BY FACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL

Mr. Joel Sandberg, P.E.,

Project Manager

Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority

707 Wilshire Blvd., 34^th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

March 30, 2007

            Re:  Response to Notice of Preparation of Draft Environmental Impact             Report for the Exposition Light Rail Transit Project Phase 2

Dear Mr. Sandberg,

The success of any mass transit plan must be measured by how well it serves the communities within which it is planned as determined by ridership. The success is also measured in the economics of passenger costs, construction costs and community acceptance. To ensure the success of an intelligently and aesthetically planned, well-built, and economically sound project, the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Association (CHHA) makes the following requests and expresses our concerns regarding the scope and contents of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Exposition Light Rail Transit Project Phase 2 Extension to the Mid-City Corridor Light Rail Transit Corridor Project (Expo Phase 2).

It is our understanding that the goal and imperative of this proposed transit project is to terminate within close proximity to the beach, whether at Santa Monica or Venice Beach. The CHHA requests that all property or rights of way be acquired to make this feasible prior to the commencement of design and construction, on any of the three routes studied. It will not be in the interest of the public to start a massive public works project of this nature that stops short of the objectives stated, indeed it would be fraudulent. The benefit to the greater Los Angeles City citizenry and communities would be at a disproportionate disadvantage compared to that of The City of Santa Monica, if the route did not, in fact, continue as represented to a proximate coastal terminus.

Indeed, it is the citizens and communities of The City of Los Angeles, who will bear the greatest amount of disruption, dis-benefit, and dis-amenity from this project so it is their interests, whether or not those interests conflict with those of Santa Monica, which must be considered super ordinate.  Every attempt must be made in good faith to design and build the Expo Phase 2 transit system so that it benefits the most citizens in Los Angeles upon completion and considers proximity and linkages to future transit lines.

We are requesting that all questions and concerns herein be addressed, studied and compared within the contexts of three separate routes.  Those three routes are the Venice to Lincoln route defined by the train leaving the Exposition Transit Project Phase 1(Expo Phase 1) terminus at Venice/Robertson (or Washington/National) and proceeding down Venice Boulevard to Lincoln Boulevard, or points west to be determined; the Venice/Sepulveda alignment defined by the train leaving the Expo Phase1 terminus at Venice/Robertson (or Washington/National) and proceeding down Venice Boulevard to Sepulveda Boulevard at which point it turns north and rejoins the Exposition Right of Way (Expo ROW) south of Pico Boulevard, and the Exposition Right of Way (Expo ROW) which is defined by the train proceeding from the Expo Phase 1 terminus at Venice/Robertson and continuing on the Expo ROW to the Santa Monica terminus at 4^th street.         

Transit Oriented Development

Will the DEIR be examining the potential for subsequent commercial development surrounding, and as a result of, the building of a rail system through West Los Angeles to Santa Monica?  There is little opportunity for Transit Oriented Development along the Expo ROW, while the Venice to Lincoln route, and to a lesser degree the Venice/ Sepulveda alignment, present a tremendous opportunity.  The positive potential community development impacts of rail must be considered when creating public transportation policy.

The DEIR must analyze and compare land use designations around stations and along the tracks that are consistent with the opportunity for transit oriented development along all three routes.  Are there current zoning regulations that would prohibit such development on any of the routes to be studied?  Are any changes in zoning regulations being sought or considered by the Expo Authority, on any of the three routes, for which, pursuant to the construction of the Expo Phase 2 LR, there will be environmental impacts and thus the rightful need to be studied within the scope of this DEIR?

Demographics

In light of the proven predictors of transit need, purpose, and success, how will the DEIR evaluate and compare the following transit planning facts in selecting the locally preferred alternative?

●Increased residential density is a key predictor of rail ridership.  The CHHA requests that residential density be measured fairly and compared for three separate routes, the Venice to Lincoln route, the Venice/Sepulveda alignment, and the Expo ROW.

●Employment density is a key predictor of rail ridership.  The CHHA requests that the employment density be measured fairly and compared for all three routes under consideration.

.

●Access to zero or one vehicle is a key predictor of rail ridership. The CHHA requests that access to vehicles by residents be studied and compared for all three routes under consideration.

●Lower household income is a predictor of the greater benefit, need, and use of mass transit. The CHHA requests that annual household income of residents along the Venice to Lincoln route, the Venice/Sepulveda alignment and the Expo ROW be studied and compared.

Design-Build is unacceptable

 The CHHA is concerned with the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority’s (Expo Construction Authority) expressed wish to “fast track” the construction and completion of the Expo Phase 2 project, and the lack of stakeholder oversight opportunities that such a philosophy might present.

The CHHA are insisting that any rail or transit project in our community be built to FTA standards for noise, vibration and structural integrity.  The “Design-Build” approach to such a massive public works project is not sound planning and is unacceptable.  Participation in an EIR process when there is no design apparent, no engineering available and no route chosen diminishes stakeholder opportunity to imagine what impacts might reasonably be considered.  It provides only a sham opportunity to evaluate a cloaked process. We want a completed design, including engineering calculations that we, and other independent authorities, may examine, verify, and then comment upon for all three routes we propose for study; the Venice to Lincoln route, the Venice/Sepulveda alignment, and the Exposition ROW.  The “Design-Build” concept is incompatible with our rights of public comment and review.  The current problems on the Metro Gold Line Light Rail are an example of this failed and inadequate plan of construction.  The Expo Phase 2 LR project will be finished in a timelier, more acceptable manner if there are completed architectural designs, engineering specifications, and construction requirements made public in advance.  Otherwise there is a risk of legal entanglements stopping the project at every new phase.  As concerned residents and community members it is our duty to monitor how our tax dollars are spent, to preserve the quality and nature of our community, to protect the property values of homes and businesses, and most important, the CHHA is committed to the guardianship of public safety in our schools, in our parks and on our streets throughout the impact zone of the Expo Phase 2 project. Attempts to fast track any aspect of this project that circumvents the FTA’s highest standards, or conspires to undermine the authority of state or local agencies responsible for public safety, will result in our drawing upon every resource to halt, delay or infringe on the progress of the project, including legal action, community action, and lawful acts of civil disobedience.

