has skyrocketed to $862 million (Source: NBC Los Angeles)

Link: Expo Line Budget Derails | NBC Los Angeles

Expo Line Budget Derails
The $640 million project has skyrocketed to $862 million
By SCOTT WEBER
Updated 2:45 PM PST, Tue, Dec 8, 2009



It was supposed to open this summer with the promise of fixing the congested Westside. Now the Expo Line rail project is $220 million over budget and at least a year behind schedule.

Officials had hoped that the 8.6 mile line connecting downtown to Culver City would be relatively simple and cost effective since it used right-of-way from the Southern Pacific railway. But the plan quickly derailed after a series of construction delays, problems with contractors, and project changes increased costs and delayed the opening.

According to the LA Times, problems included construction delays where the Expo and Blue lines meet on Flower Street, the decision to add a station at USC and safety improvements required next to public schools along the route.

The $640 million project has skyrocketed to $862 million and it may cost tens of millions more, the Times reported. Transit officials hope to open at least a portion of the route to west Crenshaw Boulevard next year.

The Culver City station may be running by the end of 2011 or the beginning of 2012 although no official decision has been made, the Times said.
First Published: Dec 8, 2009 2:39 PM PST

Santa Monica: Residents get first look at multi-story transit project (Source: The Argonaut)

Link: The Argonaut: Top Stories

Santa Monica: Residents get first look at multi-story transit project

BY GARY WALKER

Santa Monica officials and a real estate management company are exploring the possibility of a mixed-use complex near a future light rail site at Bergamot Station, which they believe will provide increased green space, housing and commercial opportunities.

In addition, planning representatives believe that attracting employees who work in or adjacent to Santa Monica to the residential units will bring the added bonus of reducing automobile traffic in the beachside city.

Residents of the Pico Neighborhood heard a presentation on the planned mixed use development near the site of the Mid-City/Exposition Light Rail Line on December 15th and the reaction to the project appeared to be mixed.

Santa Monica Planning Director Eileen Fogarty and Jing Yeo, the city’s special projects manager, opened the evening with a visual presentation of what the proposed transit-oriented project, which is at the former Paper Mate factory north of Olympic Boulevard, will entail.

The developer of the proposed venture, Hines, purchased the property in 2007 and is seeking to build a nearly one million-square -foot complex that will house residential units, along with space for the creative arts and entertainment, retail, commercial and office space.

Hines Senior Vice President Colin Shepherd followed Fogarty and Yeo and explained the benefits that the developer feels the project will bring to Santa Monica.

Shepherd said the mixed-use complex would be LEED certified, and the plans also include the possibility of building an amphitheater at the complex.

LEED certification is the nationally recognized standard for measuring sustainability, according to the National Resources Defense Council.

The developer will also attempt to lure local workers to live in the residential component of the complex, which in turn could help to alleviate congestion near the transit corridor and other areas of the city, Shepherd said. He added that they would especially like to attract firefighters, police officers and teachers.

“We will target those who work in the area,” Shepherd told the audience. “When there is a person working in the nearby area that can walk to work, the (car) trip that would have been generated no longer exits.”

Nearly 100 residents attended the public hearing, and most who addressed the developer appeared interested and supportive of what is being considered by the city.

“It seems to me that there’s a balance of spaces for creative arts and housing, and bike and pedestrian friendly access,” said Jerry Rubin, a longtime Santa Monica environmental activist. “I think it’s good that it is also a LEED-certified project, even though they are not required by the city to do so.”

Rubin said he was generally pleased with the tone of the meeting and he feels that both Hines and planning officials seem to be considering what the public offered as feedback on the night of the hearing.

“I sensed that the developer and the city are listening to the public,” he said.

Robert Rosenstein told Shepherd that he is worried about the potential for increased traffic, particularly for residents who live near Colorado Avenue.

“Folks north of Colorado are very concerned not only about this project, but the other four projects that are on the drawing board that will be nearby,” said Rosenstein, who lives on Yale Street. “My street will be destined for a lot of the traffic coming out of these four projects because it’s a way for people to get to the 405 (freeway).

“I think that it’s going to be a challenge for anyone to develop this site.”

A five-story post-production facility and a LEED-certified, 3.85-acre mixed-use project are being proposed on Colorado for next year, as well as another mixed-use complex with 135,000 square feet of office space and 84 residential units. A three-story, 91-unit artist lofts project is also in the works, but its environmental impact report has been suspended per the applicant’s request.

All three are within blocks of the former Paper Mate location.

In an interview with The Argonaut after the meeting, Shepherd mentioned his company’s longtime involvement with Santa Monica’s Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) process, and attending a number of meetings in recent years has given them an idea what city officials and residents want for their city.

“We’ve been hearing from a lot of people over the past three years during the LUCE process, and at the (December 15th) public hearing, we did not hear anything that was new,” he said.

The Hines executive acknowledged that one of the most frequent complaints about the planned transit development is centered around the potential for added traffic in certain areas, and he and city traffic engineers are taking that concern seriously.

“We are the closest site to the light rail line and one of the best ways to mitigate traffic is with rail,” Shepherd stated.

City Councilman Kevin McKeown also attended the community meeting and he said the City Council will be faced with a dilemma when Hines makes its presentation before the city’s governing body.

“The question is how much new traffic we’re willing to risk in one of Santa Monica’s critical crossroads, and how much new commercial office space we

still need,” the councilman told The Argonaut. “We want a vital mixed-use gateway across from the future Expo station, with restaurants and retail, affordable housing, local jobs, and pedestrian and bicycle access.”

Shepherd also addressed the height of his proposed project and sought to clarify the significance of how tall the complex would be as compared to what the developer can legally build.

“We are ten percent below the current density and just over ten percent above the current height requirement. In the original LUCE draft, there was an average building height of 78 feet,” he explain-ed. “The current LUCE document has an average of 65 feet, and our proposed building height is 71.”

The current zoning in the area where the transit center is proposed is 84 feet.

McKeown noted that the planned transit development is a green project, but said that was to be expected.

“LEED certification is a given, not a negotiating point,” he asserted.

Rubin pointed out that this was the first presentation of the project and it still requires approval of the City Council.

“It’s the beginning of the process, and I’m hopeful that everyone can come together to make this a win-win situation,” he said.

The developer has been tracking the former Paper Mate site for many years, Shepherd said.

“We purchased the land with a strong positive use in mind,” he said. “Santa Monica is a very involved community, and we would like to hear all of the individual ideas and concerns with our project.”

McKeown said the inclusion of units that could house creative arts-related businesses might help the public’s perception of the project.

“If we could guarantee true arts-related creative space, I’d be more comfortable, but often such promises fall prey to broad interpretation and we end up with creative accounting,” he said.

Shepherd told the audience at the public meeting that city officials are working with the former owners of the property toward remediation for environmental hazards due to various chemicals and solvents that found their way into the Olympic Wellfield, an aquifer that represents the city’s second largest groundwater supply.

Santa Monica Assistant City Attorney Joseph Lawrence confirmed that Gillette, which purchased the site from Paper Mate in 2004, has agreed to clean up contaminated soil at the site and transfer property to Santa Monica valued at approximately $3.25 million as part of a $68 million settlement agreement.

Hines is slated to present its proposal to the Planning Commission on January 27th.

Expo Line Authority Says They are Not Over Budget

Expo Line Authority Says They are Not Over Budget - LAist

Expo Line Authority Says They are Not Over Budget

In response to a LA Times story exposing the Expo Line's over budget and delayed light rail project between downtown and Culver City, the independent authority in charge of construction denies the facts, perhaps with some spin, maybe not. In a memo, the Authority explains that some "overruns" in the budget were actually added and approved "enhancements" (not too mention the "unforeseen work elements"). Some delays are being blamed on third parties like Caltrans, therefore beyond control of the authority. The LA Times said the 8.6-mile route, which was supposed to open in June, is likely to open in phases with the full completion in 2011 at the earliest.

By Zach Behrens in News on December 11, 2009 10:59 AM

Roundup of articles on the delayed opening of the Expo Line

Articles 1

Link: Over Budget and Delayed: Full Expo Line Route Won't Open Next Year - LAist

Over Budget and Delayed: Full Expo Line Route Won't Open Next Year


The first phase of the Expo Line will be 8.6 miles of light rail track between downtown L.A. and Culver City

A train ride between downtown and Culver City will not happen in 2010, according to a report by the LA Times today. The delayed Expo Line project is $230 million over budget and if anything opens late next year or early 2011, it will open be eight stations from downtown to Crenshaw Boulevard. The remainder of the route--three stations to Culver City--would open on a later date, possibly late 2011 or 2012.

The culprit in this mess? "A variety of change orders, additions and increases in material costs," says the Times. Of that includes the strong opposition from the Fix Expo campaign, which has fought for increased pedestrian improvements.

