Community Mtg 091123 Handouts
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Community Mtg 091123 Handouts as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,285
- Pages: 7
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• 4#&&56789!F(#530!YYYG`7SRS3#G#(F!•!N=#6%]`;S0!L*)*M!@/A./P*Q!•!R&;7<0! 76O#bO7S%S3#G#(F! • D76C!8#!4(%6?=;Y!D76%!<%88%(?!;6K!(%3#(8?0! =8830]]YYYG?>(7'KG>#&]3%#3<%]K#>5&%68?]P*-2QA,]O#(%6?=;Y!;6K!YYYG'57
!"#$%&#'($!)!%)'*$ %&#'($!)!%)'*$
$
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
)!#+,$ ?&30(4J34HF&1#&.K! 1-H&(;;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K! L-/J34HF&1#&.K! ;&(J34HF&1#&.K! M0M)>;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K! ?4*&.J34H0)*#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#>'0L4.J34H0)*#&.K! .0)4#.&F0(1&(J34H0)*#&.K! .91*3?4.J4&3#H&?! ,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)! B-/!C4.&134/19*6!D.;!801)!WO0H-!%>40.X! %&'(H03!5-?F-.!Q-.F!^-11&(!W%>40.X! %&'(H03!5-?F-.!P4(!T-..*!WT41)!%>40.X! %&'(H03!5-?F-.!Y-.(4.;!T4.91! %'3/-.!%0)*!54*&.!+H&))!54310(! +4()4!5&(0H4!%&'(H03!5-?F-.!T4?!RN%&((&.!
$
)!#+,$ 1-H&(;;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K! L-/J34HF&1#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#Z-11&(J34H0)*#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#,-..*J34H0)*#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#,4.91J34H0)*#&.K! 1H&))#?4310(JH'3/-.H0)*#&.K! ,4?#&H&((&.J1?K&/#(-)!
DESCRIPTION OF CRENSHAW RAIL LINE ALIGNMENT & OPTIONS As Currently Proposed by MTA (Nov. 23, 2009) 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 crossing at: Arbor Vitae
= 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. At-grade
NOTES:
= Crossings that would remain at-grade (street-level) even if MTA adopts all six options: • On Crenshaw: 48th, 50th, 52nd, 54th, Slauson, 57th & 59th • On the Harbor Subdivision (tracks into LAX): Victoria, Brynhurst, West, Redondo, Cedar, Oak, Hindry & Arbor Vitae 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 integration into the project if funding becomes available.
CRENSHAW LINE ALIGNMENT
CRENSHAW LINE DESIGN OPTIONS
October 19, 2009 Roderick Diaz Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Crenshaw-South Bay Transit Line Project Manager One Gateway Plaza, M/S 99-22-3 Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 [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 unanimously adopted 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, and Slauson 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's Blue Line, which has taken 95 lives and maimed and injured thousands more in over 842 reported accidents to date. Stakeholder’s lives should not be placed in jeopardy by 225-ton trains traveling at high 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 24 Crenshaw 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 is proposed 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
Statement on Metropolitan Transit Authority’s Staff Recommendations for Crenshaw Corridor November 19, 2009 BY DAMIEN GOODMON Editor’s note: The statement below is on behalf of the Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line and the South Los Angeles Neighborhood Council’s Joint Committee on Rail Transit. It was released in light of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority staff’s recommendation to have a light-rail line instead of a busway for the Crenshaw Corridor. The proposal calls for the $1.7 billion, 8 1/2-mile rail to start at Exposition and Crenshaw boulevards and eventually end at to the Green Line on Imperial Highway. We agree with MTA staff’s 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. County Supervisor Gloria Molina regarding the Gold Line’s Eastside Extension safety issues. Staff’s 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 area’s commerce; require chopping down tall median trees that are crucial to Crenshaw Boulevard’s 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 staff’s 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 McDonnell’s 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 don’t 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].