Aesthetics

The CHHA is concerned with the loss of privacy, views, and reasonable use of private residential and public properties that might be considered a “taking” under current eminent domain statutes if the Expo Phase 2 were to include elevated stations in residential areas. What measures, whether of design or subsequent mitigation, will be devised to evaluate and diminish the likelihood of such a taking?  Will you be applying the same grade crossing policy that the City of Culver City and its two Expo Authority board members (one sitting, one alternate), and the Westside Cities Council of  Governments are advancing under Culver City’s General Plan (City Council Resolution 2001-R063 Circulation Element Policy 2.N)?  Will this policy be applied to the study of all three routes under consideration, and for all grade crossing options at every grade crossing? What mitigation measures for noise, vibration, visual blight and air pollution would be acceptable under the Culver City City Council resolution?

For safety and subsequent speed through grade crossings at highly congested  intersections in residential neighborhoods, the CHHA requests that any grade crossings other than the existing elevations on Bagley Avenue and Motor Avenue be cut-and –cover or fully enclosed subterranean.  Elevated stations through the neighboring communities on the Expo ROW would increase the likelihood of noise and negative aesthetic environmental impacts and safety, and thus are more likely to slow train travel because of necessary mitigation.  

The CHHA would like the opportunity as stakeholders to comment on design, structural materials, colors and motifs for stations, parking structures, parking lots, landscaping and public art to the extent that they affect the aesthetic environment in our community. How is that possible if much of the design work has been completed during the planning for Expo Phase 1 and we were not advised and thus not party to participation in that process?  What opportunities will the CHHA and surrounding community residents and interested parties have to affect design changes on all three routes and for all grade crossing options?  How will the design elements effectively merge with and complement the residential nature or the commercial nature of the different routes being studied? What mitigation or recourse is available to remedy “visual blight” of stations that may be deemed inconsistent with neighborhood character or inconsistent with existing land use designations, for example elevated stations rising above lower rise residential or commercial property?

Will any and all train tracks constructed on the Expo ROW, or any of the routes being studied, proceed down the middle of  the right of way so as not to disproportionately infringe on the privacy or use of property of residents or businesses residing on either side?  Will the catenary designer be involved in the track design to create a coordinated system with minimal visual “pollution” for the visually sensitive residential areas where the train may pass?  Will low profile catenaries be installed?  What pole alignment and spacing is anticipated?

Inverse Condemnation

In consideration of the possible construction and operational consequences of the Expo Phase 2 Project  the CHHA submits that the potential for the effects of “inverse condemnation” to manifest should be anticipated, studied, and compared in the DEIR on all three lines equally; on the Venice to Lincoln route, the Venice/Sepulveda alignment, and the Exposition ROW. A reasonable bond, or other form of  accessible surety, should be posted and held in trust for a period of not less than 25 years to mitigate the costs associated with loss of, or diminished use of,  private property on each studied route which results from the construction or subsequent operation of  the Expo Phase 2 light rail project, whether or not this condemnation is a consequence of  unintended, unforeseen, or unpredicted traffic load, or by any other cause associated with the design, construction or operation of the Expo Phase 2 light rail project. Generally public entities (MTA, Expo Construction Authority) are liable and should pay the costs and damages for inverse condemnation resulting from public works projects. Will the DEIR address and compare the likelihood of inverse condemnation for all three routes studied and for all grade configurations under consideration?

Traffic

The CHHA requests the DEIR study the existing traffic patterns in West Los Angeles using actual trip counts and driver surveys including “driver points of origin and destination” surveys on individual businesses, multi-use business complexes, and housing with more than twenty-five residents or employees, at the start and terminus of each of the three studied routes, and on all businesses and housing, along or within ½ mile of the routes, with more than twenty-five residents or employees. This information will most reliably determine which route best supports the construction and operation of a fixed rail project of the type proposed and which route will generate the most trips among those studied and compared. Only such a thorough real world traffic analysis and subsequent Travel Demand Forecast Planning Model can determine the best route and thus the most environmentally sound route among the options under consideration. 

The DEIR must address the total volume of traffic in the West Los Angeles area in general. The arterial and freeway capacity must be addressed.  The periodic gridlock during peak a.m. and p.m. hours and during mid day must be addressed.  The comparative impacts of the EXPO Phase 2 trains on the existing traffic saturation must be examined and compared for all three routes. Current performance data generated by like rail projects such as the Gold Line should be used as predictors of traffic flow disruption, time impacts, and congestion along North-South arterials along all routes.

The current traffic Levels Of Service (LOS) are to be measured, traffic impact projections are to be determined by virtue of real and actual trip generation and traffic counts, and a plan for mitigation must be developed for the following intersections in West Los Angeles and any other intersections determined to fall within the zone of impact for all routes being studied: 

         ● Santa Monica Boulevard at Century Park East, Avenue of the Stars,     Century  Park West, Beverly Glen Boulevard, Manning Avenue, Overland             Avenue, Westwood Boulevard, Veteran Avenue, Sepulveda Boulevard, Sawtelle                                                           Boulevard, Barrington Avenue and Bundy Drive.

         ● Olympic Boulevard at Century Park East, Avenue of the Stars, Century

Park West, Beverly Glen Boulevard, Patricia Avenue, Prosser Avenue, Manning Avenue, Overland Avenue, Westwood Boulevard, Veteran Avenue, Sepulveda Boulevard, Cotner Avenue, Sawtelle Boulevard, Barrington Avenue, and Bundy Drive.