"They've known that these street-level crossings in our community and next to our schools were opposed by our community since the inception of this project," said Damien Goodmon of Fix Expo to the paper. "The reality is this project was sold as being cheap and built fast, and the fact is neither of those points has come true."

Metro's website still claims the line in full will open in 2010.

By Zach Behrens in News on December 8, 2009 8:59 AM 4 Comments 2 Likes Likes

Article 2

Expo Line project costs and delays are ballooning, will open only to Crenshaw next year

December 8, 2009 |  7:12 am

The Expo Line, the first rail project into the traffic-clogged Westside, is $220 million over its original budget and more than a year behind schedule, with officials saying additional delays and costs are possible.

The line was supposed to open this summer, running from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City at a cost of $640 million.

But the price tag has risen to $862 million, and transit officials say their goal for next year is to open just a portion of the route -- only as far west as Crenshaw Boulevard.

It is unclear what the ridership for such a short line would be, but it probably would be considerably less than the full run to Culver City. Officials are unsure when the Expo Line will reach Culver City or how much the total cost will be upon completion.

Read the full story here.

-- Ari B. Bloomekatz

Article 3

Link: Expo Line Budget Derails | NBC Los Angeles

Expo Line Budget Derails
The $640 million project has skyrocketed to $862 million
By SCOTT WEBER
Updated 2:45 PM PST, Tue, Dec 8, 2009

It was supposed to open this summer with the promise of fixing the congested Westside. Now the Expo Line rail project is $220 million over budget and at least a year behind schedule.

Officials had hoped that the 8.6 mile line connecting downtown to Culver City would be relatively simple and cost effective since it used right-of-way from the Southern Pacific railway. But the plan quickly derailed after a series of construction delays, problems with contractors, and project changes increased costs and delayed the opening.

According to the LA Times, problems included construction delays where the Expo and Blue lines meet on Flower Street, the decision to add a station at USC and safety improvements required next to public schools along the route.

The $640 million project has skyrocketed to $862 million and it may cost tens of millions more, the Times reported. Transit officials hope to open at least a portion of the route to west Crenshaw Boulevard next year.

The Culver City station may be running by the end of 2011 or the beginning of 2012 although no official decision has been made, the Times said.
First Published: Dec 8, 2009 2:39 PM PST

Expo Line project costs and delays are ballooning. The rail line from downtown L.A. to Culver City is $220 million over budget and a year behind schedule. Officials hope to open part of the route next year.

Link: Expo Line project costs and delays are ballooning - latimes.com

Expo Line project costs and delays are ballooning.
The rail line from downtown L.A. to Culver City is $220 million over budget and a year behind schedule. Officials hope to open part of the route next year.

By Ari B. Bloomekatz

December 8, 2009

The Expo Line, the first rail project into the traffic-clogged Westside, is $220 million over its original budget and more than a year behind schedule, with officials saying additional delays and costs are possible.

The line was supposed to open this summer, running from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City at a cost of $640 million.

But the price tag has risen to $862 million, and transit officials say their goal for next year is to open just a portion of the route -- only as far west as Crenshaw Boulevard.

It is unclear what the ridership for such a short line would be, but it probably would be considerably less than the full run to Culver City. Officials are unsure when the Expo Line will reach Culver City or how much the total cost will be upon completion.

Richard Thorpe, chief executive of the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority, said that although he hopes $862.3 million will be the final price tag, the project possibly could need tens of millions of additional dollars.

The construction authority, which is building the line, receives its money through the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and has contracted with a group of construction firms to perform the work.

The firms and the construction authority are at odds over which is responsible for some of the project's delays. Depending on how that dispute is resolved, it could further raise the project's cost, officials said.

The 8.6-mile line has been touted by planners as a fast and cost-effective route for rail service to the Westside because it is being built mostly on an abandoned Southern Pacific right-of-way.

But a variety of factors have held up what was supposed to be a relatively quick project and added to the costs. Among them: construction delays where the Expo and Blue lines meet on Flower Street, the decision to add a station at USC and safety improvements required next to public schools along the route.

The problems with the Expo Line come at a difficult time for the MTA, which is now trying to build new rail lines with federal money and revenues from a transportation sales tax that L.A. County voters approved last year.

MTA officials said they do not yet know how the agency will pay for more Expo Line costs if needed or whether those costs would eat into money slated for other projects, which include a subway along Wilshire Boulevard and an extension of the Gold Line east into the San Gabriel Valley.

The delays are prompting concern from communities along the route and elsewhere on the Westside, which was supposed to be a main beneficiary of the Expo Line.

Westside officials said they are reconsidering how to build the western portion of the line given the problems with the first construction phase.

"The contracting process is going to be done very, very differently," said Culver City Councilman Scott Malsin, who is on the Expo Line Construction Authority board.

Officials said they lack a breakdown on what the cost increases could be, but reports from the construction authority have said that "there are a number of areas that pose significant risk to the budget."

One of the more vexing problems is occurring where the Expo and Blue lines meet near the Los Angeles Convention Center. Planners originally believed that tying the two lines together would not be a major effort.

But officials said the section was delayed initially because the design was incomplete and was delayed further when portions of the existing track needed to be replaced because of inadequate Blue Line track insulation, in addition to other changes requested by officials.

The Blue Line segment is crucial because plans call for Expo Line trains to follow the Blue Line route into the downtown Metro Center station, which planners expect would be a key destination for many riders.

The Expo Line route has long had its critics, who have argued that the line is too far south to effectively serve the Westside.

The line runs about three miles south of Wilshire Boulevard, missing major job centers in Beverly Hills, Century City and Westwood.

But MTA planners favored the line in large part because of the cost savings involved in using an existing rail right-of-way.

Some of the projected cost savings are now coming into question.

The project jumped from $640 million to $862.3 million because of a variety of change orders, additions and increases in material costs.

In September 2007, the MTA board approved $22.3 million for extra work on the Blue and Expo line hookup, safety enhancements and a new USC station.

MTA approved another $145 million because of increased construction costs and later approved $54 million to build an elevated station in Culver City. Thorpe said the original plan called for a temporary station in Culver City, with an elevated platform planned for later. Officials decided that it made more sense to build the elevated platform right away.

Though no specific date has been set, officials hope to have the Culver City station running by the end of 2011 or the beginning of 2012.

More money probably will be spent on safety improvements. Over the last few years, activists have complained that the route poses risks to students at Dorsey High School and Foshay Learning Center, among other campuses near the line. They have called for costly improvements to protect pedestrians, including running the line above or below street level.

The state Public Utilities Commission, which has regulatory authority over rail lines, is now deciding which safety improvements are needed near Dorsey High.

"They've known that these street-level crossings in our community and next to our schools were opposed by our community since the inception of this project," said Damien Goodmon of the Citizens' Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line, one of the line's chief critics.

"The reality is this project was sold as being cheap and built fast, and the fact is neither of those points has come true," he said.

ari.bloomekatz

@latimes.com

Round up of Articles on Rail Maintenance Yard Location

Round up of Articles on Rail Maintenance Yard Location
Article 1

The Argonaut: Santa Monica

Santa Monica City Council endorses hybrid proposal for light rail maintenance yard location

BY GARY WALKER
(Created: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:12 PM PST)

Despite objections from residents who believe that their neighborhood is not the best place for a light rail maintenance facility, the Santa Monica City Council has voted to back a site recommended by the Mid-Cities Exposition Light Rail Construction Authority.

The council also pledged to look into claims made by Stewart Park neighborhood residents that levels of methane gas near the proposed location were higher than previously reported and to urge the construction authority to do so as well.

The Mid-Cities Exposition Light Rail Line, commonly known as the Expo Line, will have three stations in Santa Monica — 26th Street and Olympic Boulevard, near Bergamot Station, 17th Street and Colorado Avenue and at Fourth Street and Colorado.

Kate Vernez, assistant to the city manager for governmental relations, said that city staff members had investigated the methane claims at the proposed location, which is the city-owned Verizon telephone maintenance facility on Exposition Boulevard and a portion of a parking lot used by Santa Monica College (SMC).

“The environmental concerns have been addressed and were found not to be a hazard,” Vernez told the council.

Vernez gave the council and the public an update from an August meeting when the hybrid alternative was offered by Metro authorities instead of only the Verizon site, the original proposal. At the meeting, the council voted to consider the so-called hybrid location of the existing Verizon facility and the SMC parking lot, but a number of residents of the Pico and Stewart Park neighborhoods complained that their neighborhoods were being targeted for a facility that could bring noise and environmental complications.

Vernez mentioned that the new planned location had been redesigned to eliminate “wheel squeal” from the train and a car wash and cleaning platform would be relocated north of the Verizon property. A 110-foot sound barrier is also proposed to reduce noise from the train and the light rail yard.

“In addition,” Vernez added, “Metro has eliminated the paint and body shop, restricted access to Stewart Street, proposed adding directional lighting to reduce glare and installed landscaping to soften the building facade.”

