Good morning.
It is 10.02. We are about
to start the meeting.
Good morning.
It is 1101 and we are calling
the Planning and
Programming Committee
to order.
Madam Clerk, will you please
call the roll
to establish a quorum?
Vice Chair Solis is absent
today.
Director Butts.
Director Horda.
Here.
Director Najarian.
Here.
Thank you.
Here.
Thank you.
Times two.
Caltrans Representative
Benavides.
And Chair Tupou Walker.
I'm here.
A quorum is present.
Would you continue with
reading the public comment
instructions, Madam Deputy
Clerk?
To give public comment,
each speaker needs to follow
a three-step process.
First, at any time
during the meeting, the
speaker can dial
1-888-978-8818 and enter the
English or Spanish access
codes.
The English access code is
564-7249.
The Spanish access code is
729.
2892 pound.
This number and the access
codes are also listed
on the agenda for this
meeting which can be found
at http://boardagendas.metro.net.
For speakers watching the
video feed, there's a 30
second lag
behind the actual meeting.
If any speakers are watching
on video and want
to give public comment,
they should dial in early to
make sure they don't miss the
chance.
Second, once a speaker dials
into the public comment line,
they have to indicate which
item they want
to speak on.
When the item comes up,
the speaker should press
pound 2 to raise their hand
to speak.
Third one is the speaker's
turn.
The moderator will call
out the last four digits
of the phone number.
Speakers will have one minute
to make their comment or two
minutes including
translation.
Consistent with the board
rules posted on the agenda,
individuals requesting
to speak will be allowed
to speak for a total
of three minutes per meeting
on agenda items in one-minute
increments per item plus one
minute
for general public comment.
General public comment is
to be used only
for items not
on the agenda.
Please be advised that
sign-up for public comment
will close immediately once
the public comment portion
of that item begins.
If you wish to speak,
make sure
to register beforehand.
Written public comments
received by 5 p.m.
the day before the meeting
are compiled and sent
to the board.
Please make sure
to include the item number
with your comment and your
position of for, against,
general comment, or item
needs more consideration.
You may email your comment
to BoardClerk of http://Metro.net or
mail it to Board
Administration, 1 Gateway
Plaza, Mail Stop 99-3-1, Los
Angeles, CA 90012.
In accordance with LACMTA's
Administrative Ordinance
Section 2-01-130,
limitations
of public comment, and
at the discretion of the
Chair of the Board
Committee, limitations may be
placed on the total number
of speakers, the amount
of time for each speaker,
and the amount of time
for all speakers
on any particular matter.
If this limitation were
to occur, additional
directions will be shared
for those that were not able
to speak so they are able
to submit their comments.
Chair, back to you.
Thank you.
And would you share anything
that we need to
about this?
the access.
Sure.
Right now, we are not able
to live stream this meeting.
It will be recorded, and the
recording will be posted
later.
Members of the public are
able to call in and listen
to the meeting, but again,
will not be able
to watch it live.
They are also able to do
public comment via telephone.
There is a 30-second delay,
as Dee has mentioned
previously.
They are also able
to do public comment
in person.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to you and to the
excellent team working, I
guess, 24-7.
I hope you went home and got
some rest so that today we
could have our meeting.
We have two items listed
on the consent agenda.
Did anyone wish to pull?
Madam Chair, I need
to recuse from Item 6, so I
just would
like clear direction
on whether I should step out
or that can be acknowledged.
I'll leave it to advice
of the clerk.
If it's done
on the consent calendar,
you're fine to stay in.
I do have you noted as
conflicted.
So when you do the vote,
it's totally fine.
If we do pull it, either way,
I do have your conflict
noted.
Okay.
I just want to be clear.
Yep.
Got you.
Thank you.
Colleagues, I'd like
to pull items five and six
from the consent agenda.
I've heard
from several members
of the public
with questions,
and I hope that
with presentation
by our staff, we'll be able
to.
have answers to those
questions so i would like
to move items five and six
from the consent agenda to
the non-consent agenda madam
clerk
since we've moved those items
from the non-consent agenda
and the public would then
have an opportunity
to concern
on each item as it is heard
Yes, that's correct.
Moving forward
with the non-consent agenda,
item five, federal transit,
I'm sorry, item five, 2027
Federal Transportation
Improvement Program adoption.
Mr.
Sosa?
Thank you, Chair, committee
members, Ray Sosa, Chief
Planning Officer.
Joining here with me is
Senior Director Nancy
Marquin.
Executive Officer Mark
Yamarone, who will lead us
in the presentation.
Thank you.
Good morning, Madam Chair,
members of the committee.
Our recommendation today is
to adopt the resolution
for the 2027 Los Angeles
County Transportation
Improvement Program, as shown
in Attachment A.
A little bit
of background.
SCAG, which is the Southern
California Association of
Governments, is the
Metropolitan Planning
Organization.
The six-county region that
includes Los Angeles County
is required,
under federal and state law,
to develop a federal
transportation improvement
program every two years.
The 2027 FTIP is a required
six-year programming document
that advances the planning
and construction
of projects funded
with federal, state,
and local funds.
The 2027 FTIP covers the
period
from federal fiscal year 27
to federal fiscal year 32.
It includes nearly 995
projects in Los Angeles
County, totaling nearly $33
billion,
and that includes projects
for about 100 agencies
throughout the state of Los
Angeles County.
Adopting the resolution
for the 2027 FDIP would allow
agencies in Los Angeles
County to program and receive
funding allocations
for the on-time delivery of
projects.
I'll just add that the
resolution simply certifies
that the funding capacity
within Los Angeles County is
available
for the projects.
It doesn't individually
approve every project.
Upon board approval
of the recommendation, staff
will submit the resolution
to staff by the March 31st
deadline.
And that concludes my
presentation.
I'm happy to answer any
questions.
Thank you for that
presentation.
It's such a significant
effort.
especially since there are
nearly, I believe, 1,000
projects and about $33
billion in investments
across the entire county.
And we appreciate the
coordination that it brings
in order to make this effort
a success.
As chair, I want
to focus my comments, though,
on equity, because ultimately
this program is not just
about delivering projects.
It's about who benefits from
those investments and whether
we are meaningfully
addressing disparities.
across all communities.
The report notes that the
FTIP incorporates multiple
layers
of accountability and aligns
with Metro's equity platform,
and
about that we are pleased, as
well as the regional efforts
like SCAG's racial equity
action plan.
Those are important
frameworks.
But I do think the
presentation report leaves
some key questions
unanswered, and I hope that
we can...
I have some answers for that
in a few moments.
For example, we hear that
equity considerations are
being incorporated,
but it is less clear to me
how funding is ultimately
distributed across
disadvantaged communities or
how we are measuring whether
these investments are
improving access
to opportunity,
reducing environmental
burdens,
or closing longstanding gaps
in mobility.
So I'd like to ask, can you
clarify how equity is being
operationalized in this
program specifically?
How investments are
prioritized for disadvantaged
communities?
What matrix are being used
to track outcomes?
And how the board will be
able to monitor whether these
equity goals are actually
being achieved
over time?
I will start with some
additional information.
The projects included in the
FTIP...
are all selected by the
nominating agency,
in our case LA Metro, and
they do go through a
competitive process,
whether our historic call for
projects or the most recent
CMAC SDBG call
for projects, which each have
equity components
in them as far as the...
Project evaluation.
They're also, all the
projects are consistent
with both, for Metro, our
long-range transportation
plan,
which has equity as one
of its pillars.
And each agency also uses
their own evaluation.
And as you mentioned,
as it's noted
in the report, SCAG also
applies an equity measure
to it as well.
How it's measured is all
these projects are rolled up
into...