● Pico Boulevard at Century Park East, Avenue of the Stars, Motor Avenue, 

Beverly Glen Boulevard, Patricia Avenue, Manning Avenue, Overland Avenue, Westwood Boulevard, Veteran Avenue, Military Avenue, Sawtelle Boulevard, Gateway Boulevard,  Sepulveda Boulevard, Cotner Avenue and Bundy Drive.

         ● Motor Avenue at Washington Boulevard, Venice Boulevard, Palms

Boulevard, National Boulevard, Manning Avenue, Cheviot Drive, and Club

Drive.

         ● National Boulevard at Bundy Drive, Barrington Avenue, Sawtelle

Boulevard, Sepulveda Boulevard, Military Avenue, Westwood Boulevard, Overland Avenue, Palms Boulevard, Manning Avenue, Castle Heights Avenue, and Robertson Boulevard.

         ● National Place at Overland Avenue and Motor Avenue.

Those measurements should include, but not be limited to, measurements and evaluations of vehicular traffic from all directions at each intersection.; waiting time at intersections pursuant to current traffic mitigations and traffic calming measures; existing turn lane usage; current on-street parking options and options projected during and post-LR construction on all three routes; vehicle counts at parking lot entrances and exits; entrance to and exit from surrounding freeways up to a 2 mile radius of each intersection on each of the three studied routes.

The traffic counts should be taken at peak and non-peak hours, both AM and PM.  The service analysis for all routes studied must include comparisons of each grade configuration; at-grade, elevated, cut-and-cover and fully enclosed subterranean. At many signalized intersections and roadway segments traffic already exceeds acceptable levels of service (LOS D or less) and experience extensive delays and queuing (operating at LOS E and LOS F) at peak periods.  Those intersections would incur significant negative impacts by the use of at-grade crossings so all grade crossing designs should be considered and compared for all intersections on all routes studied. Air pollution counts and noise studies should accompany the traffic evaluations to accurately predict increases in air contaminants and noise levels.

The traffic counts need to be taken during fall, winter or spring quarters when UCLA is in session. Traffic counts taken on weekends, holidays, during school breaks or in summer would not accurately reflect normal traffic patterns in effect most times of the year.

Traffic counts should not be taken when FOX Studios is on a studio or industry operational hiatus, or during an industry strike that would create an unusual or atypical traffic pattern.

Traffic counts cannot be taken when SONY/MGM Studios is on a studio or industry operational hiatus, or during an industry strike that would create an unusual or atypical traffic pattern.

Traffic counts cannot be counted as valid if they are taken during a natural disaster, a civil disturbance resulting in an area-wide curfew, or a military/defense action which would result in an unusual or atypical traffic pattern.

Construction traffic impacts from truck haul routes, construction vehicle clearances, equipment waiting areas and employee vehicles needs to be anticipated, evaluated, and mitigated for minimum impact during planning , construction, testing and commencement of service on all routes studied and for all grade separations.

We request that the DEIR study current parking management on streets, in paid city lots, on private residential or commercial property, as well as in public buildings such as schools, libraries, and government buildings, and the effect the Expo Phase 2 construction, testing and revenue service will have on the number of parking spaces available, before, during, and after construction, and their locations on all three routes to be studied.

We request that the DEIR study light/glare issues and shade/shadow issues relating to changes in vehicular traffic, the addition of train traffic and the construction of stations near the adjacent residential and commercial property on all three routes being studied as well as for all potential grade crossings and station designs.

Once accurate existing traffic levels and patterns are established will the DEIR predict  the subsequent impacts to those levels due to the construction, testing and commencement of revenue service of Expo Phase2 on all three routes studied and for all possible grade crossing variants at all grade crossings?

Intermodal Connections

The CHHA asks that the DEIR look at existing intermodal connections for proposed LR stations and evaluate the environmental impacts to the existing traffic levels and mobility of additional transit stops that might be necessary to connect to the proposed LR system, on all routes studied and for all grade crossing options.  

What are the expected impacts of Expo Phase 2 to existing transit modes, such as the addition of new standing lanes, additional stops, scheduling changes, and additional trip time for current passengers on those modes? Would those or any other subsequent changes to the existing transit modes result in additional noise, vibration, air contaminants, visual blight or other environmental impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods on any of the routes to be studied?

Feeder or Shuttle Buses

If the Expo Phase 2 Project envisions the necessity of a feeder bus or shuttle system at the commencement of revenue service how will the resulting impacts of noise, air pollution, traffic, and parking be studied for residential streets where shuttles might be routed?  How will those impacts be studied and evaluated on streets in commercial areas? What service schedule will be established as a norm and how will the levels of implementation be determined?  How will the routes be determined? Are there commercial or multi-unit residential projects completed or underway which are linked to the inclusion of such a feeder system as part of Expo Phase 2? Given that all three Expo Phase 2 routes are an inconvenient distance from such industry centers such as Fox Studios, Sony/MGM Studios, Westwood/UCLA and Century City, is such a shuttle system likely?  How will the extra vehicular load be evaluated in terms of pedestrian safety on residential streets and on commercial streets for all three routes being evaluated?  Will grade crossing configurations impact the choice of any shuttle bus routes envisioned? If the Expo Phase 2 light rail will be designed with a corollary shuttle system assumed, then all aspects of the shuttle bus system need to be evaluated in concert with this DEIR in consideration of the significant environmental impacts inherent.  Will the shuttle buses run on clean fuel?  Will they be dedicated to the Expo Phase 2 routes only?  Where will they be parked and serviced?  What are the capacities for such buses?  What are the speed limits for such buses? What would be the hours of operation and how will that be determined?   What are the environmental impacts of the shuttle system to other existing transit modes?