Mayor Ken Genser, as Vernez did at the beginning of the meeting, reminded the audience that the final authority on where the rail yard will be placed lies with Metro. He also commented on what he sees as the transportation authority’s sense of urgency to determine where the maintenance yard should be built.

“It seems like Expo is moving ahead no matter what our position on CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) is,” said the mayor, referring to questions regarding environmental review at the suggested location. “Expo seems to be operating on the basis of ‘we’ll work with you as long as you don’t oppose us or what you’re doing does not slow us down.’

“That seems to be their (modus operandi,)” Genser asserted.

Samantha Bricker, the chief operating officer of the construction authority, said that her agency has been working diligently with Santa Monica officials as well as residents in the neighborhoods that will be affected. Bricker also said it was important to have a site selected so that any necessary environmental work can begin prior to submitting all necessary documents to Expo’s board of directors in January for its approval.

“We have reviewed the hybrid site regarding any environmental issues, and our team did not find anything that would be cause for concern,” Bricker said, echoing Vernez’s earlier statements. “Our final draft is a CEQA document that will give environmental clearance for both the Verizon site and the hybrid site.”

Residents who addressed the council represented a mixture of supporters of the hybrid site and those who remained concerned that Expo has not given sufficient mitigation regarding noise, traffic and potential environmental hazards. Some Stewart Park homeowners have also taken issue with the alignment of the rail station that will stop at nearby Bergamot Station, which will be at grade, or ground level, instead of an elevated track.

Sarah Devine, a Stewart Park resident who lives on Delaware Avenue, took exception with the site’s location, which she pointed out was close to an educational institution, private school New Roads School, on nearby Olympic Boulevard.

“How or why is this (site) so different from the other sites that were not selected because they were close to a school?” she asked.

Darrell Clarke, a former Santa Monica planning commissioner who is also a light rail proponent, commended the city’s staff and Metro officials for crafting a proposal that he feels will satisfy both parties.

“I hear about the impact of the (10) freeway all the time, said Clarke, who lives south of the Verizon facility and is a co-chair for the light rail advocacy group Friends 4 Expo. “A maintenance facility is not the same thing.

“I look forward to the completion of this excellent project,” he concluded.

Councilwoman Gleam Davis stated that it was important to separate safety and the potential impact on neighborhoods.

“There are a number of communities in the country that operate at-grade systems that operate very safely,” Davis noted. “I have seen nothing that leads me to believe that this will be a problem.

“Rail, as a method of transportation, is a safe method.”

Genser also mentioned that the selection of the hybrid site was predicated on approval of a land exchange with SMC officials.

Bricker said that Expo had been in contact with the college and city leaders about the land swap and did not anticipate any problems.

“It’s my understanding that the city and the college are both willing,” she said. “Everyone has been very cooperative and we’re very optimistic that we will be able to work with all parties.”

SMC officials did not return phone calls for comment.

Davis also discussed the environmental concerns that some members of the audience brought before the council.

“City reports show that the ambient levels (of methane gas) are safe,” the councilwoman said.

The Expo Line will begin in downtown Los Angeles and is set to arrive in Culver City in its first stage of construction next year. It is scheduled to arrive in Santa Monica in 2016.

Article 2

Curbed LA: Wheel Squeal Considered, Santa Monica Votes for Hybrid Yard

Wheel Squeal Considered, Santa Monica Votes for Hybrid Yard
Thursday, November 19, 2009, by Dakota

2009_08_expo.jpg Whenever the second phase of the Expo Line opens, there'll be three stops in Santa Monica: 26th Street and Olympic Boulevard, 17th Street and Colorado Avenue and, Fourth Street and Colorado. A light rail maintenance yard also needs to go up as part of the line, and today's The Argonaut reports that the Santa Monica City Council voted to back a recommendation to use a Verizon facility on Exposition Boulevard and part of a Santa Monica College parking lot for the site of the maintenance yard. Metro has the final say on the placement of the facility, but the proposed location has roiled some neighbors. Concessions have been made: A city official tells the paper that the "new planned location had been redesigned to eliminate 'wheel squeal' from the train and a car wash and cleaning platform would be relocated north of the Verizon property. A 110-foot sound barrier is also proposed to reduce noise from the train and the light rail yard." Meanwhile, there's also talk of methane gas. According to members of the Stewart Park neighborhood residents, "levels of methane gas near the proposed location were higher than previously reported," whic

Yet another meeting post: Expo Line, Harbor Subdivision, long-range plan (Source: MetroRiderLA)

Yet another meeting post: Expo Line, Harbor Subdivision, long-range plan | MetroRiderLA

Yet another meeting post: Expo Line, Harbor Subdivision, long-range plan
Contributed by Wad on October 21st, 2009 at 2:45 am

Expo Line construction sign

Photo by Alan Weeks and uploaded by Metro Library and Archive on Flickr; used with a Creative Commons license

You, at least more than two-thirds of you, voted for a tax to expand public transit. Most of them come at the last 15 years of the Measure R period. What’s the first 15 years? Attending meetings and seeing maps, diagrams and harangues on what could be.

It also means MetroRiderLA will post yet another meeting post, though longtime MetroReaders know we are much more.

Here’s something to do tonight. The Expo Line Construction Authority conducts a community meeting tonight in West Adams for an update on Phase 1, which may or may not open next year — and likely to Crenshaw Boulevard first and then to Culver City. Find out more by going at 6:30 tonight to Holman United Methodist Church, 3320 W. Adams Blvd. Transit access: Metro lines 37, 38, 209, 210 and 710; and LADOT DASH Midtown.

Thursday, the sparks are sure to fly and Las Vegas bookies have placed odds at 3 to 1 that something may get accomplished at Metro’s monthly meeting, where the board must vote on the long-range transportation plan. How long range? A vote Thursday affects spending for the next 40 years. Curbed LA lists some of the major items, including the subway extension, the regional connector, and the Foothill Gold Line extension. Of course, the reason for odds is that Metro may decide to punt again. That, or Metro may spend hours arguing over what color the Expo Line ought to be. The meeting begins at 9:30 a.m. It’s at Union Station. By now we trust MetroReaders to know what buses and trains to take here.

And both tonight and tomorrow, Metro is also asking what ought to be done with the Harbor Subdivision. All options are considered: bus rapid transit, light rail, Metrolink service, or an express train between Union Station and LAX. Tonight’s meeting at 6 is at the Jackie Robinson Academy Auditorium, 2750 Pine Ave., Long Beach. Thursday’s meeting, also at 6 p.m., is at the Miriam Matthews Branch Library, 2205 Florence Ave., Hyde Park.

Transit access to the Long Beach meeting: Metro Blue Line and Long Beach Transit lines 51-52, 101-103 and 181-182
Transit access to the Hyde Park meeting: Metro lines 111, 207, 209, 210, 710, 711 and 757

Little Tokyo Sounds Off About Metro’s Expansion Plans (Source: API Movement)

Little Tokyo Sounds Off About Metro’s Expansion Plans | API Movement

Little Tokyo Sounds Off About Metro’s Expansion Plans

Michael - Posted on 19 October 2009

Community leaders continue to meet with Metro officials to emphasize the area’s historical and cultural significance.

By Nalea J. Ko, Reporter
Pacific Citizen
Published October 16, 2009

Little Tokyo stakeholders are expressing concerns over Metro’s plans to expand the city’s mass transit system in the area.

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or Metro, has been collecting community input about its 1.8-mile-long Regional Connector Transit Corridor project. It is a plan that would run through Los Angeles’ Little Tokyo, connecting the Metro Gold, Blue and Expo Lines, and possible future transit projects.

Little Tokyo is one of the last three Japantowns left in the nation including one in San Francisco and one in San Jose.

Most residents and employees say they are in favor of improving the transportation in the area, but they are also concerned about how Metro will mitigate negative impacts during the construction phase.

“The Metro has to find ways which will in effect guarantee that businesses and institutions that reflect our ethnic heritage will not be destroyed or impacted to ruination through their proposed construction … and work with the Little Tokyo community after construction is done to help ensure that the ethnic flavor of the community can continue and not be swallowed up by big-money interests,” said Bill Watanabe, executive director of the Little Tokyo Service Center (LTSC).

Watanabe said his opinions are personal and do not necessarily reflect of the feelings of LTSC.
Construction on the regional connector could take as long as four years, depending on which project option is pursued.

Metro officials have not broken ground yet. An 18-month environmental impact statement/environmental impact report is currently underway. It is expected to be complete by the summer of 2010.

In the interim, Metro officials are exploring four different options for constructing the regional connector: a no build alternative, a transportation system management alternative, an at-grade light rail transit alternative and an underground light rail transit alternative.

Metro officials will determine which option to proceed with depending on community input, Metro procedures and the Federal Transit Administration’s guidelines.

