E Line (Los Angeles Metro)

The Metro Expo Line is shown in color aqua on the map, along with the Metro Blue, Gold, Red, and Purple Lines. Also shown is the proposed Downtown Connector (dashed aqua–blue line).

The Metro Expo Line of the Los Angeles County Metro Rail is a light-rail line currently under construction in Los Angeles County, California, USA, which will run from Downtown Los Angeles to Culver City and eventually to Santa Monica. Its route makes use of the former Exposition Boulevard right-of-way, from which its name comes. The Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (Expo) [1] is the project manager and the agency that is constructing the line; however, virtually all of the staff are also employees of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro).

In December 2005 the board of Metro approved the Final Environmental-Impact Report. All funds to construct the line have been obtained from local and state sources, obviating the need to wait with other localities for funds from the federal government. Expo broke ground on Friday, September 29, 2006. The line will start operations to the Culver Junction (Venice/Robertson Boulevards) in Culver City by June 2010 or earlier.

History

The line was originally built in 1875, with the name “The Los Angeles & Independence Railroad.” Southern Pacific bought it in 1877 and later leased it to electric-railway companies after it was electrified in 1908. These electric railroads merged under the name of Pacific Electric in 1911. It was known as the “Santa Monica Air Line” [2] for most of the history, providing freight and passenger service between Los Angeles and Santa Monica. Pacific Electric discontinued the passenger service on the Santa Monica Air Line in 1953. Southern Pacific continued the freight service, with the last freight service to Fisher Lumber in Santa Monica taking place in 1987 and to the Culver Junction circa 1989. Metro purchased the line from Southern Pacific in 1990 for future public-transit use.

Trivia

The Expo Line is the second oldest railroad in Southern California, built in 1875 with the name The Los Angeles & Independence Railroad in order to connect the Nevada silver mines to the then existing Port Los Angeles in Santa Monica (later moved to San Pedro). The Los Angeles & San Pedro Railroad, which then became the Southern Pacific San Pedro division and now is the Alameda Corridor, was built in 1869.

Donald Douglas was a regular commuter on the Expo Line, then known as the Santa Monica Air Line. He used to fantasize on the Air Line about airlines becoming a reality in the future. Indeed his Douglas Aircraft Company would become one of the major aircraft manufacturers.

Air line literally means a straight line through the air between two points. Therefore, it is used in the railroad industry to indicate a railroad line that directly connects two places without curves or winding routes.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky was initially the No. 1 opponent of the Expo Line, claiming that the preferred method of transportation in Los Angeles should be subways, not surface rail, and almost succeeding in preventing the purchase of the Expo Line right-of-way by Metro circa 1990. He later changed his philosophy and opposed subways as being too costly and his Proposition A has prevented the use of local funds for subway construction. He is now a strong supporter of the Expo Line. He had also advocated bus rapid transit (BRT) for the Expo Line and had introduced the Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards street diversion (see below) to be used for the BRT buses. He now acknowledges that this relic from early busway considerations might not be a good idea, saying that the diversion would slow down the line while the speed being crucial for these lines.

The Friends 4 Expo Transit [3] (and its predecessors), headed by Darrell Clarke of Santa Monica, the grassrooots group that has advocated the Expo Line since the late 1980s, played a big role in the acquisition of the Expo Line right-of-way by Metro and prevented the Expo Line being built as a busway (bus rapid transit) and succeeded in having it built as light-rail.

Name

Currently this is the only LACMTA Metro Rail line that is known by a name independent of its color on maps. Ironically the founders of Friends 4 Expo [4], the grassroots organization that has strongly advocated the line since the late 1980s, had originally used the name "Expo Line" but then popularized and heavily campaigned for the name "Aqua Line," which was later recommended by the Metro staff to the Metro board [5]. Interestingly the name Aqua Line had also popped into existence when a guerilla-artist group called Heavy Trash posted prank "Metro Aqua Line" future-station-location signs throughout the Westside during the 2000 Democratic National Convention, to stir up NIMBYs and to provoke civic dialogue [6].

On May 4, 2006, a community meeting by Metro was held at Dorsey High School near Exposition Blvd/La Brea Ave in Mid-City. In this meeting a color for the line was discussed in public for the very first time. Metro board member and city councilmember Bernard Parks, whose district is partially served by the line, was also attending the meeting and got actively involved in the discussion of the color with the several hundred attendees. He later opposed the adoption of aqua as the color, on the basis that this color didn’t really connect with the rest of the regions served by the Expo line, other than the Westside [7].

On August 24, 2006, a debate for the second time over the name of the line between Metro board members lasted over one hour. The Parks motion stated that the line be officially known as the Expo Line and designated on maps with the color "rose." At the end of the board meeting, a modified motion instead was passed by the board, which named the line "Metro Expo Line" but deferred the color issue to sometime after more public input is sought and before the line goes into service.