Transportation Plan,
but the SCAG Regional
Transportation Plan, which is
a four-year document that
does measure and model how
all those projects together
do perform.
I don't know, Nancy, if you
have any other No, I think
you answered that.
Thank you.
I think that level
of clarity is important,
not just
for accountability, but
to ensure that we move
forward with adopting this
program and securing these
funds.
We're doing so in a way that
truly advances equity
across the region.
Thank you.
Do any of the board members
have questions?
I don't see any names.
Can we hear from members
of the public who may have
questions or wish to speak
on this item?
This is public comment
for item five.
Please press
down two if you'd like
to make a comment on item
five.
I have one caller on the
line.
Please unmute.
Caller ending in 3139, please
state your name.
You have one minute
to state your comment.
Good morning, Alton Metro.
My name is Ross.
I just wanted to bring to the
board's attention that it was
very hard
to hear the speaker talk.
during the presentation.
I don't know if he was far
away or if there's a tech
issue, but just wanted to let
you know it was really hard
to hear the speaker speak.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
We'll be going forward.
That was the last public
comment.
Okay.
This is an action item.
I could have a motion.
Madam Clerk, please call the
roll.
Director Butts, Director
Najarian.
Aye.
Director Horvath.
Aye.
And Chair DuPont-Walker.
Yes.
The motion carries.
Thank you.
We'll move to Item 6 of
Federal Transit
Administration Section
5310, Grant Program
Awards.
Mr.
Sosa, do we have a
presentation,
or are you going
to handle it?
We do, Chair.
Thank you very much.
Again, Ray Sosa, Chief
Planning Officer.
And joining me to make the
presentation is...
Senior Manager Ruben
Cervantes and Deputy
Executive Officer Isidro
Panuco.
Good morning.
Taking into consideration the
last caller, thank you.
The recommendation
before you is
to approve the Federal
Transit Administration
Section 5310 funding awards.
totaling $10,752,739 as shown
in attachments to AD&C,
made available through
Metro's Section 5310
Enhanced Mobility of Seniors
and Individuals with
Disabilities Grant
Program.
Also authorizing the CEO or
the designee to negotiate and
execute pass-through funding
agreements with sub-recipient
agencies receiving the
approved awards, delegating
to the CEO or the designee
authority to administratively
approve minor changes
to the scope of approved
Section 5310 awards.
Certifying that the 5310
funds are fairly and
equitably allocated to
eligible subrecipients and
were feasible,
that projects are coordinated
with transportation services
assisted by other federal
departments and agencies,
and certifying that the
Section 5310 projects
selected
for funding are included
in the Board-adopted
2025-2028 Coordinated Plan
in compliance with federal
requirements.
A little background on the
5310 grant program.
So Metro is the LA County
designated recipient and
administrator for the FTA
Section 5310 grant program in
the three large urbanized
areas in LA County, which
includes the Los Angeles,
Long Beach, Anaheim urbanized
area, Lancaster, Palmdale,
and Santa Clarita urbanized
areas.
Section 5310 funds support
capital and operating
projects serving seniors and
individuals
with disabilities.
So following the board
adoption of the 2025
through 2028 coordinated
plan.
and authorization to release
the 5310 solicitation, Metro
conducted a competitive
solicitation for the 2025
funding cycle.
The Board approval is
required to proceed
with the funding awards,
identifying and attachments
A, B, and C.
And all recommended projects
align with the Board-adopted
coordinated plan to improve
and expand mobility options
for seniors and persons
with disabilities throughout
L.A.
County.
There was approximately
$10.75 million in Section
5310 funds that were
available
through this solicitation.
Funds were allocated
by urbanized area.
So for the Los Angeles, Long
Beach, Anaheim urbanized
area,
there was approximately
$10.22 million.
Lancaster, Palmdale,
$311,000.
And Santa Clarita,
$222,000.
The board approved 2025
solicitation was released
on September 26th
of last year
with applications due
November 14th. And there was
a max awarded limit of
$800,000 per applicant.
We did do extensive outreach
efforts to promote this
solicitation.
So we sent notifications out
to over 5,700 public
nonprofit stakeholders
throughout L.A.
County.
We distributed the
solicitation
through the networks of 11
community-based
organizations.
and all LA County Council
governments.
An applicant webinar was held
during the solicitation
process.
We had a total of 56
participants that represent
all five LA County
Supervisory Districts.
We also did presentations
to all five Metro Advisory
Subcommittees.
We received 42 applications.
They were all evaluated and
they requested approximately
$19.6 million.
Projects were scored
by evaluation panel.
And you have
to receive a minimum of 70
points out of 100
to be eligible
for funding.
23 projects, only $10.75
million, are recommended
following this evaluation and
Metro's tax appeals process.
The recommended awards
support both public and
nonprofit providers,
including 10 governmental and
13 nonprofit projects.
48 paratransit vehicles will
be replaced or added
through capital projects to
improve service.
capacity and reliability.
Nine operating projects will
support volunteer driver
on-demand and door-to-door
transportation services.
Four mobility management
travel training projects will
enhance trip planning, rider
education,
and independent mobility
for seniors, individuals with
disabilities throughout the
county.
And recommended awards
provide benefits throughout
LA County and ensure
geographic equity across all
five county supervisor
districts.
The next steps is to approve
the staff recommendations
for the 5310 awards.
We will then, upon approval,
we will then submit a 5310
grant application to the FTA
on behalf of all
of the approved projects.
Following the FTA approval,
we will then execute
pass-through funding
agreements, and we will
oversee the project
implementation to ensure
project consistency and
federal compliance.
This concludes my
presentation.
I'm happy to answer any
questions.
Thank you.
Thank you
for that presentation and
for allowing us
to bring this item forward.
We appreciate the work that
has been done in
administering this program
and advancing mobility
options
for seniors and individuals
with challenges across Los
Angeles County.
For me, elders and those
with mobility, audio, and
sight challenges are a major
demographic
in my work life.
In fact,
the fastest growing segment
of the population is 80 and
above.
So we do have a growing
demographic to service.
So this is an important
investment, over 10.7 million
supporting 23 projects.
And it's encouraging
to see that the focus is
on expanding access
to vehicles, ongoing demand
services, and mobility
programs.
I also want to acknowledge
the intentional efforts
around outreach,
and inclusion in the
equity-focused communities as
we evaluate.
That is a strong foundation
and so consistent with what
this board believes is
important,
community outreach.
That said,
from an equity perspective,
I do think the presentation
of the board should leave a
few more important questions
unanswered,
so if I could ask them now.
We hear that projects were
prioritized based on need,
and that equity
considerations were
incorporated in the scoring
and the outreach.
But it was less clear to me
how those input translated
to outcome, specifically
whether the final funding
distribution is actually
reducing disparities for the
communities we're trying
to reach.
For example, while the report
notes geographic coverage
across all five supervisorial
districts, Geographic
distribution.
A loan doesn't necessarily
mean equitable distribution.
How do we capture impact
on the city of Los Angeles in
ways that similar demographic
analysis have been done?
Yeah, so the coordinated plan
and equity focus community
section was actually worth
25 points out
of the application.
So that's something that we
prioritize
with this solicitation.
The coordinated plan was a
planning study that we did
last year.
We went to the board, I
believe, in July
for approval, adoption
of the coordinated plan.
The coordinated plan did an
in-depth analysis to
determine what are the
current services we offer
in LA County
for seniors and persons
with disabilities.
That allowed us,
we did a lot of outreach
for that as well in a lot
of ESC communities
to determine where the gaps
in services are.
So that determined,
we call it high-need areas,
and then we also have
Metro's internal
equity-focused communities.