The regional connector is intended to provide those who live and work in downtown with “more access to the light rail system.” Little Tokyo is one of the communities that would be included in the project area. Others include Bunker Hill, the Jewelry District, the Civic Center, the Toy District, the Historic Core, the Arts District, the Financial District and the Jewelry District.

Constructing the regional connector would allow passengers to travel through the downtown area without having to transfer, said Dolores Roybal Saltarelli, Metro project manager.

“The elimination of these transfers would save passengers between 12 and 20 minutes of travel time per average trip, and would reduce the need for casual passengers — those without monthly transit passes who pay for each trip individually — to pay additional fares.” Saltarelli wrote in an e-mail to the Pacific Citizen.

“In order for the Metro system to accommodate the anticipated population growth and increases in transit users through the year 2035 and beyond, it will be important to address crowding at these stations.”

Each proposed regional connector option has varying price tags. The transportation system management alternative would have an estimated capital cost of $63 million and an operating cost of $13.6 million. That option would provide bus or shuttle service between the 7th Street Metro Station and Union Station.

The at-grade light rail transit alternative would be $796 million with an operating cost of $9.8 million. This option would go west along Main and Los Angeles Street and north along Temple Street. And the final option, the underground light rail alternative, is estimated to be $910 million, costing $5.2 to operate. Its route would run along Second Street, crossing into Little Tokyo.

“No option is really acceptable to us,” said Craig Ishii, JACL PSW regional director.

“Little Tokyo — this is the whole community — the whole community for the most part is not opposed to the idea of public transit and is not opposed to Metro. It is only opposed to these options that are being presented. The idea is that Little Tokyo should have been involved in the process where they went from 30 [project options] to four.”

Ishii said they oppose the underground light rail transit alternative because of the possible traffic congestion and loss of business during construction. The at-grade light rail transit alternative is also problematic because it sequesters Little Tokyo, said Ishii.

The JACL PSW regional board passed an Oct. 5 resolution, saying they are against all options presented by Metro, unless proper mitigations are implemented.

Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, also submitted a letter to Metro Chairman Ara Najarian urging him to be mindful of the regional connector’s possible impact on the Japanese American National Museum, which has “unique characteristics and compelling historic significance.”

Saltarelli said they are working with the community before finalizing their decision.

“The project team is conducting extensive outreach in the community to identify the best possible alternative,” Saltarelli said. “We are hopeful that we can identify an alternative that minimizes the impacts on the downtown community, and provides great benefits to businesses, residents, and visitors in downtown Los Angeles and regionally for the long-term.”

The next downtown-based Metro community meeting is Nov. 7 at 10 a.m. at the Wurlitzer Building.
Stakeholders hope Metro officials will consider the historical and cultural significance of Little Tokyo.

“If the Little Tokyo community can plan and coalesce in effective ways to ensure that the community will not be destroyed in the future, then perhaps there is hope for change that results in positive ends for the city and for the Little Tokyo community,” Watanabe said. “Without these guarantees and assurances, many in the community will be unsupportive of these changes.”

Expo Light Rail project coming down to the wire (Source: www.smdp.com)

Link: Expo Light Rail project coming down to the wire

Expo Light Rail project coming down to the wire

opinion and commentary

October 12, 2009
The final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Expo Light Rail, Phase 2 will be submitted to Expo's Board of Directors early next year for final approval — but we all will get a sneak peek on Wednesday.

There are two major problems with Expo service in Santa Monica. One is the location of a maintenance/train storage yard on Verizon's property between Stewart Street and Centinela Avenue, adjacent to Exposition Boulevard. The other is the route Expo will take down Colorado Avenue to a termination at Fourth Street.

Neighbors and members of the Pico Neighborhood Association have voiced their opposition to noise, pollution and other negatives associated with having such an industrial operation near homes. One plan is to position the maintenance facility at the northern edge of the property, isolating it from neighbors by building new multi-story, mixed use buildings to block sound from drifting across Exposition.

But, isn't there something wrong with building apartments, of all things, as buffers for noise and pollution?

Pico neighbors recently toured light rail maintenance facilities in Pasadena and the South Bay courtesy of the Expo Construction Authority. Reactions were mixed with some folks saying that an indoor facility may mitigate much noise and potential pollution while others were concerned about the screeching of 270-foot long trains weighing several hundred tons as they turn in and out of the yard.

Bulldog Realtors
advertisement
Some neighbors would like to see the yard moved to another location although the Expo Construction Authority has evaluated and eliminated some 40 possible sites leaving the Verizon site as the best location.

More problematic for me is track alignment that would send as many as 24 trains per hour up and down the center of Colorado Avenue at street level from roughly 17th Street to Fourth Street. The Expo Authority originally recommended a partially elevated alignment down Olympic Boulevard with elevated flyovers at Lincoln Boulevard and freeway off ramps before terminating above ground at Fourth Street. Putting the "visual blight" of overpasses ahead of safety and traffic, City Hall unfortunately backed Colorado.

On Colorado, traffic and parking lanes will be removed to accommodate track. With trains running at grade, numerous and lengthy traffic delays will occur at intersections with 20th, 17th, 14th,11th, Seventh and Fifth streets and Lincoln Boulevard, leaving motorists in traffic jams plenty of time to enjoy the uncluttered view.

Then, there are the safety issues. A similar street level (at-grade) configuration can be found on Washington Boulevard in downtown Los Angeles, which is part of the most accident-prone section of Metro's Blue Line: "America's deadliest light rail line." Conversely, the South Bay Green Line with its elevated track and isolated alignment is virtually 100 percent accident free.

The Pasadena Gold Line (PGL), which Expo cheerleaders often use as an example of how safe at grade light rail can be, is an entirely different system that runs mostly on an isolated right-of-way and within the center divider of the Interstate 210.

According to the Citizen's Campaign to Fix Expo, there's no section of the PGL that compares to the Colorado plan backed by City Hall. The PGL operates with congestion-inducing crossing gates and grade separation at crossings with heavy traffic like Lincoln here.

The only portion of the 13-mile line that doesn't have crossing gates or grade separation is a short, 3/4-mile section on a nearly traffic-free, two-lane, residential street in Highland Park where 45 percent of all the Pasadena Gold Line's accidents still occur even with trains slowing to 20 mph and an "all-red" requirement at crossings.

On Wednesday, Oct. 14, at 6:30 p.m., an update on Expo's final EIR will be presented for public comment at the Civic Auditorium. Go! Speak up, especially about the Colorado alignment, which closely parallels adjacent multi-family residences and will cause multiple accidents and cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in settlements for injuries and deaths.

And, if someone says, "It works in Amsterdam, Prague and Copenhagen," tell 'em, "Santa Monica isn't quaint, old Europe."

Take a shot of this

I was lucky enough to attend "Kids with Cameras," a photo exhibition and "community conversation" at McKinley Elementary School, Saturday, Oct. 3.

Fifteen young people between the ages of 14 and 17 were recruited from local non-profit agencies including the Police Activities League. With support from the Santa Monica police and fire departments, they shot pictures over eight weeks under the tutelage of Fabian Lewkowicz (a professional photographer who shoots for this publication) with supervision by PAL's Eula Fritz and PAL police officers.

The event was under the aegis of the Santa Monica Bay Human Relations Council and "designed to create an awareness of civic responsibility among Mid-City youth by encouraging them to explore their community and document their views through the lens of a camera."

Their fabulous photos will be displayed at various city venues over the next few months. Check 'em out.



Bill can be reached at mr.bilbau@gmail.com

Expo Yard Belongs Downtown (Souce: Santa Monica Dispatch)

Link: Santa Monica Dispatch » Blog Archive » Expo Yard Belongs Downtown

Expo Yard Belongs Downtown
By: Peggy Clifford
Published: October 8th, 2009

The Expo Construction Authority and City staff persist in saying that the Verizon property at Stewart Street and Exposition Boulevard, just south of the Lantana complex is the only suitable location in this area for the Expo light rail maintenance yard.

Finding it impossible to believe That there weren’t other likely stets

Along the line in West L.A. or Santa Monica, my friend Craig Bowie and I went exploring.

We found a couple of likely sites in West L.A. near Anawalt Lumber, another under the 405 freeway and still another next to a small government complex.

But the two most likely sites are right here in Santa Monica. One is on the south side of Colorado west of 20th Street. It’s a kind of building junkyard now, but it’s large and well-located.

We’re sure someone, the City, a developer has big plans for this tumbledown site. But Santa Monica is choking on big plans, and is in desperate need of some sensible plans.

What could be more sensible and sustainable than creating a transportation center on and around the bus yards? The freeway is there. the bus yard has just undergone an $80 million renovation, so presumably it has everything it needs. The western terminus of the Expo light rail line is a block away.

The Expo maintenance yard could be located under either the bus yard or the western terminus, which would reduce its negative impacts and muffle its noise. The cost of the big dig would be less than the cost of any surface acreage.