Route

The route is the locally preferred alternative (LPA) officially adopted as part of the approval of the Final Environmental-Impact Report in December 2005. The Expo Line (also known as the "Mid-City/Exposition Light-Rail Transit Project") will begin at 7th/Flower Streets (Metro Center) and then travel south on Flower St. South of the Pico station, it will branch off from the Blue Line, continuing on Flower St to Exposition Blvd. The rest of its route is exclusively on the Exposition right-of-way. The line will end just short of the Culver Junction (the intersection of Venice, Robertson, and Exposition Boulevards, within short walking distance to Downtown Culver City). A second phase of the line will continue from Culver City to Santa Monica, mostly on the original Pacific Electric Exposition Blvd right-of-way.

Stations

Station	Mileage	Trip time†	Connections	Opening projected
Preexisting stations
7th/Flower (7th St/Metro Center)	0.0 miles	0 minutes	Red Line  Purple Line  Blue Line  Harbor Transitway Metro Rapid: 714, 720, 760, 770 Foothill Transit: Silver Streak
Pico/Flower (Pico)	0.7	1	Blue Line  Harbor Transitway
Phase 1 (under construction)
23rd/Flower	1.5	3	Harbor Transitway	2010
Jefferson/Flower	2.2	5	Harbor Transitway	2010
USC/Exposition Park	2.7	7		2010
Vermont/Exposition	3.1	8	Metro Rapid: 754	2010
Western/Exposition	4.1	10	Metro Rapid: 757	2010
Crenshaw/Exposition*	5.6	13	Metro Rapid: 710	2010
La Brea/Exposition	6.8	16		2010
La Cienega/Jefferson*	7.7	18	Metro Rapid: 705	2010
Venice/Robertson*	8.7	20		2010
Phase 2 (planned)
Motor–Palms/National*	9.8	22		2013
Westwood–Overland/Exposition	10.9	25		2013
Pico–Sawtelle/Exposition*	11.8	27		2013
Bundy/Exposition*	12.6	29		2013
Cloverfield/Olympic*	13.7	31		2013
14th/Colorado*	14.5	33		2013
4th–5th/Colorado*	15.2	35	Metro Rapid: 704, 720 Big Blue Bus: Rapid 3	2013

Notes:
* indicates that parking is planned.
† These are estimates for the near-optimal trip times, based on 50 MPH cruising speed, 3 MPH/s service acceleration/deceleration, 45 s wait at each intermediate station, and signal priority. The actual trip times may vary due to miscellaneous factors. The estimates by the construction authority are substantially higher to avoid future criticism.

USC/Exposition Park Station

The attitude of the high-level administration of the University of Southern California (USC) toward the Expo Line has been generally negative, while the attitude of students and neighbors has been positive. Originally USC opposed at-grade light-rail next to its campus, claiming that light-rail would separate the university campus from Exposition Park. But the locally preferred alternative in the final environmental-impact report only contended with a short tunnel segment at the junction of Flower St and Exposition Blvd. The final environmental-impact report left the USC/Exposition Park Station as an option, citing that it would be built if funds (approximately $5M) could be obtained and local support is present. Many acknowledged the importance of this station, citing its convenient accessibility by the USC students/employees and Exposition Park guests. Moreover the station would be crucial for a future NFL venue in place of the current Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, as well as for future Olympic Games. The Exposition Park/Coliseum authority has taken a strong position in support of this station. Recently the USC Student Senate [8] has passed a resolution in strong support of the USC/Exposition Park Station and the Expo Line. On the other hand, USC President Steven Sample [9] remained the sole opposer. Expo (Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority) worked to secure the funds for this important station and to negotiate its design. A remaining issue that the construction authority needed to resolve was USC’s request for special architecture for all stations serving the campus.

On September 19, 2007, the board of Metro approved the funds ($7M) for the USC/Exposition Park Station [10]. Therefore, this station will open with the rest of the line in 2010 or earlier. USC has not made any contributions to the cost of the station. Expo has also abandoned the considerations for special architecture requested by USC for the three USC stations and ceased the communications with USC in this regard.

Phase 2 expansion

The expansion to Santa Monica for the Expo line is known as Phase 2 or the Westside segment. Phase 1 (or the Mid-City segment) to the Culver Junction (Venice/Robertson Boulevards) in Culver City is planned to begin operations in 2009–2010 and Phase 2 in 2013–2015.

Route options for Phase 2

The alignment between the Home Junction (Exposition/Sepulveda Boulevards) in the Westside and the intersection of Olympic Blvd and the Exposition right-of-way in Santa Monica is generally agreed on to follow the original Pacific Electric right-of-way along Exposition Blvd. However, between the current terminus at the Culver Junction in Culver City and the Home Junction in the Westside, the Expo Line could follow either of two alignment options, and to the west of Olympic Blvd/Exposition right-of-way in Santa Monica, there are three possible alignment options. See also the alternatives map by the construction authority [11].