So that was built into the
scoring criteria where
projects that were
identifying new, enhanced,
and expanded projects into a
high-priority area and or EFC
area receive more points
versus a project that is not
in this area.
This allowed us to ensure
that we're focusing funding
on some of those highest-need
areas that were identified.
Throughout the...
the project implementation,
we collect quarterly progress
reports.
In these reports, we collect
data, one-way passenger
trips, and also how many
seniors, persons with
disabilities were afforded
mobility as a result
of this project.
That data is collected on a
quarterly basis and it's also
reported to the FTA.
And once a year, normally
toward the end of the year,
what we do is we take all
that data,
we do a comparison based
on what they propose
in their application.
And if we do identify any
high variance,
we work together
with the subrecipients to
identify corrective action.
Many
of those corrective action
has to do with the marketing
and marketing
to seniors and persons
with disabilities
to identify,
to ensure that they're aware
of all these various services
that are available
in this community.
So it sounds
like we have a lot
of data.
Would it be possible if I had
the technology to overlay the
city's boundaries and get a
view?
Director Walker, we actually
have a zip code included as
part of the process,
so we did include that
in this evaluation process.
Oh, good.
Thank you.
If I could add to that,
about two solicitations ago,
I actually worked
with the equity team, and we
identified that zip code
level data may be helpful
for future updates
to the ESV map as well.
So we incorporated that zip
code level data that we are
collecting.
And upon approval
of this award, I plan
to share that data
with them.
You reaffirm that you still
are the best department
in the whole of Metro.
Just a few.
The CEO is telling me calm
down.
Could you briefly explain how
these funds are being
directed to the highest needs
communities and how the board
is able to track whether
investments are actually
improving the mobility
outcomes?
Yeah, so part of our analysis
that we do every year, I
mentioned, was focused on the
performance measure data.
This is also data.
We collect a lot of
information regarding the
actual use of this data
from the agency.
So in our application,
we also collect all that.
We have a performance measure
section because what we want
to do is we want to ensure
that they have the staff and
they have the process
in place to capture the data
that we need.
to identify where the impact
is are made
for these funding sources.
So that data is collected,
and we plan.
We use a lot of that data
every time we do an update
to the coordinated plan,
which we have
to do every four years.
All that data is also taken
into consideration.
That helps us identify where
funding,
where there's still a lack
of funding based on the
awards that we have given,
and that determines the next.
highest priority need to
ensure that we continue
filling in the gaps
in services we keep investing
into those high need areas.
Okay.
Thank you.
That clarifies a lot, and I
think hopefully the people
who asked me those questions
are also listening,
and I'm supportive of moving
this program forward because
these are very critical
services.
I think, though,
it's also important
to continue to track,
as you have already been
doing, such an excellent
manner so that we can be
confident the investments are
reaching those who need it
the most and who we intended
to benefit.
I'd like to ask that we have
you report back to the board
with an initial update
within 12 months, followed by
an annual update so that we
can track both performance
and outcomes.
Thank you both.
Any other colleagues have
questions?
Okay, I see no hand up.
Do we have any requests
to speak from the public?
There's public comment
for item six.
Please press down, too,
if you'd like
to make a comment.
We have two callers
on the line.
Please unmute the first
caller.
Next caller, your line is
unmuted.
Please state your name.
You have one minute to state
your comment.
I would like
to thank the chair
for her comment.
Many times in discussions
of progress, members
of our community
with mobility issues
of any kind fail
to be acknowledged and fail
to be included
in the planning
of that progress.
Thank you.
Next speaker.
Moving on to the next caller.
Caller ending in 0547.
Please state your name.
You have one minute
to state your comment.
Hi, I'm Jack Galanti.
I'm a disabled resident of
L.A.
County, and I just wanted to
uplift what the chair
mentioned earlier.
I really appreciate you guys
bringing this
to the attention of the
Metro Board, as oftentimes
this...
Accessibility and
accessibility issues are
often overlooked
in the planning stage, so I
really appreciate you guys
making this a priority.
Thank you.
That was the last public
comment.
This closes the public
comment period, and let me
assure the public that this
board is very focused on all
of our ridership and
especially those
with mobility challenges.
Were you ready to speak?
Okay.
This is an action item.
I will receive a motion and a
second.
I'm sure.
I'll second the item.
Madam Clerk, will you please
call the roll?
Director Butts.
Let's record him as a yes.
Director Butts.
Director Nazarian.
Yes.
Director Horvath is absent.
And Chair DuPont-Walker.
Resounding yes.
The motion carries.
Thank you very much.
We're now at Item 7, K-Line
Northern Extension, Locally
Preferred Alternative.
I'd like for the record
to reflect that due
to perceived conflict and
out of my own abundance
of caution,
I'm recusing myself
from commenting
on this item.
As the meeting is conducted
pursuant to Robert's Rules
of Orders,
In my capacity as chair
of the Program and Planning
Committee, I have the
authority to designate an
acting chair when the vice
chair is unavailable.
Accordingly, I have asked and
he's accepted Director
Legerian
to serve as acting chair
for Item 7.
Director Legerian.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Madam
Chair.
Okay, item seven, Mr.
Sosa.
Thank you, Chair.
Ray Sosa again, Chief
Planning Officer here with
Executive Officer Anthony
Crump from Community
Relations and Deputy
Executive Officer Georgia
Sheridan, who will lead us
in the presentation.
Good morning.
On behalf of the K-Line
Extension team, I'm going to
present our staff
recommendation today.
for the selection of the
locally preferred
alternative,
also called the LPA.
This is a critical milestone
for the project being led
under the early project
delivery framework.
So I'm going to walk
through this recommendation.
The recommendation is
for the board
to consider approving the
San Vicente-Fairfax
alignment,
which was evaluated in the
2024 draft environmental
impact report.
also called the draft EIR,
as the LPA for the project
contingent upon the formation
of an enhanced infrastructure
financing district,
also called an EIFD, by the
City of West Hollywood
in coordination with Los
Angeles County to provide
additional local sources
of funding, at least 25% of
the capital cost estimate per
the early project delivery.
with An initial operating
segment called an IOS
from the Expo Crenshaw
Station
at the E-K line terminus to
Wilshire-Fairfax
at the D line, with an
adjusted tunnel alignment
in Mid-City to continue
to maximize the use
of public right-of-way to
reduce subsurface easements.
This is described as the
Crenshaw right-of-way or
option two in the Mid-City
Additional Alignment
Analysis Report and a
commitment to work
with the owner of the
Midtown Crossing Shopping
Center
to preserve the opportunity
to relocate the supermarket
at an alternate location
on acquired property adjacent
to the construction site
prior to the start
of construction.
And lastly,
a terminus station at the
Hollywood Bowl.
The K-Line Extension Project
extends the existing K-Line,
which you can see in pink,
to close a gap in our
regional rail network.
extending the K line
from the E line
to the D line at Wilshire
Boulevard and the B line in
Hollywood.
In doing so, it closes a gap
and connects four of our
major metro rail lines and
six of our busiest bus lines
in the county,
serving major activity
centers, job centers,
and regional destinations.
This is one of our Measure M
projects.
It has $2.24 billion in 2015
dollars.
with a groundbreaking set as
2041 to begin construction
with an estimated opening
of 2047 to 2049.
Metro has prepared the draft
DIR to inform the selection
of an LPA under the early
project delivery strategy.
So we started public scoping
in spring of 2021.
We published a draft DIR in
2024 for public comment.
And based
on comments that we received
on the draft EIR, we've
conducted additional
engagement and additional
studies that were published
last summer in 2025.
And now we have taken the
input and the studies
to inform our recommendation
for the LPA.