City Hal ls teeming with planners and consultants who should be able to fashion a multi-model transportation center that would fuse the freeway, Big Blue and the Expo light rai line into one smooth coordinated operaton. It’s either that or an endless collision of both vehicles and the jurisdictions.

We can assume that both the Big Blue and Expo bosses, and their bosses will resist any effort at o-mingling, but our traffic problems are bigger than all of them, and urgent. And it’s our town. Later this month, City staff is scheduled to show the City Council revised plan for the Verizon site.

But, however “suitable” it may be for the City or Expo, it is an utterly unsuitable site for the Expo maintenance yard. A lawyer for Lantana appeared at the last hearing, and suggested that the noise from the yard would wreak havoc with Lantana tenants’ sound, recording and editing operations. He went on to say that Lantana would take whatever steps were necessary to protect its production company tenants.

The people who live on Exposition at the south end of the site would

suffer a drastic diminution in their way of life, if the maintenance yard were installed across the street.

It’s a pretty, quiet tree-lined street. The houses and apartment buildings are compact, attractive. Their gardens are very green. It’s an altogether pleasant prospect.

But if the City and Expo have their way, it will be another victim of “progress.”

As Pico Neighborhood residents pointed out at previous hearings, their neighborhood has endured more than its share of so-called progress, while enjoying little real progress. Residents cited the loss of a thriving section of the Neighborhood to the Freeway in the 1960s, and the freeway noise and pollution teat have assaulted them daily for more than 40 years. The City’s “waste management” division is also located in the Pico Neighborhood.

When they learned that the City and Expo were planning to put the maintenance yard in their neighborhood, some residents described it as “environmental racism.”

Expo maintenance yards operate on their own clocks, employ dozens of people, who come and go in cars and trucks, use all manner of chemicals for cleaning and general maintenance, some of which are bound to be toxic 230-ton cars roll in and out at grade, crossing neighborhood streets.

In sum, it’s a noisy, busy, toxic, high volt factory that does not belong in a residential neighborhood.

City staff has spoken of isertung a “buffer” between the yard and its residential neighbors to the south – a two or three-story “mixed use” complex, with stores on the furst floor and apartments on the upper floors.

But even if there were a developer desperate enough to build such apartments overlooking the noisy, noxious yard, there probably aren’t tenants desperate enough to live In them. Besides, while the current residents might find a neighborhood grocery store useful, they may not welcome a couple

of blocks of stores right across the street. Nor would they welcome a block of three story buildings casting long shadows on their houses and gardens.

Clearly, the only way out is to locate the yard n a truly suitable site—such as the City’s proposed transportation enter in m downtown Santa Monica.
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 8th, 2009 at 11:19 pm and is filed under Daily. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

After tour, concerns remain about Expo impacts (Source: smdp.com)

Link: After tour, concerns remain about Expo impacts

After tour, concerns remain about Expo impacts
By Melody Hanatani

LAWNDALE — There was screeching and honking and other noises expected of a maintenance facility for electric trains.

They were the sounds that a group of residents from the Pico Neighborhood described hearing during a recent visit to the MTA Green Line's rail yard in Lawndale, a tour arranged by the Exposition Construction Authority to show first hand what life can be like next to such a facility.

The tours to the Green Line's maintenance yard in the South Bay and the Gold Line's in Pasadena last week were organized in response to concerns from residents in the Pico Neighborhood that the proposal to place a facility on Exposition Boulevard at Stewart Street would impact their quality of life, fearing disruption from activity that will include washing the trains and testing the horns.

The maintenance facility in Lawndale was built in the 1990s in an industrial area on Aviation Boulevard, near an old U.S. Air Force storage site. A hotel and a condominium complex have since been developed next to it.

The Gold Line opened in 2003 and the maintenance yard surrounds the Los Angeles River, the 110 Freeway and the old L.A. jail.

Bulldog Realtors, Monica Born, the project director of Expo Phase II, which covers the route from Culver City to Santa Monica, said that residents rode the train from Chinatown to the Mission Station in South Pasadena where they saw what the at-grade crossings were like for automobiles and pedestrians, and observed how they all interacted.

"The Gold Line is similar to what we are proposing," she said. "It's about the same number of vehicles stored there and the Gold Line was built more recently than the Green Line so they got to see a little up-to-date technology as far as the train system and maintenance facility."

Oscar de la Torre, a long-time resident of the Pico Neighborhood and a member of the school board, said the situation in Santa Monica is different from the Green Line in that the neighbors of the facility in Lawndale chose to move in knowing that there was a maintenance yard already there.

"The price of the condo is probably not as much because they were moving in next to the maintenance yard," he said. "There was a choice."

The current proposal in Santa Monica is to spread the facility over several properties on Exposition Boulevard, including on the Verizon site, the Santa Monica College parking lot and the a portion of the City Yards, separating the building from the residents with a 120-foot linear buffer, behind which would be the car wash, storage tracks, train-washing facility and traction power station.

Alan Quinn, a proponent of light rail who has lived in the neighborhood for 38 years, said he tried to go into the tour with an open mind, not sure of what to expect.

The bottom line is that there will be a lot of noise coming from the maintenance facility and there should be a plan to enclose it if located near residences, Quinn said.

He also had concerns with the screech of the trains as they rounded tight corners, which Expo officials said will not be an issue in Santa Monica because the configuration would be more open.

"If they house the facility and all of the work is done inside a single building or even two buildings and if we agree that it's the best location, then I think it will work if it's enclosed," Quinn said.

Quinn still believes that the facility would be better left outside of the neighborhood and hopes that MTA officials will consider one of more than 40 locations that were previously studied as candidates.

There were several city officials who also joined the tour, including Councilman Richard Bloom who said he was pleasantly surprised to find that the impact on the residents next door was relatively minimal.

He spoke with several of the neighbors who had concerns about the screeching from the tight curve.

But the residents said they were not willing to move because of it.

"Our job from the council perspective is we need to look at the last remaining options but from what we know right now, it appears that our city staff has left no stone unturned trying to find a site elsewhere," Bloom said. "It would be frankly in Santa Monica's best interest all the way around economic and otherwise if we were able to find a site in an industrial zone outside of the city of Santa Monica."

Born said she will take the community's concerns and include them in the environmental impact report, which is expected to be certified as final in January. Expo officials also plan to return to the City Council later this month to further discuss the layout of the proposed maintenance yard.

She added that the maintenance facility will be enclosed but the track storage portion will be open. While enclosing the entire facility is possible, she said it's not needed because the impacts can be otherwise mitigated.

de la Torre believes that the noises cannot be 100 percent mitigated.

"It's impossible unless you cover the whole thing with thick walls and sound barriers," he said. "Everything becomes an issue of it's too expensive to mitigate noise. I translate that as it's the people in the community that will be impacted and they aren't worth the investment to make this work."

melodyh@smdp.com

Group Claims Expo Rail Line Is ‘Deadly’ (Source: Santa Monica Dispatch)

Santa Monica Dispatch » Blog Archive » Group Claims Expo Rail Line Is ‘Deadly’

Group Claims Expo Rail Line Is ‘Deadly’
By: Peggy Clifford
Published: October 4th, 2009

The following statement was issued Friday by Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line.

MTA board members are claiming that in comparison to their Metrolink peers their rail safety policies are worthy of praise. Not true says a prominent Southern California rail safety advocacy group.

“Comparing the rail safety of Metrolink to MTA is like comparing Ted Bundy to John Wayne Gacy,” said Damien Goodmon, coordinator of the MTA watchdog group Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line (”Fix Expo Campaign”). “Metrolink is among the nation’s deadliest commuter rail systems, and MTA is the nation’s deadliest light rail system. They are different sides of the same coin and share the same failed rail safety culture that has led to scores of preventable deaths on Southland tracks.”

The Federal Transit Administration’s 2007 light rail safety statistics indicate that the national average for light rail accidents is 7.2 per million train miles traveled. Yet the same year, the MTA’s Los Angeles-to-Long Beach Blue Line, the nation’s deadliest at 94 deaths and over 836 accidents, averaged 19.9 accidents per million train miles traveled – over 275% higher than the national average. The fatality rate of the MTA light rail line, in which 225-ton trains travel up to 35 and 55 mph, is far more daunting. There have been some years in the past few when nearly half of all light rail deaths in the country were on MTA’s tracks, which are under the regulation of the California Public Utilities Commission.

Goodmon continued, “MTA claims Blue Line accidents have gone down since the ’90s, but the reality is they went down across the board, because earlier this decade the FTA changed the reporting standards for light rail accidents. It may be good public relations strategy for MTA to spin this as ‘improvement,’ but human beings are still being killed at the same high rate, and service is still being disrupted.”