Culver Junction to Home Junction

The first option would be to use the original Pacific Electric right-of-way between the Culver Junction and the Home Junction through northern Palms and Rancho Park. The second alignment option would divert the line from the right-of-way into the median of Venice Blvd, which separates Palms from Culver City, then turn north on Sepulveda Blvd, before rejoining the original Pacific Electric right-of-way, just south of Pico Blvd/Sepulveda Blvd at the Home Junction.

Right-of-way alignment

Route

The right-of-way alignment passes through the highly populated Palms, and then passes through Rancho Park, just south of the highly populated area of the Pico Blvd vicinity. Part of this alignment is in a quiet, affluent suburban neighborhood, where the right-of-way borders Cheviot Hills and then goes through Rancho Park.

The Palms/Rancho Park right-of-way alignment is shorter and also allows higher speeds without impeding the street traffic since the exclusive railroad right-of-way already exists. There are three crossings in this alignment that already have grade separation, i.e., an underpass or overpass:

National Blvd and Motor Ave: Existing railroad bridges will be rebuilt to accommodate dual tracks and the bicycle/pedestrian paths.

I-10 (Santa Monica Freeway) underpass: Currently this is a narrow tunnel under a short freeway bridge, called Palms Overhead. The existing tunnel, designed for a single track, is only 25-ft-wide, which is probably not wide enough to allow dual tracks. To ensure safety, such as of any pedestrians who could wander into the tunnel, in emergency situations, etc., the tunnel will likely have to be widened. Moreover, it is necessary to widen the tunnel to about 60 ft to accommodate the bicycle/pedestrian paths next to the tracks. The bicycle/pedestrian paths would also help discourage graffiti around the tunnel and help reduce the noise echoed out of the tunnel. The tunnel could be gradually widened from one or both ends toward the opposite end, without affecting the traffic on the Santa Monica Freeway above.

The remaining crossings are:

Bagley Ave: would likely have the Venice Blvd/Robertson Blvd overpass extended over,

Overland Ave: grade separation likely necessary since a major north–south arterial,

Westwood Blvd and Military Ave: grade separation optional, Military Ave crossing could be eliminated,

Sepulveda Blvd: grade separation likely necessary since a major north–south arterial.

Metro Expo Line grade-separated transit parkway (artist’s rendition on actual photograph). This section of the parkway, looking toward northwest, is adjacent to Northvale Rd (formerly, Exposition Blvd) near Dunleer Dr. Palms Park is on the left and Northvale Rd, which borders Cheviot Hills from the southwest, is on the right side of the parkway. There is a paved two-way bicycle/pedestrian path on either side of the parkway. Note the absence of any retaining walls, which would be considered as not being aesthetic in a suburban parkway setting. No natural trench exists for the tracks beyond Northvale Rd.

Stream daylighting for the Metro Expo Line.

Some design suggestions by right-of-way neighbors

A possible design for the Expo Line would be the continuation of a grade-separated transit parkway (see the adjacent picture). Between the freeway underpass and Overland Ave, the line goes in a natural soil trench, next to Northvale Rd (formerly, Exposition Blvd), surrounded by dense trees and plants. In this design the dual tracks sit in the middle of the 100-ft-wide right-of-way, separated by fences. On either side of the right-of-way, there is a paved two-way bicycle/pedestrian path. The parkway sits in a natural soil-lined trench, with its slopes covered with trees and plants. There are no concrete retaining walls, which could be considered as not being aesthetic. The grade-separated transit parkway design also avoids the use of visually displeasing overpasses.

Note that there is an approximately twelve-feet-deep, twelve-feet-wide storm drain under the western sidewalk of Overland Ave where the Expo Line crosses. In order to build an underpass at this intersection, the “inverted siphon” (also called depressed sewer) method could be used to pass the storm drain under the light-rail line [12]. It has also been suggested to divert this and another storm drain nearby (both feeding into the partly open Westwood Channel further downstream) to along the north side of the right-of-way between Overland and Military Avenues and then to daylight it as a creek. The water would be cleaned along the way, therefore reducing the pollution runoff into the ocean. This method could be used in conjunction with the inverted siphon, the latter serving as a backup during heavy storms. Note that recently there is a lot of activity with regard to daylighting the lost streams in Los Angeles, in order to reduce the contaminant runoff into the Santa Monica Bay. (See Save all of Ballona [13], City of Los Angeles Integrated Resources Program [14], and the LA Weekly article “The lost streams of Los Angeles” [15].) This water-cleaning program is mandated by the federal Clean Water Act [16].