!"#$%&#'($!)!%)'*$ %&#'($!)!%)'*$
$
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
)!#+,$ ?&30(4J34HF&1#&.K! 1-H&(;;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K! L-/J34HF&1#&.K! ;&(J34HF&1#&.K! M0M)>;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K! ?4*&.J34H0)*#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#>'0L4.J34H0)*#&.K! .0)4#.&F0(1&(J34H0)*#&.K! .91*3?4.J4&3#H&?! ,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)! B-/!C4.&134/19*6!D.;!801)!WO0H-!%>40.X! %&'(H03!5-?F-.!Q-.F!^-11&(!W%>40.X! %&'(H03!5-?F-.!P4(!T-..*!WT41)!%>40.X! %&'(H03!5-?F-.!Y-.(4.;!T4.91! %'3/-.!%0)*!54*&.!+H&))!54310(! +4()4!5&(0H4!%&'(H03!5-?F-.!T4?!RN%&((&.!
$
)!#+,$ 1-H&(;;01).0H)J34HF&1#&.K! L-/J34HF&1#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#Z-11&(J34H0)*#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#,-..*J34H0)*#&.K! H&'(H03?-?F-.#,4.91J34H0)*#&.K! 1H&))#?4310(JH'3/-.H0)*#&.K! ,4?#&H&((&.J1?K&/#(-)!
DESCRIPTION OF CRENSHAW RAIL LINE ALIGNMENT & OPTIONS As Currently Proposed by MTA (Nov. 23, 2009) 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 crossing at: Arbor Vitae
= 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. At-grade
NOTES:
= Crossings that would remain at-grade (street-level) even if MTA adopts all six options: • On Crenshaw: 48th, 50th, 52nd, 54th, Slauson, 57th & 59th • On the Harbor Subdivision (tracks into LAX): Victoria, Brynhurst, West, Redondo, Cedar, Oak, Hindry & Arbor Vitae 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 integration into the project if funding becomes available.
CRENSHAW LINE ALIGNMENT
CRENSHAW LINE DESIGN OPTIONS
October 19, 2009 Roderick Diaz Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Crenshaw-South Bay Transit Line Project Manager One Gateway Plaza, M/S 99-22-3 Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 [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 unanimously adopted 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, and Slauson 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's Blue Line, which has taken 95 lives and maimed and injured thousands more in over 842 reported accidents to date. Stakeholder’s lives should not be placed in jeopardy by 225-ton trains traveling at high 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 24 Crenshaw 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 is proposed 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
Statement on Metropolitan Transit Authority’s Staff Recommendations for Crenshaw Corridor November 19, 2009 BY DAMIEN GOODMON Editor’s note: The statement below is on behalf of the Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line and the South Los Angeles Neighborhood Council’s Joint Committee on Rail Transit. It was released in light of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority staff’s recommendation to have a light-rail line instead of a busway for the Crenshaw Corridor. The proposal calls for the $1.7 billion, 8 1/2-mile rail to start at Exposition and Crenshaw boulevards and eventually end at to the Green Line on Imperial Highway. We agree with MTA staff’s 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. County Supervisor Gloria Molina regarding the Gold Line’s Eastside Extension safety issues. Staff’s 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 area’s commerce; require chopping down tall median trees that are crucial to Crenshaw Boulevard’s 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 staff’s 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 McDonnell’s 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 don’t 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].
Related Documents
Community Mtg 091123 Handouts
June 2020 14
Community Mtg 091123
June 2020 17
091123
June 2020 8
091123 4639junesprings
June 2020 6
Handouts
November 2019 48
Handouts
November 2019 50More Documents from ""
Community Mtg 091123
June 2020 17
Planning Dept Ltr On Crenshaw Line Deir
June 2020 15
Community Mtg 091123 Handouts
June 2020 14
Daily Trojan 08-09-18
November 2019 43
Motion For Extension Of Time
November 2019 41