Draft EIR evaluates three
fully underground light rail
alignments.
Starting from west to east,
the San Vicente-Fairfax
alignment in green is the
longest alignment, almost 10
miles with nine stations.
Fairfax in yellow in the
middle has seven stations,
almost eight miles, and La
Brea about six miles
with six stations.
All of these options allow
for an extension to the
Hollywood Bowl, which was
studied as an optional
terminus.
And all alignments require
the expansion of Division
16, which is the maintenance
yard.
that serves the existing K
line near LAX.
We also studied a high
frequency bus alternative and
a no project alternative.
These do not meet the project
need for a high capacity fast
light rail connection.
The project would be
constructed using tunnel
boring machines or TBMs and
would be implemented in
sections or phases as we've
done with other metro rail
projects.
The first phase, or IOS,
would connect the E line
to the D line.
The second phases for La
Brea and Fairfax would
connect to the B line.
And for the San
Vicente-Fairfax, the second
phase would connect
to the heart of West
Hollywood at San
Vicente-Santa Monica
with a third section or phase
to Hollywood.
The Hollywood Bowl would be
constructed as part
of the final phase.
Based on our...
experience,
each phase would take 8 to
12 years to construct, and
each phase or section
requires its own tunnel
boring launch site.
As part of the environmental
review process, we conducted
extensive studies not only
on environmental impacts, but
as well as project benefits,
things like ridership,
travel time savings,
regional economic benefits,
reduction
of vehicle miles traveled.
The map
on the right shows the
density of jobs
around the stations
under study.
As you can see,
the western alignments
connect
to higher density job center.
Of the alignment study, the
San Vicente-Fairfax alignment
provides the greatest amount
of benefits as it connects
to the highest numbers
of stations,
including major job centers
like Cedars-Sinai, as well as
other regional destinations
like The Grove, Los
Angeles.
Farmers Market, CBS
Studios, the Rainbow
District in West
Hollywood.
The project includes several
segments where tunnels would
travel below homes or private
properties,
which you can see
on the map here
in the dark black outline.
This is in order
to create fast connections
between stations where the
tunnels need to turn off
of primary streets.
During the draft EIR comment
period, we heard concerns
from Mid-City residents
regarding lack of engagement
about the tunnel alignment
in Mid-City and concerns
about tunneling below older
homes and historic
neighborhoods,
as well as negative impacts
to property values and
businesses.
As part of additional
outreach,
we conducted a survey
of the age of homes in
Mid-City neighborhoods,
including Wellington Square
and Lafayette Square.
and found that a majority
of homes are constructed
in the 1920s. However, there
are homes that date back to
1900 to 1910.
This study helped inform case
studies that we looked
at as part
of our tunnel safety report.
As part
of the additional analysis,
we completed three studies.
The first is the Mid-City
Additional Alignment
Analysis, the map which you
can see here in the center,
as well as a study on
property considerations and
tunnel safety.
Based on comments we received
from residents in Mid-City
during the draft EIR comment
period, we developed 12
additional alignment options
in Mid-City.
based on routes that were
suggested
by the committee.
These alignments we studied
to understand if they were
feasible to construct and how
we could travel
below public streets
to find ways
to minimize easements.
Of these 12 options, we found
that six were feasible
to construct and were able
to connect to stations
at the D-line.
All six required use of the
Midtown Shopping Center as
both a station and a
construction staging area.
And all six require that
there are some areas where we
would travel
below private properties.
The diagram on the right
shows the relative depth
of tunnels
in these neighborhoods,
which ranges from 80 to 120
feet below ground.
The studies as well as.
fact sheets and FAQs are
available on our website to
help distill the findings.
As part of this analysis,
we shared these 12 options
with the community at
community meetings as well as
briefings,
which we'll discuss later
in our presentation.
Of these, we then asked
for input.
The three alignments here are
those that received the
highest support as part
of this additional outreach.
An analysis, starting
with the draft DIR alignment
on the left, this had 159
subsurface tunnel easements,
29 in the historic neighbor
of Wellington Square, and 29
in Lafayette Square, which is
an historic preservation
overlay zone, as well as 64
in Miracle Mile and 37
in other neighborhoods.
The Crenshaw right-of-way,
which is shown in the middle
in orange, is the alignment
that we are recommending.
This is able
to reduce overall easements
in the project area from 159
down to 114.
It eliminates easements in
Wellington Square and
minimizes them in Lafayette
Square.
It's also able to create
flexibility at the Midtown
Crossing Station
to address some impacts
to businesses.
The West Boulevard alignment
shown in purple also received
community support.
These are not recommended as
they increase the overall
number of easements and also
had negative impacts
to the station area,
which was of concern
to residents.
Here, as part
of our alignment analysis,
we looked at how the
alignment affects the layout
of the station and the
construction staging area.
So the staff recommendation
is a balance of both.
reducing alignments as well
as maximizing access to the
station and minimizing
long-term impacts by locating
the station and the tunnels
as close to San Vicente as
possible.
This creates the greatest
flexibility to allow us
to coordinate
with the property owner
to look
into relocating the business,
the grocery store,
in advance of construction,
given that we have a lot
of time
to continue our analysis.
Option three, which also
receives community support
and travels below Crenshaw,
pushes the station box
further
into the private property,
which makes it more difficult
to mitigate impacts to
businesses and also pushes
the entrance further away
from the street.
And option four is a more
extreme version of this,
pushing the station box
further away from the
intersection and having a
less optimal layout, both for
the station and...
future opportunities for
these reasons we are
recommending option two next
i want to talk a little bit
about the tunnel safety
report which was completed as
part of this additional
analysis this is our most
extensive tunnel report to
date includes data collected
by our construction teams for
the d-line k-line and
regional connector as well as
case studies evaluating
tunneling in cities locals
Abroad and peer review
by an independent panel
of experts,
our tunnel advisory panel.
What we found is that using
modern tunnel construction
techniques, which include
extensive pre-construction
surveys, monitoring,
mitigations,
and advanced tunnel boring
machines, which have sensors,
is a very safe and successful
way to construct tunnels.
The tunnels throughout the
project area are 40 to 120
feet below ground and
within mid-city are 80 to
100 feet.
These are some of the deepest
tunnels.
At these depths, there would
not be noise and vibration.
Similarly, we have
successfully tunneled
in similar soil conditions at
similar depths and have not
had issues
with settlement.
We have not had property
damage.
We do not anticipate.
any impacts
to properties above,
and this has been seen
across the globe with
successful tunneling using
the same type
of tunnel boring machines.
In addition, we studied
tunnel easements and found
that they would not affect
the property and structures,
the ability
to remodel or develop, they
would not affect historic
designation or zoning, and
they would not affect
underground oil rights,
which are thousands of feet
below ground.
Lastly, we did a study Thank
you.
of the Westwood area studying
home sales prices
for properties
with easements and those
without and found no
meaningful difference
in property values.
We also looked
at property values for homes
near transit and found a
positive correlation
between homes
within a half mile of
stations and property values.
So these findings are online
and were shared
with the community through
extensive engagement.
And I'll now turn it to
Anthony Crump
to discuss some
of the engagement.
Thank you, Georgia.
Anthony Crump, Executive
Officer for Community
Relations.
As Georgia indicated, we did
an extensive outreach effort
after the close
of the draft Environmental
Impact Report comment period.
This included four coffee
conversations with the city
leaders where we actually
listened to them,
solicited their feedback,
helped to identify the issues
that were of most importance
to them.
We confirmed that we got
those issues correct, and
then we went out.
and did additional research
and analysis to address those
issues as much as possible.
Once we had the opportunity
to do the studies that
Georgia mentioned previously,
we went back to the community
and reported those out
through a series
of community meetings.