Stations

There are two possible stations along this alignment. The first one would be between Motor Ave and Palms/National/Exposition Boulevards, perhaps behind the currently existing PRICE self-storage facility [17], which would serve the extremely densely populated Palms. The second one would be between Westwood Blvd and Overland Ave midway between the two streets, which would serve the densely populated Pico Blvd vicinity and the extremely congested Century City and Westwood. The Palms station would require acquisition of several parcels within the station area to create adequate space for the station, as well as to provide convenient access and parking accommodations. The Pico Blvd vicinity/Century City/Westwood station area between Westwood Blvd and Overland Ave is already available within the 200-ft-wide right-of-way. This station would need to be carefully designed so that it would blend with its suburban surroundings. The parking structures and lots in the nearby Westside Pavilion shopping mall [18] are currently lightly used and could serve as a park-and-ride opportunity for this station.

1951-parcel-map overlay for Pacific Electric Railroad Palms Depot (Palms Station) of the Expo Line (then Santa Monica Air Line), shown along with the possible future station location (aqua rectangle).

The figure on the right shows the location of historic Pacific Electric Railroad Palms Depot (Palms Station) [19] in a 1951-parcel-map overlay, as well as the possible future Metro Expo Line Palms Station location (aqua rectangle).

Alternatives for grade separation

A key question for the right-of-way alignment is whether the tracks would go at-grade as they have in some other sections of the line or if they would be above-grade (raised) or below-grade (underground or in a sunken ditch). Issues of cost, noise, safety, and traffic congestion are related to the choice to do grade separation or not.

Metro issued a grade-crossing policy for light-rail [20] in 2003. This policy only considers grade-separation issues at specific crossings rather than for entire neighborhoods. The policy defines how to decide which rail crossings would be at-grade (traffic flow controlled by signals and/or gates) and which would have grade separation (an underpass or overpass). Grade separation ensures safety and speed and eliminates the use of horns or bells and possible traffic backup. On the other hand, each grade separation can cost $10 million or more per crossing.

While Metro has built tracks at-grade in other residential neighborhoods, this decision has created controversy. An LA Times article by Douglas P. Shut dated 2/22/2000 [21] featured an interview with Yvonne Braithwaite Burke, County Supervisor and head of Metro, in which she expressed anxiety about crossing the Blue Line tracks. Among the concerns was the accident rate (as of 2000 there had been 53 deaths attributed to the Blue Line). Metro explored a proposal to rebuild the Blue Line to put it below grade. The cost for such a project once the rail line has been built was estimated at $1.6 billion—much too high to make it feasible. “… the best chance of paying for grade separations comes during construction; because once a system is built, the costs become prohibitive.” [22]

There are key differences between the Metro Blue Line and the Expo Line. The former was built two decades ago with much different standards and long before the 2003 Metro grade-crossing policy for light-rail. The Gold Line, which opened in 2003, provides a more recent comparison. Since it has started operations, the Gold Line has only had two, nonfatal injury accidents, both caused by gross negligence and reckless behavior by a light-truck driver [23][24], and it maintains a higher average speed on its full route than the Blue Line. But proximity to housing and the many at-grade street crossings led to the state Public Utilities Commission restricted the speed of Gold Line trains in parts of South Pasadena and Highland Park (LA Times article dated 8/11/2007 By Rong-Gong Lin II and Jeffrey L. Rabin [25]). The Expo Line is being built by the same CEO, Rick Thorpe, and project manager, Joel Sandberg, who built the Gold Line. Metro has also established a program of rail safety education.

Explicit rail crossings for the right-of-way segment

Metro has currently committed for grade separation (an underpass or overpass) at the following crossings in this segment: Venice Blvd, Palms/National Boulevards, Motor Ave, Santa Monica Freeway, and Sepulveda Blvd. The four remaining crossings are discussed below:

Bagley Avenue: Since the tracks are next to a freeway overpass at this crossing, there is zero visibility coming from the freeway side of Bagley Avenue. In addition the crossing is in between two overpass inclines (National and Venice/Robertson) where the train would have little room to slow down or stop for an oncoming vehicle stuck in the gates. Therefore, this crossing seems to meet the criteria in the Metro grade-crossing policy for light-rail [26].

Overland Avenue: Metro staff has indicated that there would very likely be grade separation at Overland Ave; although, they have declined to commit to this before they have done the draft environmental study. Current traffic volume on Overland Ave, which is a major arterial connecting the surrounding area of the Westside to the Santa Monica Freeway, exceeds the criteria in the Metro grade-crossing policy for light-rail [27]. Moreover, the map at the construction authority Web site currently indicates grade separation at Overland Ave with a blue cross [28].

Westwood Boulevard: Westwood Boulevard is also a major arterial helping Westwood, Century City, and Rancho Park connect to the Santa Monica Freeway. Given the traffic congestion in the Westside, grade separation at this crossing is highly desirable.