Traffic Methodology

The CHHA requests that actual traffic figures be provided and published for review wherever possible.

We request that any mitigation proposed be proven effective by independent analysis before it is considered for the projects studied and compared, for all three routes, and considering all grade separation options on each route. Traffic mitigation monies should be separate from any payments made to MTA or Expo Construction Authority employees and their agents.  Mitigation money should not pay staff salaries.  The Traffic Mitigation Budget should be available to the public during the entire project and said money should be held in a public trust with a right to audit and an annual (or more frequent) accounting report should be available for public review of fund balances and sources and uses of funds.

Additionally, will the traffic study utilize methodology identified in Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies? What threshold of significance will be used for a potentially significant impact (i.e., a 2% increase in the level of service?).Will the traffic study include analysis of Congestion Management facilities? What realistic mitigation measures will be considered for freeways, freeway overpasses, exits and entrances, roadways, intersections, driveways, parking capacities?  How will specific and significant traffic impacts on residential streets be identified and mitigated during construction, testing and revenue service?  How will “fair share” contributions for the project be developed?  How will the study address traffic safety impacts?

When addressing need and purpose, will the DEIR be addressing issues such as savings in vehicle miles traveled, potential for automobile commuter modal shift, fare box recovery, net cost per passenger, net cost per passenger mile, non motorized access to stations, and differential constraints of anticipated funding for all three routes under consideration.  To the extent that station locations and design (elevated, underground, open air, etc.) and proximate grade crossing affect passenger use, those elements must be studied.  How will station design and location be studied in relation to passenger acceptability and thus usage?

Air Quality

Air quality impacts need to be determined for all intersections studied where there would be an at-grade crossing, and resulting traffic blockage, as well as to adjacent streets where overflow traffic causes traffic queuing and the resulting pollution from idling cars. Will these evaluations be done prior to construction, during construction, during testing and periodically during revenue service since it is feasible that train trips will increase over time compounding and increasing vehicular traffic emissions?

We request not only the standard analysis of the project’s short-term and long-term air quality impacts during construction but also an evaluation of the continuing impacts once testing and revenue service begin, as it is most likely that negative air quality impacts will multiply geometrically with the increase in the number of at-grade crossings and over time.  Evaluation should include measurements of dust and air-borne particulates taken at different times of the day to address daily coastal wind shifts common to much of the area wherein all three proposed routes lie.  The air contamination matrix should consider times when children in adjacent schools are outside, and for how long, during the school day, but also during pedestrian travel time to and from the schools affected.  These evaluations need to be done prior do and during construction, during testing, and again periodically during revenue service to establish a normative pattern that can be examined and compared as train trips are likely to increase over time.

The above evaluations should be done for all three routes regarding at-grade crossings and then compared to evaluations of the same grade crossings, on all routes, using grade separation variants, i.e., elevated, cut-an-cover, and fully enclosed subterranean.

Station Placement

How will station locations be chosen?  The CHHA requests that there be no station proximate to Overland Avenue Elementary School at the grade crossing at Overland Avenue.  The safety and security of students would be compromised by such a location.  The CHHA requests that there be no station located on the ROW, or on any of the routes under consideration, that impinge on the privacy of residences by affording line of sight of passengers in transit to the yards or homes of the residences.

Parking Facilities

The CHHA would like to request that if parking is proposed for any station, it should be restricted to subterranean or structured parking that is wrapped with a multi-use development. Open parking can present security issues and aesthetic issues.  Parking allotments and design at stations should be carefully evaluated so as not to utilize more space than necessary.  However consideration must also be given to adequate service and access at parking facilities to prevent peak period queuing and the resulting blockage to other vehicular traffic, impediments to adjacent business, and increased air pollution.  

Sub-stations and Maintenance Yards

What is the proposed location of maintenance yards that will service the light rail cars on each of the three routes studied? What environmental protections and safety procedures are planned, or in place, including the management of stray currents, track insulation and separate grounding issues, at any and all maintenance yards servicing the Expo Phase 2 project?  The CHHA requests that costs of operation and efficient access to maintenance yards be evaluated and compared for each of the three route options.

In addition, what is the number of sub-stations necessary to maintain constant power load to the trains on each of the routes being evaluated and compared? The necessary substations for all three routes should be studied and compared considering all grade crossing options: at-grade, elevated, cut-and-cover, and fully enclosed subterranean.  Where will the sub-stations for each of the three routes be located?  How will the need, cost, and construction of the number of substations required on the three routes be studied and compared?

All environmental impacts, including noise and electro-magnetic field generation of sub-stations and the possibility that the need for more power generation would

increase the number of sub-stations on some routes, should be evaluated for all three routes with all grade-crossing options being considered and compared. Will the DEIR address the impact of substation design for issues of visual pollution or visual blight in visually sensitive residential areas as well as commercial areas? How will substation design be integrated into the design scheme developed by Expo Phase 2?  How will substation locations be planned?

How will hazardous materials be disposed of at the maintenance yards, including petroleum products, refrigerants, insulation materials, metals, glass, and cleaning products?  What recycling protocols will be established to protect contamination of surrounding area and ensure reclamation and reuse of all possible materials?

Sanitation

The CHHA is concerned with the safety and cleanliness of the transit environments on all three proposed routes. 

Where will trains be cleaned?  Will they be cleaned with biodegradable solvents or solutions? How will the refuse and trash from the trains be disposed of? Will all possible materials, whether paper, glass, plastic or other, be recycled? What program will be developed for this and what agency will oversee the administration of the program?

How will the stations and platforms be cleaned, on what schedule, and what agency will oversee the cleaning and trash removal?  How will the refuse and trash from the stations be disposed of? Will all possible materials, whether paper, glass, plastic or other, be recycled? Will biodegradable cleaning solvents or solutions be used?