We did four community
meetings in August and
October.
We had approximately 234
attendees.
We also included as part of
that a tunnel safety tour
that included Directors
Mitchell and DuPont Walker,
where we actually physically
walked the Westwood
neighborhood.
and looked at homes and a
community that actually had
in-place underground
easements related to the
Purple Line Section 3
construction so that people
could actually experience
what it was like to be in a
neighborhood that had
underground easements and a
tunnel running through the
neighborhood itself.
In addition, we answered
questions and provided
additional information both
on our website as well as
through email to those
communities that had those
concerns and impacts.
Recognizing that this project
is a regional project,
one that connects many, many
communities, we continue
to elevate the project itself
through a series
of pop-up events.
We actually had briefings
with Council Member Heather
Hutt's office.
We met monthly
with board staff
to update them on the
outreach and engagement and
provided updates via the
project website and the
stakeholder database as well
as social media toolkits.
Overall, this project would
provide important benefits,
not just for the communities
that are immediately
along the proposed alignment,
but also
through connectivity
to the larger MetroRail
network.
This would connect
to the expanded Metro D-Line,
as well as connect to the
Metro E-Line,
providing access not only
to Hollywood and Torrance and
the South Bay, but also to
Santa Monica, to the VA
Center, and all the way out
to East Los Angeles
on the east side.
So our community outreach and
engagement has really
encompassed not just the
concerns expressed
by the mid-city community,
but also those that were
expressed up and
down the entire corridor.
So in conclusion,
we're going to recap the
staff recommendation,
which is for a locally
preferred alternative
along the San
Vicente-Fairfax alignment,
which creates the greatest
number of benefits contingent
upon the formation
of an EIFD by the City of
West Hollywood
in coordination with Los
Angeles County to provide
additional local sources
of funding at least 25% of
the capital costs per the
early project delivery.
And you can see the
boundaries of the City of
West Hollywood in pink.
This recommendation includes
an initial operating segment
to Wilshire-Fairfax at the
D-Line as this project is
large enough
to be phased and constructed
in sections.
And based on input and
additional analysis, we are
recommending adjusting the
tunnel alignment in Mid-City
to the Crenshaw right-of-way
to reduce tunnel easements
below historic residential
neighborhoods
with a commitment to work
with the property owner
at the Midtown Shopping
Center to preserve the
neighborhood grocery store
in advance of construction so
that grocery store could
continue to serve the
community throughout the
construction and beyond.
And lastly, the
recommendation suggests a
terminus at the Hollywood
Bowl.
This is a major regional
cultural center.
It's also an optimal
construction site
for the final phase
of construction
for the last segment
in the north.
As you can see
on the diagram here,
we are very early in the
project development process.
We've completed the draft EIR
and additional studies.
The LPA selection is a
necessary step in the
planning process initiated
under early project delivery
for future planning, funding,
and coordination purposes.
The LPA selection is not
project approval.
There would be additional
engineering and environmental
analysis,
and we are still very early
in design.
However, that analysis will
be on hold as...
Progress is made
to address additional funding
under the early project
delivery strategy, and
further planning and
construction would then
remain subject
to board approval
for formal acceleration.
That concludes our
presentation,
and we're now available
for questions and comments.
Thank you.
Well, thank you very much for
your presentation.
I had a slight sidebar
with...
Supervisor Horvath who
indicates we may be losing
some people if we
on the board, on the
committee start discussions.
So it's my intention to let
the public speak first and
on the subject
of the public speaking,
we have close to 120 speakers
who have requested an
opportunity to address the
committee.
I'm going to Set the time
limit at 30 seconds
for each speaker.
That's within my purview, and
the reason we're doing that
is to make sure each and
every one
of you has a chance
to address the committee.
And we do have another
committee meeting also
scheduled at 1 p.m.
So let's jump right
into it, 30 seconds, and we
appreciate your patience
throughout this ordeal.
I do apologize we can't give
you the typical one minute on
other items that we usually
do.
This is public comment
for item 7.
If you're on the phone,
please press down to now.
We'll be closing the signing
up in about 30 seconds.
In the room, I would like
to call Chelsea Byers
for lectern A, John
Erickson, lectern B, Carl
Dumont, lectern A, Lauren
Smith, lectern A, Mia
Morano, lectern B, and Skye
Saulnier, lectern B.
I'll be calling more names
voluntarily.
Please go ahead.
Thank you.
My name is Chelsea Byers.
I'm a council member
for the City of West
Hollywood, and I'm also here
representing the West Side
Cities Council of
Government.
We urge your support for
staff recommendations today
and without delay.
The City of West Hollywood is
prepared to launch the EIFD
as soon as we possibly can,
and we can only do that
with a decision
on the LPA.
We know this is going
to be a game changer
for the entire region, but
it's the billions and
resources that the city is
prepared
to cultivate that we want to
make sure are highlighted
today, and we thank you
for your partnership
on this great project.
Hello, Councilmember John
Erickson and former mayor
for the City of West
Hollywood representing my
great city.
West Hollywood wants
to give Metro and the county
$2.2 billion in our EIFD to
make sure we prioritize this
project in not only
connecting our communities,
but our regions.
We want to work
with everyone
to make this a win, because
when our communities are
connected, we all thrive as
Los Angelinos.
We're here, we want to work
with you all, and we urge a
recommendation today so we
can get moving and get
in a rail and come on down
to Metro Station.
Good morning, my name is
Carl Dumont.
I'm a community member at
Lafayette Square.
I want to say thank you
for having this opportunity
for us
to share our voices.
And I am against going
through Lafayette Square
for multiple reasons,
and there's not enough time
to go through it,
but I am ultimately
against going through
Lafayette Square.
Thank you.
Hold on,
before you start speaking,
we're going
to call somebody.
For Lecture A, David James
Henry, Maryamand Duster,
Kelly, Deepak Krishna.
For Lecture B, Andrew
Solomon, Anita Goswam, David
Eichmann, and Matthew
Valetti.
Hello, Metro Board members.
My name is Mia Morano, and
I'm the Square and
Parabellities, who absolutely
supports having a Metro to
strongly voice my opposition
to any alignment that goes
under...
We are now discussing
alignment options, but our
community was entirely left
out of the conversation
about the placement
of the station once Hancock
blocked this Wilshire and
Crenshaw stop.
A draft ERR was presented
to our community with 28
easement plans.
The ERA was presented
to the I want to point out
that not all easements are
the same.
An easement on a residential
street with little traffic
and historic old homes is not
the same as an easement
on a very traffic street
with newer homes, especially
when the latter is a viable
option.
Additionally, comparing
impact...
Thank you.
We have to go
to the next speaker.
Go ahead.
Hi, my name is Lauren
Smith.
I'm with Lafayette Square.
We do appreciate the
engagement
from our metro partners.
They have been very wonderful
to work with, and we
appreciate the opportunity
to be here.
However, I will stand
with my neighbors
in not supporting any
drilling under Lafayette
Square.
We appreciate your attention,
and thank you for additional
community engagement as we
move forward.
I am Skye Sommier.
I am the vice president of
Lafayette Square
Association.
We're here discussing option
two because the original plan
to meet the Purple Line at
Crenshaw and Wilshire was
stopped by Hancock Park.
Now Metro is looking
for ways to meet needs
of other communities.
We've asked
to not receive transparency
from the MTA on lawsuits
from private homeowners.
No one has asked us what our
needs are.
We need to protect our
historic community,
and we need to be asked what
our transportation needs are,
and not simply always meeting
other communities' needs.
Thank you.
My name is David James
Henry.
I'm a metro user and an
employee at the Writers
Guild of America West.