MTA’s quarterly report indicates that the Blue Line killed 61 people in its first 12 years of operation, from 1990 to 2002. In the six years from 2002 to 2008, 30 more people were fatally wounded. “They’re killing people at the same rate today as they were in the beginning,” said Clint Simmons, the Public Safety Committee Chair of the West Adams Neighborhood Council, where the controversial Dorsey High School crossing on the under construction Downtown-to-Culver City Expo Line Phase 1 is located.

Statistics by the American Public Transportation Association indicate that in 2002 when the Blue Line led the nation with 61 deaths. Comparatively, the second deadliest light rail system in that span of time, which had more riders and more track miles, fatally wounded 22.

“We called the Blue Line ‘Death Row,’” said former MTA light rail operator Lester Hollins. At a community forum held at Dorsey H.S., Hollins told the crowd his MTA superiors reprimanded him for stopping his Blue Line train to pick up a toddler who had wandered on the tracks through a hole in the fence.

For the past two years, the Fix Expo Campaign, which collaborates with internationally renowned and respected experts in rail safety and vehicular accident causation, has submitted numerous public records requests for MTA to produce their accident reports. “They’ve stonewalled,” said Goodmon. “MTA just gives the number of accidents and deaths the FTA requires they report, not specifics about potential cause, age of victims or anything substantive about each individual incident. This is in stark contrast to Metrolink, where every accident is put on the Federal Railroad Administration’s safety website and the public can view the age of victims, preliminary determined cause, location, time, etc.,” said Goodmon.

“MTA claims they can’t give us the info because of potential lawsuits,” said Simmons. “That says a lot about how bad MTA’s system is if they’ve got to hide records from the public. And by the way how can it be litigiously okay for Metrolink to make the data available on the web, but not MTA?”

Goodmon continued: “MTA knows our intent is to illustrate for the world that they are making the same mistakes today on the Expo Line in South LA as they were when they designed the Blue Line: putting tracks down in the middle of highly congested areas without ‘grade separation.’” Grade separation involves the train entering a trench or going over the street on a bridge.

MTA’s statistics indicate that the most accident-prone portions of the Blue Line are where the 225-ton train operates with no gates. “92% of all vehicular accidents and 76% of total accidents occur at crossings with no gates,” said Goodmon. “Yet, 40 of the 45 street-level crossings on the under construction Expo Line Phase 1, have no crossing gates including Crenshaw, Vermont, Western and Normandie, and only one street-level crossing has them on the under construction 6 mile Eastside Extension.” MTA’s own study predicts the Expo Line will be involved in 52 accidents per year.

“They’re repeating the same mistakes, so obviously the number of light rail accidents is going to go up,” said Hollins. “You or someone you know will experience tragedy because of the MTA’s new street-level tracks.”

“They’ll be spared in Culver City, where the city demanded and MTA provided the money to build the train there without a single street-level crossing,” said Carol Tucker of the Baldwin Neighborhood Homeowners Association.

In a hearing before the California Public Utilities Commission, Russ Quimby, the former national chairman of all rail accident investigations for the National Transportation Safety Board, testified regarding planned Expo Line street-level crossings, “If the crossings at Farmdale (near Dorsey High School) and Western (near Foshay Middle School) don’t qualify for a grade separation from a safety perspective, then no crossing would.” Yet MTA has decided not to put the train underground or elevated at Western, and though directed by the CPUC to grade separate, is reapplying to run the train at street level at Dorsey HS.

“The first issue is why hasn’t MTA gone back and put the deadliest light rail train in the country in a trench like the Alameda corridor or in the air like the Green Line in El Segundo so they can stop killing people,” said Goodmon. “The second issue is how are they getting away with repeating this unsafe design on new lines in South LA and on the Eastside? These are the primary reasons we’ve called for a Congressional investigation into MTA’s planning practices and policies.”

Tucker continued: “One has to wonder if the deadliest light rail line in the country was rolling through Hancock Park, Miracle Mile, Beverly Hills and Century City, whether MTA would get away with calling their system ’safe,’ let alone spending money on new projects. But because these accidents are occurring in Watts and Compton instead of West Hollywood and Culver City there is no outcry – they have no shame.”

# # #

* The Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line (Fix Expo Campaign) is a collaboration between over a dozen South LA community groups, neighborhood councils and homeowners association, civil rights leaders and rail safety advocates. As part of their request that MTA build train underpasses or train overpasses on the currently proposed street-level Expo Line, the group has highlighted the criticism by several rail safety experts, transportation safety experts, and former MTA rail operators, including but not limited to: Prof. Meshkati; Russ Quimby, the former National Transportation Safety Board Chairman of All-Railroad Accident Investigations; Ed Ruszak, national expert in vehicle accident causation; along with former MTA Blue Line operators.

Construction lags on LA-Culver City Expo Line (Source: LA Daily News)

Link: Construction lags on LA-Culver City Expo Line - LA Daily News

Construction lags on LA-Culver City Expo Line
Daily News Wire Services
Updated: 09/15/2009 08:38:00 AM PDT

Though the Expo Line light-rail system from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City is about half finished, construction problems have pushed back completion of the project by another six weeks to almost a year, it was reported Tuesday.

Expo officials said they had planned to open the 8.6-mile line in 2010, but parts of the route would not be completed until the latter part of 2011, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Earlier this year, the estimated delay was 44 weeks, a figure that has been revised to 50 weeks in a September report to the Expo Line Construction Authority board.

Officials attribute the additional six weeks of delay to the late completion of a bridge at National Boulevard, which set back construction of a bridge at Ballona Creek, The Times reported.

Expo Chief Executive Richard Thorpe said there also have been complications involving sewer lines where the route crosses Jefferson Boulevard and La Brea Avenue, according to The Times.

The bulk of the delay has been attributed to the addition of a third aerial station that eliminated the need for an interim station and a controversy over pedestrian safety at Dorsey High School and the Foshay Learning Center. The California Public Utilities Commission eventually required improvements to a pedestrian tunnel at Foshay and a pedestrian bridge at Dorsey.

The $862 million line between downtown and Culver City broke ground in 2006. It will run from the 7th Street Metro Center to USC where it will turn onto Exposition Boulevard and proceed to Venice Boulevard and Robertson Avenue in Culver City.

Is the Expo Line Making the Grade? Moving LA (Source: CityWatch)

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall - Is the Expo Line Making the Grade?

Is the Expo Line Making the Grade?
Moving LA
By Ken Alpern

It’s no secret that the 10 Freeway between the Westside and Downtown LA is one of the most congested, if not THE most congested, freeways in the nation. It’s also no secret that the major north-south surface streets are some of the most congested streets in the nation as well … due to poor planning and overdensification of the Westside.

Enter the Expo Line, a light rail line that will shadow the 10 Freeway from Downtown to the beach, access the majority of its adjacent pedestrian destinations, and thereby add the commuter capacity of the 10 Freeway corridor by the equivalent of 2-4 extra freeway lanes.






Map reflects Expo Board's 4/2/09 preferred alignment (from the Friends4Expo Transit website at http://www.friends4expo.org/ )

Although it’s always foolish to proclaim that mass transit initiatives such as the Expo Line or Wilshire Subway will reduce automobile traffic (only planning for decreased density can do that), it’s safe to say that if these initiatives are designed and built correctly that commuters will have more transportation alternatives.

With respect to the Expo Line or any other major initiative, I’ve always felt it vital to approach transportation with a balanced approach that:

1) Doesn’t make one side “eat it” at the expense of the other—it’s neither smart nor moral to make motorists suffer unnecessarily to convenience transit users, or vice versa. Whether it’s the old car vs. rail, rail vs. bus, car vs. pedestrian/bicyclist arguments, transportation options are as mutually exclusive of each other as is food to water.

2) Recognizes that the best answer to a problem often lies with the lesser of all evils—so when there are neither good nor easy options, the answer is often unpleasant (even downright lousy) yet the best available alternative.

The first, Mid-City phase of the Expo Line is on its way to being built from Downtown to Culver City over the next two years--despite engineering, contractor and legal challenges. The second, Westside phase of the Expo Line will be designed and built over the next 5-6 years, and arguably the greatest conundrum that Expo Line and community planners will confront will be that of grade separations in West Los Angeles.

In short, “at-grade” crossings of rail with surface streets are the equivalent of traffic signals (in fact, an at-grade crossing IS somewhat of a traffic signal with respect to its traffic-slowing aspects).

“Grade-separated” means either shutting down a street to allow the rail to cross unimpeded (such as at Farmdale Ave. near Dorsey High School), digging a trench (such as the Jefferson undercrossing by USC) or elevating the rail (such as at La Brea, La Cienega or Venice Blvds.).

The five most disputed grade separations in West L.A. are (from west to east) at Centinela, Barrington, Sepulveda, Westwood and Overland., and the controversies swirling about their potential grade separation can be tied into three major groupings: Traffic, Neighborhood Preservation and Land Use.

1) Traffic:

This issue is, and will always be, to many commuters the end-all and be-all of the whole grade crossing debate and is the sole subject for part one of this and numerous other future CityWatch articles.