Will there be public restrooms at the stations?  What agency will be responsible for the cleaning, maintenance, and security of any restrooms?  What is a typical cleaning schedule for a typical light rail station restroom? If ridership is lower than forecasts predicted will the cleaning and maintenance continue at a level that ensures the highest hygienic standards? 

Have the operational costs of cleaning staff and maintenance of trains, stations (including restrooms), and rights of way been factored into the budget as an ongoing cost of the operation of the trains?  We would like this issue addressed for all routes under consideration.

Cumulative Projects

All street and roadway analysis should be done on existing and future conditions taking into consideration traffic calming and mitigation measures under review by the City of Los Angeles including contra-flow traffic on major streets such as Olympic, Santa Monica Boulevard and Pico Boulevard. This information should be included in the cumulative projects list. A thorough assessment of, current or planned, Los Angeles City, Los Angeles County, DOT, and California state construction projects, street improvement projects, or public works projects that would overlap or coincide or impact the construction or operation of the Expo Phase 2 LR project during construction or operation on all routes studied needs to be included in the cumulative projects list.

An analysis of all adjacent private construction and property improvement, legally permitted and on file with the City of Los Angeles, City of Culver City, and City of Santa Monica, which lie within the traffic impact areas described above under “Traffic” should be included in the cumulative projects list. Included in the list should be the current and planned projects under construction at Westside Pavilion (Macerich), Santa Monica Place (Macerich), Century City, and Fox Studios.

The ambient growth shown in the DEIR must include projections for full occupancy of all existing structures and should also include an analysis of increased densification due to pending construction and proposed developments in nearby Beverly Hills, Culver City, Santa Monica, Venice, Playa Vista and Marina Del Rey.

Other Pending Transit Projects

The effects of simultaneous construction of  the competing Metro Purple (Red) subway project on a parallel corridor to Expo Phase 2 with only a four block separation in terminuses should be examined for all traffic and safety impacts to the surrounding communities on each line or route under consideration; for uninterrupted funding potential; for cost overrun and scheduling failures due to competing interests on parallel routes; for feasibility of adequate manpower, technical expertise, and human resources available during construction of both;  possible material and equipment cost increases due to simultaneous projects.  How will ridership and farebox revenue be affected, on the Expo Phase 2 project, on all three routes studied, if the project is completed and subsequent service commences on the Metro Purple (Red) subway?

A study of connections to the proposed Green Line Extension to LAX from all three Expo Phase 2 routes studied should be made.  The cost per passenger mile on Expo Phase 2, as a result of connections to the Green Line Extension, should be studied for all three routes. The increased potential for ridership and farebox revenue in the event of a Green Line/Expo Phase 2 connection should be anticipated and studied for all three potential Expo routes under consideration.

Are there other MTA transit projects, planned or considered, that would affect the need, purpose, or operation of the Expo Phase 2 project on any of the routes suggested for study? 

Noise

The CHHA acknowledges that a major environmental impact of a proposed light rail project is the substantially increased level and frequency of noise to the environment wherein the project is built, including noise to sensitive receptors like residential homes, apartments, businesses, and those participating in outdoor recreation or activities in parks, streets and outdoor spaces.  We therefore request that the following noise related issues and concerns be studied and addressed, and the resulting mitigation costs examined and compared for the three alignments being studied, the Venice to Lincoln route, the Venice/Sepulveda alignment, and the Exposition ROW.

The mitigation to be studied and compared is to include but is not limited to:

The stakeholders of the CHHA insist that to ensure the least possible infringement on the quality of life in our community, and those surrounding, the strictest noise standards required by the FTA are to be used as the accepted standard for the operation of trains and signaling equipment on the Expo Phase 2 Project. Noise measurements need to be measured over time and should not exceed 10 dba higher than levels existing prior to construction, testing and revenue service of Expo Phase 2 on all three routes proposed for study. What are the time intervals when noise measurements will be taken and how far apart along the proposed routes will tests be spaced to ensure each of the different environments along each route are evaluated fairly? All construction must be performed, and all related projects designed and engineered, and all materials purchased must be mindful of and conform to this principle. Lowering the standard by applying a less stringent model for the sake of economy or expediency is unacceptable.

All bells and horns are to be directional in that they should not project a radius of sound into the air, but rather are directed inward toward the ground.  Any bell or horns should be calibrated not to exceed 10 dba higher than the average ambient noise for residential areas (40dba during evening and 55 dba during the day). The FTA noise standard requires noise measurements to be taken over time (Ldn) and that should be considered the acceptable standard to minimize the negative environmental impacts of noise. Will testing of bells and horns be done periodically during installation and before commencement of revenue service to ensure that FTA standard noise levels are being met?  To minimize the frequency and duration of intrusive bells and horns, and to ensure safety for motorists and pedestrians, will protective four quadrant barriers be installed at any and all at-grade crossings?

Will the light rail track installed be a continuous welded rail track (CWR) which has been shown to reduce noise and vibration impacts of light rail operation? We request that the track be constructed on an insulated bed with a ballast composition proven to absorb and reduce wheel noise, such as a high performance floating slab track system. Self lubricating wheels and track, and noise absorbing materials must be used to minimize intrusive noise in such a way as to keep wheel and track generated noise at or below FTA maximums at all times. If the train for Expo Phase has already been chosen, how are we as stakeholders able to comment or express valid concerns?  We keep hearing about “rubber” wheels from Expo, the Ansaldobreda 2550 does not have them.  What is the material composition of the wheels planned for the Expo Phase 2 trains? How can a commitment to long term maintenance be made and guaranteed so that the effectiveness of the noise mitigation does not suffer with time and wear?  Unanticipated levels of ridership or greater frequency of trips would not be considered an excuse for exemption from this commitment.