WGAW headquarters sits at
Fairfax and 3rd, and our
members and tourists would be
well served by the
recommended route as
proposed.
I'm also a former Hollywood
Bowl employee,
and I personally work
with my co-workers
to direct thousands
of patrons to shuttles
to destinations like Culver
City, Santa Monica, Sherman
Oaks, West Hollywood, and
Torrance, a Hollywood Bowl
station.
would well serve to clear the
clog on Highland Avenue's
artery every night
during bowl season.
Thank you.
Hi, Andrew Solomon, City of
West Hollywood.
I'm a dad.
I've got a three-year-old,
and I know that nothing will
affect her world more than
the decision that you make
today and next Thursday.
West Hollywood isn't
like most communities.
We come to the Metro and say
we want rail
in our backyard.
We went so far as to say that
we would create an EIFD
to help pay for it.
Not only did we create it, we
lobbied the state legislature
to change the law to make it
more practical and make it a
reality.
Build the pink line to the
Pink Pony Club.
Thanks.
My name is Nariman Dasher,
and I'll be a future user
once the D-line extends
to the West.
And when it does...
And much later, you have this
K-Line extension.
I strongly support the staff
recommendation so that we can
get access to the rest
of the Metro lines,
which will be very important
in terms of usage by all
of us.
Anita Goswami.
I'm a resident of West
Hollywood for the last 38
years.
I'm a Metro bus and train
rider.
I got here on the number
four.
I love my number four.
This is the most complex
option, the most expensive
option, contingent
on several billion dollars
from the very tiny city of
West Hollywood, which is
mortgaging decades of its
future so developers can
start using SB79.
That's why those property
values went up
over the half mile.
Please consider the less
expensive, less complex
option, because otherwise
Metro's legacy will be
destroyed neighborhoods and a
large debt.
Thank you.
Before you start,
we're going
to call some more names.
Hold on.
For Lecture A, I have Deb
Height, Pete Walgesigan,
Josh Ott, Jeff Ciccarelli,
Ernesto Pantoja, and Edgar
Suarez.
For Lecture B, I have Al
Cromer, Yazad Dester,
Danielle Silvera, Carrie
Seam, and Travis Morgan.
On behalf of the Public
Facilities Infrastructure and
Recreation Commission
for the City of West
Hollywood, we would like
to strongly advocate
for the K-Line extension
to run
through the additional stops
in West Hollywood.
We know this will not only
improve the lives of 35,000
residents of West
Hollywood,
but also serve the greater
Los Angeles area, providing
public transportation
to our parks, restaurants,
music venues, and shops
in our city,
while also providing ease
of access to some
of the best medical centers
in the country.
Please vote for the San
Vicente Fairfax extension,
and thank you
for your time.
I'm sorry,
what's your name?
Callie Rogers.
Thank you.
I have a deeper question.
Matthew Valenti, Lafayette
Square resident.
Metro has a record of damage
and not taking responsibility
for it.
Lafayette Square is
historically too important
to Los Angeles
to take that risk.
Please, choose a route.
avoids it and other historic
areas.
Hi there, I'm Deb Height.
As a resident
of the historic Lafayette
Square, I'm here to express
my strong opposition
to the LPA Option 2
for the K-Line Northern
Extension.
My primary concern is about
Metro's construction record
and reliability risks.
It's a consistent and
verifiable pattern across
Metro's major tunneling
projects in which the
agency...
minimizes foreseeable
impacts, disclaims direct
responsibility,
and implements mitigation
only after harm occurs.
Thank you.
Good morning.
David Eichmann, Chair
of the West Hollywood
Transportation and Mobility
Commission.
We support staff
recommendation.
The numbers speak
for themselves.
100,000 daily trips.
To quote Supervisor
Horvath, nowhere in L.A.
County has a city stood so
unanimously in support of
bringing transit.
and all the benefits that
come with it
inside its borders.
Please make sure it's done
by 2047.
I'll be 87 years old.
Make sure the elevators work.
Hi, my name is Edgar
Suarez.
I'm a General Services
Supervisor and an AFSCME
Union Steward.
On behalf of AFSCME Local
3634, Metro Supervisors, and
its 900 members who have
continued to build
Adelaide's Metro-Growing
Transportation Network, I
would like
to express my strong support
for the staff-recommended
LPA.
and ask for your approval
today.
Hi, I'm Travis Morgan, and I
serve on Culver City's
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Advisory Committee, though
today I'm speaking for
myself.
I rode the K-Line here today,
and so this project as a
Fox Hills resident is
personal to me.
My comment is yes and.
A strong yes to the locally
preferred alternative and a
request to seriously study
cut and cover, particularly
in Phase 2 north of
Wilshire.
Please expand Metro's...
bore tunnel vision and look
beyond deep bores instead of
casually dismissing cut and
cover.
Thank you very much.
Good morning,
chair and members.
My name is Pete Wogelgen.
I'm a 26-year member of UA
Local 250, pipefitters,
welders,
and refrigeration.
I'm here to speak on behalf
of the LAOC Building
Trades.
This project is a game
changer for regional
connectivity and ridership.
But for our members,
it means real work.
The staff recommendation
represents more than 10,000
well-paid union jobs, nearly
10 billion in labor income,
and about 23 billion
in economic output.
The building trade strongly
recommends the committee vote
yes on the staff
recommendation and send this
to a final board vote
for approval.
Thank you.
Hi, my name is Yeza Duster.
I'm a born and raised
Angeleno, and I'm a resident
of the Crenshaw District.
I'm in support
of the K-Line extension.
This extension would
effectively create a link
between Crenshaw to West
Hollywood, not to mention
connecting residents
along this corridor to one of
our most revered cultural
centers, the Hollywood
Bowl.
Thank you.
Good morning, Honorable
Chair.
My name is Ernesto
Pantoja.
Here on behalf of Sergio
Rasc n, Business Manager of
Labor's Local 300,
in support
of the staff recommendation,
this alignment will be able
to pull most
of the best communities on
the local higher alignment.
The other thing is laborers
and operators are the ones
that build the tunnels.
We are the most qualified,
and with Metro's support, we
have opened up apprenticeship
opportunities
in the tunnels,
the best work they can get.
We urge your support
for this.
Thank you.
Hi, my name is Daniel
Silvera.
Thanks so much for having me.
I've lived in L.A.
my entire life.
I've been using public
transit since I was 13 years
old, and I wanted to...
reframe this question a
little bit.
We have to think
about what we want this city
to look like, not
in the next couple years,
but in the next couple
generations.
And I think that this project
is going to connect so many
different communities and
will be just in the long term
what this city will look back
on as
like a good historic moment,
creating this line for all
of the people.
Morning, my name is Josh
Ott.
I'm the president and
legislative rep for TCU
1315.
On behalf of our 1,300
members and their families,
I'm here in strong support of
the staff-recommended LPA and
urge that the committee and
board approve it.
The K-Line Extension is a
transformative project
connecting the South Bay, LAX
area, South LA, Inglewood,
Crenshaw Corridor,
Mid-City, West Hollywood, and
Hollywood.
The San Vicente-Fairfax
alignment would generate
over 10,000 jobs, nearly
2,000 more than the next
highest alternative,
while delivering fast,
reliable transit.
Thank you.
Before you start speaking,
we're going
to call the last batch
of those that have signed up
in the room.
And this is a reminder,
if you're
on the phone and you would
like to speak,
please press pound two.
For Lettern A,
Roshayaglimai, Sarah Shaw.
Eli Lipman, Electron B.
Dennis Zane, Jeremy Winter,
and Jaleesa Hazad.
Hi, Carrie Seim, a resident
of Lafayette Square, here
to speak out strongly
against Option 2.