Military Avenue: The volume of traffic on this section of Military Avenue is extremely low. It had originally been closed at the right-of-way but was opened to traffic in more recent decades. If grade separation is not possible at Military Avenue, an option would be to eliminate this crossing.

There are no other crossings in this section of the right-of-way.

Support by the board of the Palms Neighborhood Council

The right-of-way alignment passes through a large section of the very densely populated Palms [29]. On March 7, 2007, the general assembly of the Palms Neighborhood Council [30] passed a motion supporting the routing of Phase 2 of the Expo Line along the Exposition right-of-way. On April 4, 2007, another motion passed, stating, "We request the project to study locating a station in Palms behind the current location of the PRICE self-storage facility [31] on National Blvd between Palms Blvd and Motor Ave. This location would serve Big Blue Bus No. 12 and Culver CityBus No. 3 [32]."

Support by the board of the South Robertson Neighborhood Council

The Exposition right-of-way route borders densely populated South Robertson from the south [33]. On July 11, 2007, the South Robertson Neighborhood Council [34] passed a motion supporting the routing of Phase 2 of the Expo Line along the Exposition right-of-way.

Support by the board of the Mar Vista Neighborhood Council

On June 8, 2004, the Mar Vista Neighborhood Council passed a motion supporting the Expo Line built on the existing Pacific Electric Exposition railroad right-of-way. The Mar Vista Neighborhood Council passed another motion on October 3, 2007, supporting the permanent elevated Venice/Robertson Boulevards Station instead of the interim Washington/National Boulevards (Wesley St) station. A similar motion was also passed by the Del Rey Neighborhood Council. On November 29, 2007, the Metro board ruled in favor of building the permanent Venice/Robertson Station instead of the temporary Washington/National Station [35][36].

Opposition by the board of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners' Association

Even though the Expo Line does not actually go through but only borders Cheviot Hills, which is a quiet, affluent neighborhood with an older median age, there has been a great deal of opposition by its residents ever since the early ideas of using the Expo Line for public transit.

During the initial-planning phase of Metro Rail in the 1980s, when Metro planners had advocated the Expo Line, lobbying by the Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association [37] ultimately forced the abandonment of the Expo Line until its late-1990s revival. Recently there is a group of residents in Cheviot Hills and Rancho Park supporting the Exposition line going by their neighborhood [38]. The most recent, Summer 2006 survey carried out by the Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association showed that now about a third of the Cheviot Hills residents preferred the Expo Line going by their neighborhood—a huge increase from less than 5% support in the past. Despite the increasing popularity of the line, the Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association recently chose to oppose the Expo Line [39], in sharp contrast with the increasing support trend among the Cheviot Hills residents [40]. In fact, to make the vote on the Expo Line seem unanimous, the homeowners’-board members in support of the line were discouraged to use their votes [41].

Most Cheviot Hills residents who are against the Expo Line are primarily worried about their property values and not being able to preserve their neighborhood as the way it is, once the light-rail is built [42]. They are worried about the possibility of increased high-density development in the vicinity of Cheviot Hills fueled by light-rail. There was a strong reaction from the public when a former president of the homeowners’ association was quoted saying [43][44], "Do you think the people who live in Cheviot Hills are going to take this bloody train. No, they are going to get in their cars. The people who are going to use this are the people who work in the hotels in Santa Monica, and they are going to come from the Hispanic areas nearer downtown. Now they take the bus."

Another argument brought forward by some Cheviot Hills residents pertains to the potential impacts on Overland Avenue Elementary School [45], located at the northeast corner of Exposition Blvd and Overland Ave. Concerns are raised about grade crossing at Overland Ave and noise. The currently planned grade separation at Overland Ave would address these concerns due to the heavy traffic coming and going to the 10 freeway Overland Avenue entrance/exit.

Nevertheless, since the line already goes through similar residential sections in East Culver City and Mid-City, any preferential treatment for Cheviot Hills would have severe implications of social and racial discrimination. For this reason it is highly unlikely that the position of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners' Association board would have any effect on the determination of the route for the Expo Line. (See, e.g., the links [46] and [47] for information regarding the environmental justice law.) Meanwhile, the strong opposition of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners' Association board to the Expo Line was strongly criticized by the Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez in his recent article "Something’s wrong with unused right-of-way" [48].

Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards diversion

Route

Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards diversion option for the Metro Expo Line, shown as the dashed aqua line, and the original right-of-way alignment, shown as the solid aqua line. Also shown are the population densities in the City of Los Angeles. Historically there used to be passenger and freight rail both on the Exposition Blvd right-of-way and on Venice Blvd, pointing to the significance of both alignment options.

