Community Mtg 091123 Handouts

8/14/2019 Community Mtg 091123 Handouts

1/7

!"#$%&'"((#%%))&"$&*+#,&%*+$-#%&".&%/)&-"0%/&,"-&+$1),)-&$)#1/2"*/""3&'"0$'#,-4&

'#%#5)$-6&'+(7+#1$&%"&.#8&%/)&)87"&*+#,&,#$)&9&'*)$-/+:&-02:+;&'"+,#%#"$&

!

!"#$%!!

"#$%&'%(!)*+!),,-!.!/0*,!1!20*,!3&!

4#&&56789!:%;7


2/7

!"#$%'($!)!%)'*$

$

%'($!)!%)'*$ )!#+,$

!

"#$#!%&'()*!+',-./01&.1!

23&.04!5&30(46!71)!801)!

54.9!:0;3-*&?416!@(;!801)A!

B-/!C4.&134/19*6!D.;!801)A!

8&(!E(4F-6!G)>!801)!

509-!$()&(&/0H>6!I)>!801)!

?&30(4J34HF&1#&.K!

1-H&(;;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K!

L-/J34HF&1#&.K!

;&(J34HF&1#&.K!

M0M)>;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K!

!

54*&.N1!$,,&0()--1!

$()&(0&!O0334.40K&146!"$!54*&.!

P&1-!Q'0L4.6!%&'(H03?-?F-.!

:0)4!:&F0(1&(6!"$8R=!2-(#!54(4K-.!

:0H>4.;!E4)L6!S?.#!$11-?F3*?-?F-.!

?4*&.J34H0)*#&.K!

H&'(H03?-?F-.#>'0L4.J34H0)*#&.K!

.0)4#.&F0(1&(J34H0)*#&.K!

.91*3?4.J4&3#H&?!

!:-K0&(43!+?433!%0)0-1!:-,.-1-()4)0/-1!

T4?!RN%&((&.6!+4()4!5&(0H4!%&'(H03A!

P&>(!S414(46!8'4.)-!54*&.!

$.4!U4V4.04(6!23-(;43-!54*&.!W%>40.X!

804(-!8'Y&016!"49-Z&&;!%&'(H03!

Y&4.;!+-H.-)4.*!

,4?#&H&((&.J1?K&/#(-)!

M414(4VJ4HH-11;'4.)-#H&?!

4(4V4.04(JH0#K3-(;43-#H4#'1!

;;'F&01J349-Z&&;H0)*#&.K!

F&4.;&MM0H-J?-).(-)!

!

A![!431&!&(!)>-!\],&!"0(-!$')>&.0)*!

!

)-.&$,+/)$0&/*"'10"+&/$#1"2&'+"3$%'($!)!%)'*$$

),)0")($&44+0+#,$ )!#+,$

54.9!:0;3-*&?416!@(;!801)! 1-H&(;;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K!

B-/!C4.&134/19*6!D.;!801)!WO0H-!%>40.X! L-/J34HF&1#&.K!

%&'(H03!5-?F-.!Q-.F!^-11&(!W%>40.X! H&'(H03?-?F-.#Z-11&(J34H0)*#&.K!

%&'(H03!5-?F-.!P4(!T-..*!WT41)!%>40.X! H&'(H03?-?F-.#,-..*J34H0)*#&.K!

%&'(H03!5-?F-.!Y-.(4.;!T4.91! H&'(H03?-?F-.#,4.91J34H0)*#&.K!

%'3/-.!%0)*!54*&.!+H&))!54310(! 1H&))#?4310(JH'3/-.H0)*#&.K!

+4()4!5&(0H4!%&'(H03!5-?F-.!T4?!RN%&((&.! ,4?#&H&((&.J1?K&/#(-)!


3/7

DESCRIPTION OF CRENSHAW RAIL LINE ALIGNMENT & OPTIONSAs Currently Proposed by MTA (Nov. 23, 2009)

= The baseline project, what MTA is committed to building as of today.

= Options currently under study by MTA, which they will add to the project or not.

= Crossings that would remain at-grade (street-level) even if MTA adopts all six options:

On Crenshaw: 48

th

, 50

th

, 52

nd

, 54

th

, Slauson, 57

th

& 59

th

On the Harbor Subdivision (tracks into LAX):Victoria, Brynhurst, West, Redondo,Cedar, Oak, Hindry & Arbor Vitae

NOTES: MTA staff is currently recommending integration of Options 1, 2 and 4 into the baseline

project, and continuing study and environmental clearance of Options 3, 5 and 6 for integrationinto the project if funding becomes available.

At-grade crossings at: 48th, 50th, 52nd

(by Crenshaw HS), 54th, 57th, Slauson(next to View Park Prep) & 59th

At-grade crossings at: Victoria, Brynhurst,West & Redondo (next to Centinela Park)

At-grade crossings at:Cedar, Oak & Hindry

At-grade crossingat: Arbor Vitae

At-grade


4/7

CRENSHAW LINE ALIGNMENT CRENSHAW LINE DESIGN OPTIONS


5/7


6/7

October 19, 2009

Roderick DiazLos Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Crenshaw-South Bay Transit Line Project ManagerOne Gateway Plaza, M/S 99-22-3

Los Angeles, CA [email protected]

Re: Crenshaw-South Bay Line Draft EIR/S

The West Adams Neighborhood Council (WANC) is a certified City of Los Angeles neighborhood

council representing over 20,000 stakeholders. After much community discussion, WANC unanimouslyadopted the following position regarding the Crenshaw-South Bay Transit Line study.