A grade-separated train means a faster and accident-free arrangement for the trains, and smoother traffic for the cars—a win-win for all parties involved, right?

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple because the visual, sound and financial impacts of grade-separation aren’t always that benign. While I will normally favor spending extra for first-rate transportation projects (I despise it when we “cheap out” on transportation projects), our reality must be premised on the limited availability of transportation dollars.

Well, the recently-announced scorecard from the Expo Authority goes like this: The Expo Line will be signed off by the LADOT to be elevated/grade-separated at Centinela, at ground-level (at-grade) at Barrington, either a cheaper at-grade/ground-level or more costly elevated/grade-separated configuration at Sepulveda, at ground-level/at-grade at Westwood and at-grade/ground level at Overland.

I need to caution Westsiders that are new to light rail of two caveats:

1) Considering that the Expo Line is NOT already trenched at Palms Park (that “trench” through the park is actually dug through a hill at the same level as where it intersects Overland), and that the trench needed to connect the Green Line past the LAX runways might require up to $385 million, it is almost a certainty that there will be NO trenching of the rail line under Overland for a $100 million or more price tag.

The Expo Line is a light rail, not a subway (and I need to emphasize I’ve pushed for such an Overland trench for more years than probably anyone reading this), and any trench needed to get below the storm drain by Overland is much deeper and more costly than most folks realize.

2) Any grade separations will therefore likely be elevated rail bridges—which are not cute little bridges raised on skinny telephone poles. They’re imposing freeway off ramp-like structures necessary to handle earthquakes, and I recommend anyone go to the elevated Aviation/Imperial Green Line station to really get a grip as to what that means for single-family home neighborhoods like Rancho Park or Cheviot Hills.

Furthermore, the ability to reduce noise when a rail crossing is at-grade is much greater than elevated rail—depress/cover the tracks a bit with a dirt berm and you’ve got the majority of the sound reduced…yet the gates, lights and quacking train horns (even if they are less than the booming horns of old) have their own impacts.

Perhaps another way to look at this paradigm is to mentally replace the words “at-grade” with “stoplight”, and “elevated rail bridge” with “freeway off ramp”.

It’s my prediction that the powers that be will find the extra money for the Sepulveda Blvd. elevated rail crossing, that both Barrington and Westwood will remain at-grade, but it’s a thorny and impossible-to-answer conundrum at Overland…and it’s gonna be a legal battle for years to come.

Unfortunately, a really nasty and distracting canard has been the much-ballyhooed Environmental Justice/Legal Precedent nonsense that’s been thrown out there by a few agenda-driven folks who have proclaimed that the situation between Expo-adjacent Dorsey High School and Expo-adjacent Overland Ave. Elementary School is exactly the same and requires identical treatment.

This sad and contrived paradigm ignores the facts that:

1) Dorsey High School is, well, a high school, and Overland is an elementary school (and don’t get me started on racist proclamations I’ve heard that black and brown Dorsey High School students can’t figure out how to avoid moving trains), but there are even elementary schools throughout the nation already adjacent to rail lines

2) Dorsey High School actually has a greater pedestrian problem than Overland because its front entrance borders right on the tracks, while almost every Overland Ave. Elementary School student accesses that school via adjacent residential streets such as Ashby since traffic-heavy Overland is an intimidating way for both children and adults to approach that school

3) Dorsey-adjacent Farmdale is a dinky little street that’s more akin to quiet Military Ave., while Overland is a much wider and busier street than Farmdale ever will be (in fact, it’s rather similar to Venice or other streets that will be grade-separated)…it’s always been about the traffic!

4) There are virtually no precedents in the first phase of the line to widening Mid-City streets (as proposed for Sepulveda, Westwood and Overland) in order to have each lane carry fewer cars and thereby fall below the Metro grade-separation threshold, so it’s a real tough debate as to whether this can pass legal muster with the local and state powers that be

5) The Exposition Right of Way is much, much, MUCH wider at Overland and provides considerably greater opportunities for grade-separation than the narrow land strip by Dorsey

I hope that each street and school the Expo Line passes will be evaluated appropriately and with fairness…and not sink into a twisted and perverted Environmental Justice battle that is a violation of the very intent of Environmental Justice—which is to treat all neighborhoods equitably and to compare identical situations only when, in fact, the layout of the land is identical, and which between Overland and Farmdale streets it is most certainly NOT.

The second part of this article (which is, I’m afraid, a necessarily long one) will address what might even be greater issues to contend with as the grade separation controversy builds—that include Neighborhood Preservation and Land Use—and will address the following questions (which don’t always have easy or consensus-building answers):

1) What’s best for Overland Ave. Elementary Schools students and for local residents: do safety/traffic issues always favor grade-separation, or does the greater noise/visual impact of what would be the equivalent of a freeway overpass adjacent to Overland Ave. Elementary School necessitate a quieter at-grade crossing as the lesser of two evils?

(I again caution anyone reading this that it’s neither smart nor moral to make any group of commuters or residents “eat it” at the expense of any other groups, and the legal and time-delays blowbacks could hurt the timeframe or even existence of the line if appropriate financial, legal and engineering mitigations aren’t sufficiently pursued)

2) Is it financially, legally or physically possible to depress Overland Ave. (with perhaps a very slight rail bridge) in order to keep car and rail traffic safe and swift without the greater noise/visual/financial impacts of the elevated or trenched rail alternatives next to the school?

3) Why the heck are we building a proposed parking structure and directing car traffic to the wide Right of Way next to the Exposition/Westwood station in a single-family neighborhood instead of focusing car traffic to the nearby, freeway-adjacent Exposition/Sepulveda station that is a much better parking alternative…especially when we have big parking structures along Westwood at Westside Pavilion Mall?

4) Why is the Authority abandoning the principles of the Expo Greenway and Expo Bikeway on the Right of Way between Sepulveda and Overland by paving over so much of that land for the aforementioned parking structure (instead of the park/bikeway design that most Expo friends and foes alike favor), thereby choosing about the worst land-use options possible?

5) How can the single-family housing tracts adjacent to the Expo Line be preserved with the existing and adjacent layout of the Expo Line by creating both a “regional station” with lots of parking at Sepulveda and a “neighborhood station” at Westwood that is limited to bus, car drop-off, bicycle and pedestrian access?

6) Finally, might Overland Ave. Elementary students and neighbors someday see an accessible park on the Right of Way that will make the Expo Line the best thing ever to come to the region (see below)?

http://www.expogreenway.org/





(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 that of Mr. Alpern.

Another candidate for Expo maintenance yard emerges (Source: Santa Monica Daily Press)

Link: Santa Monica Daily Press: System Print Window

Another candidate for Expo maintenance yard emerges

by Melody Hanatani

August 13, 2009

CITY HALL — There’s a new contender emerging in the small pool of possible maintenance yard locations for the Exposition Light Rail.

That candidate is a roughly 13-acre chunk of land made up of two city blocks bounded by Colorado Avenue to the north, Olympic Boulevard to the south, Ninth Street to the west, and 11th Street to the east, all of which is currently home to approximately 27 businesses, including Jerry Bruckheimer Films.

It was included in a list of 20 properties recently evaluated by a city consultant who combed through potential sites for a work facility after Pico Neighborhood residents came out in strong opposition to a proposal by the Exposition Construction Authority to place the yard at the Verizon site, which is across the street from homes near the corner of Stewart Street and Exposition Boulevard.

While the survey concluded that the Colorado option would create safety concerns because its configuration would force trains to make a turn into eastbound traffic, the City Council on Tuesday asked its staff and Expo officials to continue studying it for different siting possibilities.

“The cost of relocating businesses to me is infinitesimal compared to the mitigated impact on residents,” Councilwoman Gleam Davis said. “Relocating businesses to me may be very expensive, but it’s not going to have a negative impact on a neighborhood.”

The council also directed its staff to continue working on a newly conceived hybrid plan that would involve using the Verizon site, adjacent Santa Monica College parking lot and part of the City Yards, separating the facility and the residents with a 120-foot linear buffer.

Behind the buffer will be a car wash, storage tracks, train washing facility, and traction power station. The new plan would require relocating the bike path from the Expo right-of-way.

The hybrid option replaces an alternative proposal that city staff presented last month to spread the facility over several properties, including Verizon, the SMC parking lot and city-owned property at 1800 Stewart St. The plan was opposed by residents, Bergamot Station and the Lionstone Group, which owns the lease at 1800 Stewart.

Both the Lionstone Group and Bergamot Station, which is home to art studios and galleries, backed the new proposal, but the hybrid plan brought out a new opponent — the owners of the Lantana Entertainment Media Campus, which sits immediately to the north.

“We have grown in Santa Monica because tenants can work in an environment that is conducive to their business,” Maggi Kelley, the general manager of Lantana, said. “It is important to us that we are able to continue the same quality of service to all tenants as we have been supplying to them the last 20 years.”