While the Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards diversion would pass through a commercial corridor, the high volume of traffic carried by Venice Blvd would most likely necessitate the elevation of the line along the entire Robertson–Sepulveda segment, due to the need for no less than four grade separations (Venice Blvd, Motor Ave, Overland Ave, and Sepulveda Blvd). The Sepulveda Blvd would be especially problematic, where the traffic is stop-and-go at rush hour and the street is only 100-ft-wide (two lanes in each direction). The combination of the LRT and automobile traffic on Sepulveda Blvd could slow down the line tremendously. The Metro Gold Line suffers from similar speed problems due to its street-running segments in Highland Park. In the case of the Exposition line, the speed problem would be severe, considering the extremely congested traffic on Sepulveda Blvd, grade separations will have to be considered on this detour.

Some residents living near the right-of-way in Cheviot Hills and Rancho Park, in particular some board members of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association and Westside Neighborhood Council [49], made the claim that the Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards diversion serves a significantly more populated area than the right-of-way alignment, therefore, should be favored for the Expo Line [50]. However, the most populated area in this region is Palms, which is served by either alignment option. The right-of-way alignment serves Palms from the north through the Motor Ave–Palms/National/Exposition Boulevards station; whereas, the Venice/Sepulveda diversion serves Palms from the south through the Overland Ave/Venice Blvd station (see the adjacent map). The same holds true for Westside Village, which is served by either alignment option. The Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards diversion option does serve Culver City better, but the densely populated areas of the Pico Blvd vicinity, Century City, and Westwood are served much better by the right-of-way alignment through the Westwood Blvd–Overland Ave/Exposition Blvd station (see, again, the map). Moreover, the section of the original Pacific Electric railroad right-of-way between the Culver Junction (Exposition/Venice Boulevards) and the Home Junction (Exposition/Sepulveda Boulevards) has a long history of past use and future modernization plans [51].

A group called Neighbors for Smart Rail (see below) have recently suggested to continue the line along Venice Blvd to Venice instead and then along Lincoln Blvd to Santa Monica [52]. However, one of the primary destinations of the Expo Line is West Los Angeles, which will be served through Bundy/Exposition and Pico–Sawtelle/Exposition stations. Since a full Venice Line would entirely divert around West Los Angeles, it is not considered within the general scope of the Expo Line project (see Page 8 in [53]). Nevertheless, such a future Venice Line serving Culver City, Mar Vista, Marina del Rey, and Venice would be very popular (seep Page 7 in [54]) in addition to the Expo Line serving West Los Angeles through the Exposition right-of-way.

Stations

The three possible stations along this alignment are Overland Ave/Venice Blvd, Sepulveda Blvd/Venice Blvd, and National Blvd/Sepulveda Blvd.

Support by Neighbors for Smart Rail

The group Neighbors for Smart Rail was formed by some Westside residents in the Rancho Park area, who prefer the Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards alignment, which detours Palms/Rancho Park, over the right-of-way alignment that goes through their Rancho Park neighborhood. Neighbors for Smart Rail describe their official position as follows: "Neighbors for Smart Rail (NFSR) [55] is an organization of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles advocating for long-term transit planning vs. short-term transit planning focused on cost savings and ease. NFSR advocates for careful analysis of all options for Expo Line Phase 2, including both the right-of-way alignment and the Venice/Sepulveda alignment. NFSR is supported by the following neighborhood associations affected by the proposed Expo Phase 2 extension: Westwood Gardens Civic Association [56], West of Westwood Homeowners' Association, and Track 7260, in addition to the Cheviot Hills Homeowners' Association." Note that NFSR’s support for careful analysis of all possible routes for the Expo extension is similar to the position of Friends 4 Expo Transit [57], but it is different in the way that Friends 4 Expo Transit doesn’t support any alternatives other than the right-of-way and Venice/Sepulveda alignments.

Most members of Neighbors for Smart Rail are strong opponents of the right-of-way alignment. See the recent LA Times article "Cheviot Hills residents differ on light-rail" [58] as well as the PBS Life & Times feature on the Expo Line "Derailing light-rail?" [59].

Home Junction to Olympic Blvd/Exposition right-of-way

Between the Home Junction in the Westside and the intersection of Olympic Blvd and the Exposition right-of-way in Santa Monica, the Pacific Electric Exposition right-of-way will be used.

Stations

Possible stations along the Exposition right-of-way include Pico–Sawtelle/Exposition Boulevards, Bundy Dr/Exposition Blvd, and Cloverfield/Olympic Boulevards.

Olympic Blvd/Exposition right-of-way to the Downtown Santa Monica terminus

The Exposition right-of-way purchased by Metro ends at 17th St in Santa Monica. The possible alignment options to the Downtown Santa Monica terminus are described below:

Colorado Ave median or right-of-way repurchase between 14th St and the Downtown Santa Monica terminus

Colorado Ave alignment for the Metro Expo Line in Downtown Santa Monica. The right-of-way is being extended from 17th St to 14th St with recent acquisitions. Additional acquisitions could extend the right-of-way all the way to the 4th–5th Streets terminus, retaining the traffic lanes and eliminating the possibility of future traffic congestion on Colorado Ave.