We are for public transit.
We are not for an alignment
that is a dangerous impact to
our historic and historically
targeted neighborhood.
The destructive and alarming
impact
of the underground transit in
these residential
communities,
including recent studies,
some from Metro itself,
documenting severe
vibrations, noise,
and structural damage,
which provide an undue burden
to our neighborhood.
Many of these homes have
deteriorating crippled walls,
heavy foundation settlement.
And thank you
for listening.
Thank you for the time.
Thank you very much.
Hi, I'm Jeff Ciccarelli.
I'm a resident of East
Hollywood, and I'm here
to speak in favor of the
San Vicente-Fairfax
Extension.
I think it's important
to connect West Hollywood and
the Hollywood Bowl.
It's long overdue.
And I also hope this gets
more people out
of their cars on the way
to LAX.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
I'm Al Cromer, president
of ASPE Local 3634 Metro
Supervisors.
I stand here for the K-Line
Northern Extension
Project.
It will connect riders to
110,000...
jobs within one half mile
of stations, over 40,000 more
jobs than the next highest
Fairfax alternative.
I would like
to thank the board and staff
for putting forward this
recommendation, and I ask
that this committee approve
the recommendation
before you today.
Thank you.
Hi, my name is Zara Shaw.
I am a lifelong LA resident
and a current USC student,
and I am urging the LA
Metro Board
to I'm strongly urging the LA
Metro Board to support the
San Vicente-Fairfax alignment
of the K-Line North
extension.
This is an incredibly
important project when it
comes
to changing how people move
through Los Angeles and
connecting our most important
cultural centers.
And I think if we don't
support this, then we're
basically selling our future
down the line.
So I don't know.
I have to boo.
Board members, my name is
Denny Zane.
I'm here representing Move LA
and the original R&M
coalition that moved the
measures to the ballot
to raise the funds
for this remarkable moment.
This remarkable moment when
we have an opportunity to
complete the planning and
commitments
of the vision embedded
in measures R and M.
We've about
to open the first stations
on the subway
toward the sea.
We've made decisions
about the Sepulveda Transit
Pass, and now we must make
the commitment
to move the system to the
Hollywood Bowl.
Thank you.
Hi, my name is Jaleesa
Hazard.
I'm a 49-year resident of
Lafayette Square.
I can remember when there
were no grocery stores
near us.
There were no places to go
to get your meds.
And right now...
You're talking about taking
away something we waited
almost 25 years to get.
And I'm thinking that's a
step back versus a step
forward.
I hope I am here to say no
to any of the current things
that are going to go under
Lafayette Square.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Jeremy
Winter.
LA Metro has two major
problems,
poor land use and a lack
of crosstown connectivity
between rail routes.
This extension is the perfect
chance
to fix this problem.
The San Vicente alignment has
far more jobs and homes
in its routing than any
of the other options.
And with connections
to the B and D line, the
extension will supercharge
the whole metro system.
It solves two
of the biggest problems
in one stroke.
Also, modern deep-water
drilling techniques are
proven
to be safe and unobstructed.
Please vote in favor
of the K line extension.
Thank you very much.
Hi, I'm Rosha Yagmai,
lifelong Angeleno.
I am against this route.
I'm very pro-metro.
I'm excited to connect
to the Hollywood Bowl,
but I feel like this route is
prioritizing the Midtown
Crossing station
over the local needs, and I
wish there was a little more
time to talk about that.
Okay.
Thank you.
Again.
Thank you.
We are now going
on the phone lines.
We have 22 raised hands so
far and can grow.
Please send me the first
caller.
Moving on to the caller.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
In the 1960s, the Mid-City
community was cut apart
for the building of the
Santa Monica Freeway.
The 1994 Northridge
earthquake epicenter, 14
miles away, caused major
infrastructure malfunction
of the Santa Monica Freeway
at Fairfax.
Midtown Crossing is two miles
away from Fairfax.
Metro must acknowledge...
during the entire process
of this project, the above-
and below-ground trauma this
community has dealt with.
Indies will say that's
history.
Okay, 2026, three weeks ago,
Metro Construction in
Beverly Hills reportedly
caused a water main break.
Thank you.
Caller, caller ending at
1480.
You have 30 seconds to state
your comment.
Hi, I'm Jay, a West
Hollywood resident for over
25 years.
Unlike many supporting this
plan, I'm not a paid law
petition tied
to interest.
I'm one of thousands of
residents who oppose this
extension.
Our biggest concern is real
on-the-ground damage.
The San Vicente and La
Cienega areas sit
on a high aquifer, and we're
already seeing the effects
of dewatering.
With cracked foundations,
damaged homes,
failing doors and windows,
expanding this for a subway
with widespread irreversible
harm across West Hollywood
and likely lawsuits.
And for what, three stations
in a city
under two square miles?
It's excessive.
Moving on to the next caller.
Caller ending in 2-9-0-3.
Let's not clap, please,
if we can.
Yeah, 30 seconds
to say your comment.
Okay.
My name is Ig.
I'm a long-time West
Hollywood resident.
I can assure you that West
Hollywood residents do not
want the K-Line subway stops.
Our city of just 1.9 square
miles doesn't have the
business centers which need
them, and the $4 billion cost
to our taxpayers is
disproportionate.
These stops would be a gift
for developers who,
under SB79,
can build luxury apartments
near these stops, destroying
affordable housing.
A better option is for West
Hollywood
to extend the route
of its shuttle two blocks,
connecting the city
to the subway station on
Walsh-Gerald-La Cienega.
Saving billions
of dollars and decades
of construction.
Thank you.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 0229.
State your name and your
comment.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, my name is Nick Amber.
I live in the Fairfax
District.
I'd like to urge the
committee to recommend the
hybrid alignment be approved
without any further delay.
If the mayor attempts
to delay further,
then I urge an amendment
to return to the D.A.R.
tunnel for phase one
of the full board meeting.
$165 million and 28 seconds
of travel time to appease
Lafayette Square's
scientifically unfounded
anxieties is shameful, and
even further delay is
unacceptable.
They've gotten 18 months
of additional engagement to
demonstrate that tunneling
will have zero impact,
and that's enough.
Please respect truth,
reality,
and respect your staff.
Thank you.
Moving on to the next caller.
Caller ending in 9152.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hello, my name is Kathy
Ramirez, organizer with Move
LA.
We fully support the K-Line
Northern Extension, LPA.
I strongly urge you
to send this recommendation
to the board for approval.
Once built, this would be the
busiest light rail line
in the country.
I'd like to specifically
highlight the high ridership
by San Vicente and connect us
in the South Bay
of the region to key
destinations and medical
centers that are only covered
by my father's insurance,
who is now unable
to drive.
Thank you so much.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 4535.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
My name is Brian.
I'm located in Studio City,
Universal Stop.
Love taking the Metro.
I weekly visit Santa Monica
and Manhattan Beach and plan
to be at the Redondo Stop
tonight.
Please keep in mind long term
the grid, the mesh that L.A.
public transit could be.
in favor of visiting West
Hollywood,
but please leave stations
open for stubs for La Brea
on a 100-year plan.
This stuff lasts a long time.
Thank you.
Moving on to the next caller,
caller ending in 0547.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
All right, moving on
to the next caller,
caller ending at 1924.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, my name is Marissa
Garcia with Move LA,
and I strongly support the
San Vicente Fairfax LPA.
As an asthmatic, I know that
clean, breathable air starts
with replacing gridlock
with reliable,
high-capacity transit.
This route is also a lifeline
for accessibility,
providing a direct connection
to Cedar-Sinai for others
with chronic conditions.
many of whom depend
on transit to access
essential health care.
