LIGHT RAIL - Autumn (October) Newsletter 2007

Since April, Neighbors For Smart Rail and the CHHA Light Rail Committee have been working with the Expo Phase 1 community group called Expo Communities United (ECU) headquartered in South LA. Expo Phase 1 will run from South Flower Street west to Culver City, Phase 2 is planned to continue through the Westside to Venice or Santa Monica. 20 years ago the Westside and Southside communities were fighting Expo side by side in defense of school safety on this route and it is ironic that we are important allies fighting the same fight this far down the road. 

Most recently Neighbors For Smart Rail (CHHA is a charter member) has committed time and resources to helping ECU protest against the grade crossing approval sought by Expo before the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). ECU is opposing the safety risks and unmitigated environmental impacts to schools, parks, neighborhood cohesion, and residences as a result of the many at-grade (street-level) crossings planned for their communities. ECU is requesting a fully grade-separated, below-grade alignment. ECU has the same concerns for their communities that NFSR has for ours. The Expo Authority’s response to the protests so far has been (paraphrased), “There is no money for grade separation, and, oh, yeah, this is safe enough for government work.”

This has been a lengthy, time consuming process that can be best characterized as a “David and Goliath” effort pitting a transit savvy, grass roots activist group against the combined might of MTA ( and a hearty welcome to its new chair, Santa Monica Councilwoman Pam O’Connor!); Expo and their lawyers (“we’re just following orders…”); the County Board of Supervisors (starring Zev and Yvonne), and local politicians who are tripping over themselves to fight for a coveted position on the fence (anyone seen Jack?).

The CPUC is the state agency charged with rail crossing safety and it is they who rule on the need for grade separations when safety is at issue. Expo currently has 27 crossing applications pending and ECU is protesting them all at this point as the “domino effect” dictates that the configuration of any one crossing will likely affect the design of those adjacent.  The CPUC is looking at the entire line as a corridor (though jurisdiction is limited to crossing safety), and so will not approve any application until the protest procedures are exhausted.

What does all of this have to do with the CHHA?  The experience we gain working on Phase 1 will serve well on Phase 2. Through requests made by NFSR pursuant to the Public Records Act, and Discovery Rights of the CPUC proceedings, we have been able to get scores of documents which provide a three-dimensional view of the Expo project and the fuzzy thinking behind it.  This material along with meetings and communication with the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railway Administration, among others, provide ECU and neighbors (for smart rail…) with support against at-grade crossings.  With the huge sums of tax payer money on the line, all the transportation dreams sold by Expo advocacy groups, and the tremendous political leverage brought to bear to ram this project through, we all thought we might uncover some important, weighty, transportation imperative underlying this project that would stop us in our tracks.  The gut check wasn’t necessary.  When you balance all of the issues against public safety there is not enough lipstick in the world to gussy up this pig! 

In all of the planning and design of this line Expo has never had any intention to build this project anywhere but at-grade. Though MTA/Expo will tell you that there is no money for grade separation, it is because none was seriously sought.  Sloppy planning in the early stages caused Phase 1 to lose out on Federal New Starts Funds, twice.  Further, it was Expo’s choice not to accept federal help in redesigning the project to qualify for matching funds.  Those funds would have required federal standards and oversight on the project, which would have benefited the LA public but ham-strung Expo. 

              Thoughts to ponder:

           ●Expo admits that grade separation is safest but saw no need to pursue the funding to build it that way on Phase 1.

           ●Expo is respecting Culver City’s City Council resolution not to allow at-grade crossings anywhere in Culver City but turns a deaf ear to Los Angeles communities who want grade separation, calling them NIMBY’s. Why the double standard?

           ●Without grade separation, for safety reasons, the trains will not run fast enough to encourage ridership. Even some of the transit advocacate folks are starting to flip on this one as they realize the inefficiency of at-grade crossings in a complex urban area with high pedestrian and vehicle volumes.                                    

          ●Yes, traffic is bad, but the Expo LR will not relieve congestion on the I-10 Freeway and north/south surface street traffic congestion and air pollution at train-blocked intersections will be worse if Expo is built at grade.

           ●Phase 1 doesn’t want trains running on an elevated two-lane freeway, 2½ stories above their community, creating noise, visual blight and privacy issues.  Phase 2 doesn’t either.  Elevated trains are unacceptable.

           ●Current per lane traffic counts at Overland Ave. do not qualify it for grade separation under MTA Grade Crossing Policy guidelines.  If they widen Overland near the National Blvd. freeway entrance that count will go down  even further.  What are the real chances that Phase 2 will have a below grade crossing at Overland Avenue?  If the other side gets their way  there will be no rail under Overland Avenue..

The most important thing we have learned so far is to start your protests early (remember our scoping comments?  Well done.), and keep them going loud and long. Los Angeles communities have been excluded from planning of Expo Phase 1, in fact, it is clear that every effort has been made to obscure the details and intentions of MTA/Expo on that project. We cannot expect the Phase 2 experience will be any different.  Public input and acceptance is the standard for transit projects all over the country. It is beyond understanding how this principle has been turned upside down in Los Angeles. MTA/Expo has made their mandate and intentions very clear. They will not listen unless we make them listen.  NFSR asks for your continued support and your signatures as we fight to have community concerns heard. We also need your generous contributions to help underwrite the costs of our work on your behalf. Currently the CHHA will match members’ tax-deductible contributions so your gift goes even further! Thank you.

Colleen Mason-Heller

Light Rail Chair