Southern Pacific sold the Pacific Electric Exposition right-of-way west of Fisher Lumber on 14th St to various entities in the 1960s. Fisher Lumber was recently purchased by City of Santa Monica for redevelopment [60]. Therefore, the right-of-way effectively has been extended from 17th St to 14th St; although, there is a single building just west of 17th St.

On October 25, 2007, at the Santa Monica Industrial Lands Workshop [61], City of Santa Monica suggested to acquire the single building, a media business, just west of 17th St and use the existing right-of-way to 14th St. In this alignment the line would be built on the Pacific Electric Exposition right-of-way until 14th St and a station would be placed just east of 14th St. Then, the tracks would divert into the median of Colorado Ave and reach the Downtown Santa Monica terminus at 4th–5th Streets following the median. This option requires reducing the traffic lanes on Colorado Ave to one lane in each direction to the west of 14th St. City of Santa Monica has given the Expo Authority $300,000 to carry out a study for this alignment. Moreover, City of Santa Monica is also considering turning the area between 17th St and 14th St into green space and transit-oriented development by enlarging Memorial Park and incorporating a new, mixed-use development.

The distance from 14th St to the Downtown Santa Monica terminus at 4th–5th Streets/Colorado Avenue is only 0.75 mile and there are only about half a dozen privately owned buildings in between. The acquisition of these buildings could easily be achieved, and the right-of-way could easily be extended to the Downtown Santa Monica terminus [62]. This alignment option would have much less impact on the automobile traffic, since the two lanes in each direction on Colorado Ave would be kept, and be faster but could be somewhat costlier than using the median of Colorado Ave or the Olympic Blvd option below.

Subway construction between 14th St and the Downtown Santa Monica terminus

Since the distance between 14th St and the Downtown Santa Monica terminus at 4th–5th Streets/Colorado Avenue is only 0.75 mile, a subway section here could also be reasonable, as proposed by some transit advocates [63], but it would increase the overall cost of the line.

Olympic Blvd alignment

The original alignment option by Metro was to run the Exposition light-rail line on Olympic Blvd west of the intersection of Olympic Blvd and the Exposition right-of-way [64]. A concern for this alignment option is the necessity to preserve the historic trees in the median of Olympic Blvd. A disadvantage of this alignment option is that it would require removal of one lane in each direction on Olympic Blvd. The narrowness of Olympic Blvd may not allow such a removal. Another disadvantage of this alignment option is the necessity to build a long guideway over Lincoln Blvd and the freeway, which would be costly and have visual impacts.

Stations

In any of the three alignment options, a station near 14th St would be needed for better connectivity to various parts of Santa Monica, as well as to Santa Monica College. The proposed location for the Downtown Santa Monica terminus is just south of Colorado Avenue between 4th and 5th Streets.

On June 13, 2006, the Santa Monica City Council authorized the acquisition of land at the property of the Sears store at the southeast corner of 4th St/Colorado Ave for the Downtown Santa Monica terminus of the Expo Line. Transit-oriented development is also envisioned around this station [65].

The process of the environmental-impact study for Phase 2 began with a brand-new draft environmental-impact study in November 2006, with Metro's award for the contract for the study.

Current status

The Expo construction authority [66] will hold the third and last round of public meetings in mid-February, 2008, this time asking public to provide input for the station locations and parking.

The Expo construction authority [67] held the second round of three public informational meetings, this time to announce the results of the alternatives analysis, namely the selection of alternatives for further environmental study. The meeting dates and locations were as follows: Monday, October 22, 2007, at Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, Wednesday, October 24, at Venice High School, and Thursday, October 25, at Vista Del Mar Child and Family Services, each between 6:30–8:30 PM in an informal workshop setting.

The table below summarizes the results of the initial Phase 2 study [68]. The alternatives under consideration have been reduced to two: light-rail (LRT) on the right-of-way alignment and light-rail on the Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards diversion. (Although, bus rapid transit [BRT] along the right-of-way is still being considered, but it has a good chance to soon be eliminated due to lower ridership estimates, unreasonably small bus headways, and lack of any public support. Expo Authority will soon announce if this alternative will be kept or dropped.) Note that the FTA cost-effectiveness rating in the last column is how the project is ranked by the Federal Transit Administration for qualification for federal funds.