Sound absorbing materials are to be integrated or applied to the structure of all tunnels, underpasses, “cuts”, or trenches, to reduce sound magnification.

Sound walls of sufficient height, thickness, and materials must be planned, engineered and constructed prior to testing or revenue operation of the train.  Those walls should be designed and constructed in a uniform, aesthetic manner so as not to create visual blight in visually sensitive residential areas.  Similar aesthetic needs should be considered for construction of sound walls in retail/commercial areas   Plans for the design and construction, and the list of materials planned for noise mitigation need to be independently verified and tested. Will potential designs and materials be available for review and approval by independent experts, stakeholders and residents adjacent to, or in proximity of, the route chosen prior to construction, and thus prior to commencement of revenue service?

To reduce nighttime noise, the frequency of train passage should be reduced to once an hour maximum after 10:00 p.m. until 1:00 a.m. and train operation should cease thereafter until 6:00 a.m. Train speed during the hours of 10:00 p.m. until 1:00 a.m. should be reduced to 25 mph maximum as well to mitigate propulsion and braking noise. During normal operational hours, in the interest of safety and noise reduction, the speed should be maintained at not more that 30 mph and reduced to 15 mph through residential areas.

How will the choice of power delivery system, catenary design (i.e., low profile catenaries), and pole placement affect noise generated by the power delivery system on the Expo Phase 2 trains?  Will weather affect the noise generated by the power delivery system? 

How will propulsion noise be affected by grade crossing choices, speed of the train and track design?  Should speed approaching any elevated grade crossing, or exiting any below grade crossing, be reduced to 10 mph maximum to mitigate propulsion generated noise? 

In addition, any and all mitigation proven effective for noise abatement should be evaluated by independent analysis before it is considered for the project.

Vibration

The stakeholders of the CHHOA insist that to ensure the least possible infringement on the quality of life to residents in our community and those surrounding, the strictest vibration standards required by the FTA are to be used as the accepted standard for the operation of trains and signaling equipment on the Expo Phase 2 Project.  All construction must be performed, and all related projects designed and engineered, and all materials purchased must be mindful of and conform to this principle. Lowering the standard by applying a less stringent model for the sake of economy or expediency is unacceptable. The cost and efficacy of ensuring that the above standards are met or exceeded must be examined and compared on all three routes, the Venice to Lincoln route, the Venice/Sepulveda Alignment and the Exposition ROW and for all grade designs, at-grade, elevated, cut-and-cover, and fully enclosed  subterranean.

In addition, any and all mitigation proven effective for vibration abatement should be evaluated by independent analysis before it is considered for the project.

Lateral Loading

In consideration of  possible construction and operational consequences of the Expo Phase 2 Project the CHHA submit that the effects of lateral loading  should be anticipated and studied on all three proposed routes equally; on the Venice to Lincoln route, on the Venice/Sepulveda Alignment, and on the Exposition ROW.  The study should be done on all grade configurations: at-grade, elevated, cut-and-cover, fully enclosed subterranean. We are very concerned about the damage from the effects of lateral loading on the structures and facilities designed to support the Expo Phase 2 project and the possibility for corollary or incidental damage to underlying foundations of the existing roads and streets, the parking lots and retaining walls, the foundations of properties and homes, and freeway embankments and roadways adjacent to or near the proposed Expo Phase 2 project on all three routes. Standard engineering principles acknowledge that the design of deep foundations of the type required for seismic safety and structural integrity for the various grade separation designs under consideration are a complex matter that should be addressed in a design context by engineers who are experienced in the observation of pile behavior, theoretical modeling, and the appropriate use of design methods. Geotechnical reports of soil conditions, including existing petroleum constituents and ground water levels, and drainage, should be generated and analyzed at each site on each route where excavation is considered.

Once completed, the calculations and designs need to be available for MTA, FTA and independent shareholder review, and a reasonable bond should be posted in trust for not less than 25 years to mitigate the cost of repairs due to any design failure or laxity that causes damages determined to be from lateral loading, whether or not natural events such as weather or seismic activity compound said damage, or whether the consequences of unintended, unforeseen, or unpredicted traffic load compounds said damage.

In addition, any and all mitigation proven effective should be evaluated by independent analysis before it is considered for the project.

Physical Danger-Construction

The CHHA is concerned with the inherent physical dangers to people, pets and wildlife that are created by construction hazards and the attractive nuisances of a construction site, excavation, materials, heavy equipment, truck hauling and loading, temporary sanitation facilities, and support vehicles (supervisory personnel, food trucks).  A plan of strict materials inventory control, job site separation, and 24 hour security personnel needs to be in place during the entire construction duration for each and every job location.  Prior to construction a plan for student and resident education regarding the inherent perils needs to be presented to schools in proximity of the work sites to ensure the protection of minors. Will these concerns be addressed and a plan devised for the protection of the neighborhood residents as well?  Will identifiable job supervisors in the employ of Expo Construction Authority work closely with local officials, school administrations, homeowners’ associations and public safety personnel so that all citizens affected have every opportunity to protect themselves from the hazards, predictable and unforeseen, inherent in the construction of this public works project? 

The CHHA asks for the DEIR do execute a complete analysis of geologic hazards, including, but not limited to airborne debris, that may be created by construction and operation of the completed project in the event of a major earthquake, or high winds.  The DEIR should address the distances such debris might travel and the impact of the debris. They should address the Earthquake potentials in the new Scripps Institution of Oceanography study.

Will the DEIR study the geologic hazards of underground methane, other petroleum contaminants, naturally or commercially introduced, or soil liquefaction as they might be present on all routes studied and in consideration of all grade crossing options?  