The WANC requests that the entire Crenshaw Boulevard portion of the Crenshaw Light Rail Line be

placed underground with stations at Exposition Blvd, Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd, Vernon Ave, andSlauson Ave.

Area stakeholders are particularly concerned about the safety of children, elderly, the disabled and

motorists along the corridor. South L.A. is already home to America's deadliest light rail line, MTA'sBlue Line, which has taken 95 lives and maimed and injured thousands more in over 842 reported

accidents to date. Stakeholders lives should not be placed in jeopardy by 225-ton trains traveling athigh speeds down Crenshaw Blvd. The only way the safety issue can be adequately mitigated is by

placing the rail line underground on Crenshaw Blvd.

The noise, vibration, and traffic impacts of at-grade crossings are also of profound concern. To add 24Crenshaw Line crossings per hour during rush hour to the 24 proposed Expo Line crossings at the

problematic Exposition/Crenshaw crossing will lead to a train crossing every 75 seconds and total

gridlock for the area.

As the center of Los Angeles' African-American community, Crenshaw Blvd is currently home to many

public events and street festivals that would not be possible with an at-grade line.

Furthermore, proposing at-grade crossings in South L.A. on the Crenshaw Line when the rail isproposed to be 100% underground when it is extended north of the I-10 freeway would be yet another

case of environmental injustice perpetrated by the MTA and the region's transportation agencies.Jefferson Park deserves the same treatment as Hancock Park. West Adams deserves the same treatment

as the communities on Wilshire.

We look forward to continuing to participate in this important process.

Sincerely,

Hattie Babb

President


7/7

Statement on Metropolitan Transit Authoritys Staff Recommendations for Crenshaw CorridorNovember 19, 2009

BY DAMIEN GOODMON

Editors note: The statement below is on behalf of the Citizens Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line and the South Los AngelesNeighborhood Councils Joint Committee on Rail Transit. It was released in light of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority staffsrecommendation to have a light-rail line instead of a busway for the Crenshaw Corridor. The proposal calls for the $1.7 billion, 81/2-mile rail to start at Exposition and Crenshaw boulevards and eventually end at to the Green Line on Imperial Highway.

We agree with MTA staffs recommendation of light rail over bus rapid transit, the inclusion of the below-grade (underground)

sections along some parts of Crenshaw Boulevard, and the recommendation to continue study of underground options and stations

elsewhere along the route.

However, the portion on Crenshaw between 48th and 60th streets, in Park Mesa Heights, will be a rallying point for our community.

Staff is recommending the section, which abuts View Park Prep School and is about a block away from Crenshaw High School, only

be studied as street-level with no option for underground. We disagree, and want to avoid the problems articulated by L.A. CountySupervisor Gloria Molina regarding the Gold Lines Eastside Extension safety issues.

Staffs recommendation for street-level crossings in the Park Mesa Heights community will increase safety hazards to school-aged

children and the public at large; result in the removal of hundreds of parking spaces important to the areas commerce; require

chopping down tall median trees that are crucial to Crenshaw Boulevards scenic highway status; increase congestion at heavily

traveled cross streets, such as Slauson Avenue and 54th Street; slow down the overall traveling speed of the line; and impair otherwise

good economic development opportunities.

From traffic, parking, safety, economic development and procedural standpoints, it is a mistake.

As requested by the community, the neighborhood councils and L.A. City Council, an underground option from 48th to 60th Street

must be included among the other options under study, so when funding becomes available the option can be seamlessly integrated

into the Crenshaw Line project without delay. MTA should avoid the mistakes of the Expo Rail while building on Crenshaw.

Additionally, we disagree with staffs recommendation for the design and preliminary engineering contract. It appears Metro staff

wants the board to throw aside a perfectly capable and eminently qualified team that included businesses owned by people who live in

the Crenshaw Corridor, in favor a team led out of Orange County.

The largest public works project in the history of South L.A. should not be designed from Orange County.

Staff is recommending the Hatch Mott McDonnells team over the PB Americas team, which included, among others, Terry Hayes of

Terry Hayes Associates, and Roland Wiley of RAW International. These local African American business leaders have done all of the

preliminary work to date for this project going back to the early 1990s, have deep roots in the Crenshaw area, have volunteered their

expertise on numerous community projects, and most importantly, have a strong understanding of the pulse of the Crenshaw

community, because they live here.

I dont yet know why the PB Americas team was not selected, but the MTA board should overrule the staff recommendation, to ensure

that the promises made by elected officials to generate more jobs and a leadership role for members of the community are promises

kept.

We will be working in the coming weeks to persuade the MTA Board to address these issues promptly so our region and the

Crenshaw corridor communities can receive what is necessary and what we are due: a fast, safe and reliable alternative to the traffic

that is clogging our streets and polluting our air.

Damien Goodmon can be reached at [email protected].

Community Mtg 091123 Handouts

Documents

Transcript of Community Mtg 091123 Handouts