Ted Bischak, the senior vice president of asset management for Maguire Properties, which owns the Lantana campus, said the alternative proposal provided the building a significant buffer from the maintenance facility while the hybrid plan pushes those activities up to the property line.

“The buffer for pedestrians and bicycles is removed and there is no conceivable way in our opinion to fix this,” he said.

Rick Thrope, the chief executive officer of the Exposition Construction Authority, said that there is a sound studio located within 10 feet of the Gold Line tracks in Pasadena and that impacts were successfully mitigated.

Residents spoke against plans to place a facility near their homes, criticizing Expo officials for waiting until the previous evening to hold its first community meeting about the maintenance facility. Expo has pledged to hold another design workshop with neighbors.

Residents also expressed discontent with the screening criteria that the consultant used in its evaluation, which included weeding out properties that were too close to parks and schools and were under the adequate parcel size.

“I’m shocked and disappointed that neighborhoods are apparently not on the same level as schools and parks, neighborhoods that are occupied 24 hours a day,” Michael Storms said.

Darrell Clarke, who serves as the co-chair on Friends 4 Expo Transit and lived more than three years about half a block south of the Verizon site, said the maintenance yard will not produce the same health hazards as the I-10 Freeway or City Yards, which residents said will join the Expo facility in creating a “toxic triangle.”

“This is not a freeway with that kind of noise and air pollution,” he said.

Davis pointed out that the Verizon site is also currently a maintenance yard that probably produces carcinogens.

“They are refueling vehicles on that site and there are few things that create more air pollution than refueling vehicles and they are not refueling them with clean air, it’s gasoline,” she said. “There are things going on at that site now that are probably having a negative impact on the neighborhood.”

There’s some skepticism about whether the Colorado site will be financially feasible given the relocation costs of 27 businesses. City Manager Lamont Ewell said that the hybrid plan is estimated to cost about $100 to $120 million and the Colorado option would be double that figure.

Councilman Bob Holbrook said he has a gut feeling that the site will create a furor in the city.

“It’ll probably be $250 million plus 27 different law firms marching in here with all the employees that work in those places and I just think … that site isn’t going to make it and to go down that long dusty road is concerning,” he said.

Expo Takes Santa Monica For a Bumpy Ride (Source: Santa Monica Dispatch)

Santa Monica Dispatch » Blog Archive » Expo Takes Santa Monica For a Bumpy Ride

Expo Takes Santa Monica For a Bumpy Ride
By: Peggy Clifford
Published: August 7th, 2009

City Hall is counting on the Expo Light Rail Line to eliminate the traffic jam that it created. Many residents look forward to its arrival with great excitement.

Surf Santa Monica reported Tuesday that “After more than a year unsuccessfully scouring the Westside for available land for a maintenance yard for the proposed light rail line to Santa Monica, Expo officials next week will ask the City Council to begin planning for the facility at the Verizon property neighboring residents oppose.

“Expo Construction Authority officials said they will ask the council members to scrap their plan to split up the yard after vocal opposition from area residents and a key land owner at a council meeting last month…

“ ‘There was no support for the hybrid site as was being proposed,’ said Samantha Bricker, the chief operating officer for the Expo Construction Authority…

“Expo officials said they — as well as City officials — have exhausted the hunt for a property adjacent to Phase 2 of the line, which will run from Culver City to Downtown Santa Monica.

“ ‘The City hired their people (consultants), we hired our people, we searched everywhere and didn’t find anything,’ said Rick Thorpe, the Expo Construction Authority’s CEO.

“’…Now I think we’re at the point of deciding on the Verizon site and start planning ways to make it work.

“City officials, who are in constant contact with the Construction Authority, said they are continuing to explore options, but are also moving ahead with plans for the Verizon site….

“City and light rail officials said they would be reaching out to the community next Tuesday, when the council is expected to give the green light to move ahead with the Verizon site…

“The Construction Authority will hold a community workshop to gather input on how to make the site work, and officials have offered to give neighboring residents a tour of a maintenance facility that has operated successfully next to a condominium complex along the Green Line.”

At the July 11 Council meeting, Council members Bob Holbrook and Bobby Shriver both questioned City Hall and Expo claims that there was no better site than the Pico Neighborhood for the maintenance yard in West L.A.— especially since Epxo has the authority to take whatever property it wants.

Having watched this sort of ritual dance too many times, I believe Expo’s claims of “scouring” the Westside, and “exhausting the hunt” is a show, as Expo actually decided on the Pico Neighborhood site sometime ago. It’s at the west end of the line. Check. It’s the right size. Check. It’s in a rundown area. Check. It’s in Expo’s price range. Check. And City Hall is so desperate for the line, it would not get in Expo’s way. Check and checkmate.

At the July11 meeting, someone asked what would happen if a Pico neighborhood site were not available for sone reason. Thorpe said, “That would be a deal-breaker.”

Word is that Expo officials are not enthusiastic about townspeople’s choice of Colorado Boulevard as the line’s route into downtown Santa Monica. They are also said to favor elevated tracks, which residents oppose.

As planning proceeds, no one should be surprised if Expo opts for Olympic over Colorado and prefers elevated tracks. Expo has its own priorities, and they are not necessarily our priorities, and it has the upper hand.

But it’s our town, and the insertion of the stations and tracks, with or without the maintenance yard, into our densely made townscape must be done very carefully, and, to this point, nothing has been done very carefully.

Expo could hinder funding for subway (Source: Santa Monica Daily Press)

Link: Expo could hinder funding for subway

Expo could hinder funding for subway
By Melody Hanatani

August 08, 2009
SM LIBRARY — As officials with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority plan for a subway extension to Santa Monica, one of the questions it will face is whether the western part of L.A. County will have the demand to support two public transit infrastructures, the other being light rail.

Included in the proposal for the Westside Subway Extension, also known as the Subway to the Sea, are three stations in Santa Monica, including one at the corner of Fourth Street and Wilshire Boulevard, which is just half a mile away from the planned terminal for the Exposition Light Rail at Fourth Street and Colorado Avenue.

It was one of several aspects of the subway extension covered during a meeting at the main library on Thursday updating the community on the heavy rail project, which is currently in the draft environmental review phase.

The project is estimated to receive about $4.1 billion from Measure R, the half cent sales tax increase that was approved by county voters in November for public transportation-related projects. The measure is estimated to raise $40 billion over the next 30 years.

Construction for roughly 17 miles of subway however is estimated at $9 billion.

Bulldog Realtors
advertisement
In order to qualify for federal matching funds, the project will have to meet certain cost effectiveness standards, a formula based on construction cost and ridership.

"Because [a] heavy rail subway is so expensive to build, to meet cost effectiveness numbers, you really have to have high ridership to compete for federal funds," Jody Litvak, regional communications manager for the MTA, said. "By the time you get to Wilshire and Fourth, you have another rail line that is not even a mile away.

"As you get further west, those lines get very close to each other."

The second leg of Expo, which will go from Culver City to Santa Monica, is anticipated to begin service by 2015, while the subway extension won't reach the I-405 Freeway for at least another 20 years. Construction will be done in four segments with the area west of the 405 being the final stage.

The MTA is studying two possible alignment options for the subway, including one that would start at the Purple Line connection in Koreatown, heading down Wilshire Boulevard and ending at the Fourth Street intersection in Santa Monica. The second option would include an extension from the Red Line Hollywood/Highland station and travel through West Hollywood, connecting back at the Wilshire/La Cienega Boulevard stop before heading back down Wilshire to Santa Monica.

The preliminary plans show three stops in Santa Monica, including one at Wilshire and 16th Street and another at 26th Street. There is also a stop planned at Bundy Drive and officials are also studying possible stops at Barrington Avenue and at the VA.

The final alignment option is expected to go to the Metro board for approval by the end of next year, after which it will be submitted for federal review.

Construction for each station will take approximately 48 to 54 months to complete, with the most disruptive activities taking place during the first two to five months — for drilling piles along the roadway and installing the decking — and the final two to four months — to remove the deck and restore the street.

"The most disruptive part of constructing a subway is when we have to open the ground," Litvak said.

A tunnel boring machine will be responsible for doing much of the excavation underground. The new generation of the machines maintain pressure in the surrounding earth, which reduces the risk of collapse.

The machines have been used for the 1.8 mile Gold Line Extension and there have been no substantiated property damage claims, MTA officials said.

For Santa Monica resident Juan Matute and his girlfriend Sirinya Tritipeskul, who lives in the San Fernando Valley, the subway can't come soon enough.

It takes Matute about 40-50 minutes to get from Santa Monica to his work at UCLA and Tritipeskul about 70 to 90 minutes to the same destination from the valley.

Neither commute by car and are basing their future residential decisions on the subway.

"It would dramatically decrease travel time," Matute said.