These considerations need to be evaluated for all three routes studied and for all grade crossing designs. A plan must be included for public education of all hazards and safety issues and how they are being addressed. This plan should be available for public distribution and review prior to commencement of the Expo Phase 2 project. 

Physical Danger-Commencement of Testing and Revenue Service 

A plan must be developed to educate school children, and minor and adult residents, as to safety issues surrounding the operation of trains as it affects pedestrians, pets, and vehicular traffic in the environment in proximity to the proposed routes. Specific attention should be paid to the students of Overland Avenue School, Palms Elementary School, Palms Middle School, Charnock Elementary School, Clover Avenue Elementary, Castle Heights Elementary School, Daniel Webster Middle School, Richland Avenue Elementary School, Venice High School, Hamilton High School, Westwood Charter School and any other schools, private, parochial or public, within, but not limited to, the defined ½ mile proximity of the train project which has been determined to be the impact zone. A comprehensive program would include public service announcements in print, broadcast and electronic media, as well as on site education at each school, park or public gathering place within a minimum ½ mile proximity, from the beginning of construction,  and continuing through testing and revenue service. The cost of the ongoing public safety programs should be factored into the fixed cost of each route studied.

The CHHA request that all possible environmental impacts be considered on the various LAUSD school environments as well as the impacts on the environments of any private and parochial schools that lie within the impact zone of the three routes studied.  The DEIR should address projected environmental improvements to air quality and safety on all three lines studied as well as the environmental liabilities, including noise and vibration issues and possibility of derailment, feasible or likely to occur on all three lines studied.  Given that noise and derailment impacts increase in severity on curved portions of track, especially when elevated, careful study needs to be made of these issues in the sensitive school areas along the proposed routes. Track construction and noise mitigation measures should be given specific attention. These effects should be anticipated and measured, and compared for the construction periods, testing period and commencement of revenue service on all lines studied and for all grade crossing options. 

Energy

With the Los Angeles area, and specifically the West Los Angeles area experiencing frequent, periodic power outages, and brown outs, what will be the increased power load from the electricity required to power the Expo Phase 2 electric rail line and what are the effects to the general power grid in Southern California, Los Angeles County, and the City of Los Angeles?  Will each substation operate on a separate electrical circuit? The CHHA would like to know what entity is responsible for monitoring   power usage by the MTA/Expo Construction Authority and what measures have been taken to ensure there is no additional loss of service to consumers as a result of the increased load of the Expo Phase 2 project? Has every attempt been made to guarantee that power for the Expo Phase 2 project is acquired from a “Green Source” and a source that generates power within, and that is incorporated within, the state of California?  Will a solar power generating system be considered to run the trains or light the stations?

How will increasing energy costs be calculated and factored into construction costs and subsequent operation costs and how will ridership levels offset those costs?  All three routes and all grade crossing options should be studied and evaluated from an energy- cost-per-rider perspective to ensure and uphold sound energy conservation principles.  

Oil Pipelines

Will the DEIR be addressing the environmental hazards and the cost of excavation or relocation of petroleum pipelines below ground on any of the routes studied and for all grade crossing options studied?  Will the cost of any such pipelines relocation be borne by the Expo Phase 2 project, private owner of the pipeline, or other state, city, or county governmental entity?  What agency is responsible for any application or permits needed, and for overseeing the safety of any possible pipeline relocations?

There is an extensive network of working, underground petroleum products pipelines at various depths throughout the west side of Los Angeles carrying flammable product under pressure.  Namely, there is one 8-inch pipe parallel to the street down Venice Boulevard to Bundy Boulevard, several parallel pipes running beneath Sepulveda, and more significantly the Expo ROW has more than 10 pipes crisscrossing underneath ground level from downtown to west of Bundy Drive and east of Lincoln Boulevard.  The CHHA requests that these lines be located, sounded and a new, precise map be made of all pipeline locations and depths which is to be verified by an independent authority before the commencement of construction.  All three routes and grade-crossing variants need to be considered and designed, in knowledge of and in consideration of, these environmental and safety hazards. For that reason, Design-Build will not be considered a prudent or safe construction method.  A complete design of every grade separation needs to be determined in advance and available for public review prior to the commencement of funding.  It is in the public interest and safety that all stakeholders are confident that correct and complete engineering protocols have been followed.  “Overriding Considerations” will not be considered an adequate defense to design changes or mitigation failures which are based on the lack of safe and proper procedures needed to determine existing hazards prior to design and construction.

Public Utilities

The Expo ROW is a virtual mine field of buried utilities.  The CHHA requests that all utilities underground be precisely located, sounded and newly mapped with said map being available for independent and stakeholder review before commencement of construction.  All three routes and grade-crossing variants need to be considered and designed, in knowledge of and inconsideration of, these environmental and safety hazards.  For that reason, Design-Build will not be considered a prudent or safe construction method.  A complete design of every grade separation needs to be determined in advance and available for public review prior to the commencement of funding.  It is in the public interest and safety that all stakeholders are confident that correct and complete engineering protocols have been followed.  “Overriding Considerations” will not be considered an adequate defense to design changes or mitigation failures based on the lack of safe and proper procedures needed to determine existing hazards prior to design and construction.

Increased Risk of Terrorism

As the increase in the number or transit related acts of terror is apparent all over the world (Tokyo, London, Madrid, for example), the CHHA feels that it is incumbent upon the Expo Construction Authority to establish a protocol of safety measures to be integrated into the design of each project segment including track design, train design, parking facilities design, and station design.  A comprehensive analysis of increased first-responder requirements should be made. Study must envision design elements that anticipate the necessity for passenger and personnel evacuation at any and all locations of the project during construction, testing, and at the commencement and for the duration of revenue service.  The need for passenger station and sub-station security cameras, intruder alert systems, and track evaluation electronics to monitor track integrity, especially at elevated or subterranean grade crossings is imperative. The specific number of security personnel needed to monitor track and structural integrity on a daily basis on the entire length on the project and at each stop, station and parking lot or structure needs to be determined and added to the fixed costs of the rail operation on all studied routes and for all grade crossing design options. How will the DEIR address these stated safety and security concerns and requests as they may impact the transit environment of Expo Phase 2?  