Results of the initial Phase 2 study for the Metro Expo Line

Alternative	Ridership estimate (boardings per day)	Cost estimate	No. of acquisitions needed	Environmental impact on the nature	Environmental impact on the community	FTA travel-time savings over transportation-system management (hours/day)	FTA cost-effectiveness rating
LRT on the right-of-way	41,400	$930,000,000–$1,050,000,000	1	Medium	Low	14,400	$18–$20 (Medium)
LRT on the Venice/Sepulveda diversion	34,700	$1,240,000,000–$1,280,000,000	33–39	High	High	11,300	$28–$29 (Low–medium)

Heavy construction for the Metro Expo Line.

Construction near USC started on May 14, 2007, with utility relocation [69]. Heavy construction started on July 17, 2007, to build the Flower St/Exposition Blvd tunnel between Jefferson Blvd/Flower St and Pardee Way/Exposition Blvd. (See the adjacent picture.) The tunnel will be immediately below the surface, with a depth of about 30 ft. Initially two shallow parallel trenches will be dug, for the columns that will support the deck over the tunnel. Then approximately 3-ft-diameter holes will be drilled in the trenches, and reinforced-concrete columns will be cast in these holes. Once this process is completed, precast reinforced-concrete slabs for the deck over the tunnel will be brought and placed across the columns. Note that the steel cages and precast concrete slabs are currently being prepared at a makeshift casting yard in the right-of-way near Jefferson and La Cienega Boulevards. After this is finished, the earth under the deck will be excavated, and then the tracks will be laid and the catenary wires will be hung. The construction will take place at night and steel plates will cover the trenches during the day, with minimal impact on traffic. The tunnel will be completed in the fall of 2007.

The draft environmental study began with the open-comment period for Phase 2 with four public scoping meetings, held on February 27, 2007, at Culver City Senior Center, February 28 at Hamilton High School, March 6 at Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, and March 15 at Vista Del Mar Child and Family Services, each at 6:30–8:30 PM. Public was encouraged to attend and submit written comments at these meetings or during the open-comment period. The deadline for the receipt of the public comments was April 2, 2007.

On an important note, as of July 2007, Metro [70] is still working with FTA [71] to finish their ridership model for the Phase 2 draft environmental study. This has been delayed several months due to the complexity of the Los Angeles urban structure, public-transit system, and traffic patterns. The ridership model is a crucial part of the study for route and station selection as well as for achieving federal funding.

The difficulties associated with the ridership model, traffic counts, etc. have delayed the Phase 2 draft environmental study by six months. The results of the study will now be released in the summer of 2008. This will likely move the expected completion date of Phase 2 to 2014 from 2013.

On November 29, 2007, the Metro board ruled in favor of building the permanent Venice/Robertson Boulevards Station instead of the interim Washington/National Boulevards Station [72][73]. Funds are still to be identified.

On December 20, 2007, all Phase 1 railroad crossings were approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) except for the Farmdale Ave at-grade street and pedestrian crossing near the Dorsey High School and the Harvard Blvd below-grade pedestrian crossing for the Foshay Middle School [74]. The remaining two crossings will be decided in January 2008 or later.

With the CPUC approval of the Phase 1 railroad crossings, the construction in Mid-City has finally started with utility and tree relocation.

The current unofficial goal set by Expo is to open the line to service on February 10, 2010. The official goal is June 2010 or earlier.

See the construction-authority Web site for the most recent news [75].

Opposition voices focus on issues of grade separation

Opposition voices about safety and traffic congestion for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 have focused on grade-separation issues. Public outcry over the at-grade crossing near Dorsey High School has delayed some decisions on Phase 1 (LA Times article from October 21). The large volume of foot traffic after school might make this crossing dangerous even though it does not meet the Metro guidelines for grade separation. A public hearing on November 5 was heavily opposed to the current plan (video of Fox 11 report).

Opposition groups such as Expo Communities United (headed by Mark Jolles and Clint Simmons of Mid-City) [76] and Neighbors for Smart Rail (headed by Terri Tippit of the Westside Neighborhood Council [77], Michael Eveloff of Tract 7260 [78], Colleen Mason Heller and Kevin Hughes of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners' Association [79], and Loren Kosmont of the Westwood Gardens Civic Association [80]) [81] have joined forces in protesting grade-separation and other issues.

Professor Najmedin Meshkati of USC [82], a strong critic of the Expo Line [83], has recently been pointed out to live in the Cheviot Hills area, within half a mile of the Exposition railroad right-of-way [84], which raised question marks about the motivation and credibility of his research.

External links

• Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority—official Web site of the Expo Line
• Friends 4 Expo Transit—grassroots group in support of the Expo Line and careful analysis of both the right-of-way and Venice/Sepulveda alternatives
• Light-Rail for Cheviot—Cheviot Hills homeowners in support of the right-of-way alignment
• Neighbors for Smart Rail—Rancho Park area residents in support of the Venice/Sepulveda Boulevards alignment and careful analysis of all possible alternatives