Population Impacts

Given population growth in Los Angeles County (estimated at 6 million new residents by 2020), the study must consider dispersion and concentration of population centers, both residential and commercial along all routes studied.  The evaluation must consider amelioration of economic, social, demographic, environmental, and all other population-sensitive impacts in determining the optimal route selected which will service the greatest ridership. 

Economic Impacts

The CHHA requests that the economic impacts of diminished or lost man hours and reduced worker productivity, due to additional traffic queuing at rail blocked intersections, be evaluated for all three routes and in consideration of all grade crossing options on all three routes.  These effects need to be anticipated and evaluated during Expo Phase 2 construction, testing and at the commencement of revenue service. Will there be negative economic impacts to employers or employees for existing retail and commercial entities along the routes studied as a result of environmental factors during the construction, testing or revenue service?  Will there be economic impacts to the value of homes or businesses along the routes studied as a result in the degradation of their respective environments due to increased noise, vibration, air contaminants, decreased access, or other environmental factors?

Additionally, we request that the economic effects related to increased air pollution and other environmental factors resulting from construction, or from queued traffic at rail-blocked intersections, be studied from a health perspective. Will there be health or medical impacts to sensitive parties such as children and the elderly or to the community at large?  How would the costs of such impacts be calculated?

Parks

Will the environmental impacts on Rancho Park/Cheviot Hills Recreation Center and Palms Park resulting from the Phase 2 train project be evaluated pursuant to Section 4(f) of the federal Department of Transportation Act of 1966?  Will all impacts both direct and indirect be studied for the effects of increased noise, ground borne vibration and any other environmental impacts that would inhibit constructive use or enjoyment of the parks?  Will possible emissions from additional queued traffic on surrounding roadways or freeway ramps be studied which result from standing traffic at rail blocked intersections?  All other parks within the impact zone of the Expo Phase 2 project, on all three routes and in consideration of all grade configurations, should be studied as well.

The CHHA asks that the DEIR evaluate the added environmental benefits of creating parkland for public use on the Exposition ROW in the event that either the Venice to Lincoln Route or the Venice /Sepulveda Alignment is chosen as the Locally Preferred Alternative.  Since funding for such parkland or recreational space would not be derived from the Expo Phase 2 budget, and since other public agencies would likely need to purchase or lease the ROW property from MTA, the monies generated from such a park project should be considered an offset to the construction costs of either of the two Venice routes studied.

Emergency Services 

How will the DEIR address the impacts of the Expo Phase 2 project on the emergency response capacities and service on all routes studied?  How will the different grade options affect emergency response time?

Specifically, the CHHA is concerned about the ability of the police and fire departments to maintain response capability given increased densification in West Los Angeles, decreased manpower per capita and decreased funding.  The DEIR should analyze the ability of existing LAPD and LAFD stations to provide service to the existing communities and compare how their respective service capabilities will be impacted by the overlay of the Expo Phase 2 project.  This analysis should evaluate first-responder access to homes, assisted living facilities, hospitals, commercial and industrial facilities, public gathering places and schools in light of all increased traffic impacts, including blocked grade crossings, queuing, pedestrian crossings, and bicycle traffic that might affect the ability of first-responders to perform.

The locations of all emergency dispatch facilities such as the fire stations, police stations or military facilities within proximity of all three lines must be studied and evaluated for possible performance impediments imposed by construction, testing and revenue service or by increased traffic congestion as a result of construction, testing or revenue service.

This analysis needs to be done for all three routes and for all grade crossing options. 

Bikeway Design and Safety

As the design of the Expo Phase 2 project is to include a bikeway, the CHHA requests that the DEIR study design and aesthetic features that incorporate maximum ecological and safety standards, and bikeway amenities. These plans should include but not be limited to, shade plantings, potable water, air pumps, emergency phones. The design should be submitted for review and revision to Rails for Trails and the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition.  Plans need to be created for all three routes and designs should consider all possible grade crossing options. Congruency with the Expo Phase 2 track at all points should not be inferred for construction of the bike path when divergence is necessary or preferable for safety or aesthetics.  Construction and completion of the bikeway should be considered independently of Expo Phase 2 as it has already received funding from the federal government. The funding designated for the bikeway should not be commingled and should remain exclusive from funding for the Expo Phase 2 project.  What is the net gain of bikeway miles on each of the three routes studied?

Cost-Benefit and Opportunity Cost

The DEIR, in determining the comparative cost of each of the three routes suggested herein to be studied needs to consider the offsetting monies to be derived from the possible sale, at fair market value, of the property known as the Exposition Right of Way, and all adjacent parcels owned or acquired by the LACMTA or its predecessors, wherein that property, in whole or in part, might not be used for the final route chosen.  The potential land value cannot be ignored, and the study should consider alternative uses as well as liquidation to offset construction, acquisition and other related costs encountered on the final route selected. Selling portions of the ROW for development consistent with existing uses could raise many hundreds of millions of dollars and defray much of the cost of the alternate lines being studied.  

The CHHA looks forward to a careful review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report and trusts that each of the above topics will be thoroughly addressed.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hughes

President,

Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association

Colleen Mason Heller

Light Rail Chair,

Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association

C/o 2922 Patricia Avenue

Los Angeles, California 90064

cc:  Mike Eveloff

       Loren Kosmont

       Terri Tippit