Thank you.
Moving on to the next caller.
Caller ending in 0735.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Yes.
My name is Ann Rubin.
I live in Carthage Circle,
Mid-Wilshire.
We've been living
with negative impacts
of D-line construction
for a long time,
and I look forward
to the opening
of the subway.
Most of us can't take 20
years
of more train planning, but I
know that preferred alignment
is moving forward.
I asked Metro and our City
of LA to uncouple SB 79
for the time being
until we actually get closer
to the light rail functioning
around Fairfax and 3rd and
Beverly and La Cienega.
With that the effect of July
1 we'll see up zoning and
land speculation
in neighborhoods
without the actual use
of the plane.
More empty chain link lots.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending at 9326.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Good afternoon my name is
Jeff Mullen.
I'm a resident of the city
of West Hollywood and creator
of the Rainbow Village.
I'm calling
to express my support
for the San Vicente Fairfax
alignment.
That alignment will bring
transformational change
in the city of West
Hollywood and the western
region.
And it's the greatest
opportunity that Metro has
for investing
in the region.
So I hope that the board will
accept other planning and
programming committee will
approve the San Vicente
FedEx alignment.
Thank you.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending 4886.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hello there.
My name is Oliver Mather.
I am in full support of San
Vicente Fairfax alignment.
I believe that connecting the
most important in some
of the most important hubs
in LA along with the
Hollywood Bulls is a gracious
and necessary goal.
We need to make sure that
transit access is available
for all those and
to connect those
to our other lines.
In conclusion,
support the draft.
Thank you very much.
Bye.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 3746.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to say your comment.
Good morning, LA Metro.
Thank you for your time.
My name is Erin Sorenson, and
I am a resident of
Lafayette Square, and I
oppose LPA option 2.
I am a Metro user and
supportive
of the K-Line extension,
but I implore you to pursue
an alternative route that
avoids unnecessary impacts to
historic preservation overlay
zone neighborhoods.
and preserves critical local
resources with the only
grocery store and pharmacy
in this area.
Thank you.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending with 5681.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, I'm Caitlin Dietz, and I
live near USC
with my partner,
a USC student
without a car, and we're
considering LA as a long-term
home, but my main concern is
LA's lack of public
transportation that
discourages residents
from enjoying parts
of the city for fear of
frustrating traffic and
expensive parking, and that's
if they have a car.
I vehemently support this
alignment,
crucially including the
Hollywood Bowl extension.
We'd love
to explore these important
L.A.
landmarks and support the
L.A.
economy more than we
currently can when so much of
our disposable income is
eaten up by high gas and
parking costs.
Please vote yes
on this alignment with the
Hollywood Bowl extension.
Thank you.
Moving on to the next caller.
Caller ending in 9813.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hello, this is Daryl Clark,
Sierra Club, Angeles
Chapter.
Transportation share, I
commend the LPA staff
recommendation to serve major
destinations and dense
population in this important
and difficult to access part
of the city.
I also hope you can find some
cost reductions as planning
continues.
Thank you.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 5719.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Good morning, my name is
Connor Webb.
I strongly support the San
Vicente Fairfax alignment and
Hollywood Bowl terminus.
However, I urge the committee
to reject the
Crenshaw-Rideaway alignment
and select the DER alignment
instead.
The Crenshaw-Rideaway weighs
319 rider hours daily, adds
215 million
in capital costs, and barely
reduces subservice easements
in Lafayette Square.
As you've heard
in comments, it doesn't even
appease the the opposers that
it's meant to.
So please put riders first.
Please select the DER
alignment and let's get this
project done.
Thank you.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending at 9800.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hello.
My name is Renita Smith, and
I'm a resident of
Wellington Square.
Let me start by saying
clearly I love public transit
and I love the Hollywood
Bowl,
but I'm vigorously opposed to
this K-Line extension.
I urge you
to give equal weight to
another cultural treasure
other than the Hollywood
Bowl, the Lafayette Square
neighborhood.
Many of us are not opposed
to public transportation,
but we are opposed
to tunneling
under this neighborhood, and
this option asks historically
disenfranchised communities
to once again bear the
burden, threaten property
values, disrupt quality
of life, and continue the
pattern where our voices are
heard, but not heard.
We'll go on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 0283, please
state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
My name is Joanne Johnson.
I'm a resident of
Lafayette.
Square and I will also
reiterate that I do support
public transportation but
there's a you know there
there is no reason rationally
why the route cannot be
modified to avoid tunneling
under the historic
neighborhoods.
They are historic in LA for a
reason and right if you just
make a slight deviation and
review the studies and the
routes,
they can't it can be done
without tunneling
under the neighborhood.
And additionally the launch
of Moving on
to the next caller,
caller ending at 8713.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, my name is Max Payne, and
I'm speaking in favor
of the San Vicente Fairfax
alignment.
I think it will be very
important to connect LAX
with several cultural hubs,
such as SoFi Stadium and
Hollywood Bowl.
And there's also a lot
of nightlife around this
route.
I think it will be important
to help get drunk drivers
off the road and also
to make our air cleaner.
So I'm fully in support
of this alignment.
Thank you for listening.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 0412.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to say your comment.
My name is Susan Rudick.
I am a Lafayette Square
resident.
I am against option two.
I am pro-metro, like a lot
of you, but I am
against this option.
Do not drill under our
historic neighborhood.
You can alternatively go up
Crenshaw or La Brea and turn
on Olympic or Pico.
Thank you.
If you're on the phone and
you have already spoken,
please do not raise your hand
again.
We are trying to clear the
queue and ensure that
everyone that wants
to speak has the opportunity
to speak.
Thank you.
All right, moving
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 4823.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, I'm Robbie Reed, resident
of Lafayette Square,
in support
of public transportation,
but not in support
of any tunneling under our
historically preserved
neighborhood and easements
that will affect our homes
and disrupt the quality
of life.
in this area, but very much
support public
transportation.
Thank you.
Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 7299.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hello, I am Fran and I'm a
long time resident
of the historic Victoria
Park neighborhood in the city
and I respectfully urge the
decision makers
to reconsider the plans
to construct the metro line
under The O'Neill historic
neighborhoods such as
Victoria Park or Lafayette, I
oppose the proposed
construction under the
historic neighborhoods due
to the well-documented risks
of vibration and structural
damage to our homes, which
are not speculative concerns
but well-established impacts
that threaten the integrity
of these structures.
All right, moving
to the next caller.
Caller ending at 4-6-0-1,
please say your name.
You have 30 seconds
to say your comment.
My name is Ryan Bird.
I'm a resident of Lafayette
Square.
I am against any option that
would tunnel
under this neighborhood
for adversely affected.
Thank you.
Moving to the next caller.
Caller ending at 1415.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, this is Michael
Schneider with Streets for
All.
I want to reiterate Streets
for All's strong support
for the Center Center
Fairfax alignment.
I also want
to say I hear the fear
in the homeowners' voices
in Lafayette Square and
Wellington Square.
Metro spent 18 months and $2
million to study to make sure
there would be no impact.
Let's listen to that study
and get this bill.
Thank you.
Moving on to the next caller.
Caller ending in 1954.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, my name is Sam Goss.
I am a Metro...
User, and I'm not a car owner
by choice because I want
to end the cycle
of vehicular violence.
Off-Bite Square residents
have already delayed us by
18 months.
I live near a new D-Line
station impacted
with minimal.
We must approve the proposal
and evaluate cut and cover
to reduce costs.
We as a city have destroyed
so many communities
with highways.
Here we will just annoy one
community to make a
city-changing rail
connection.
We must do this.
Thank you.
Moving on to the last caller.
Caller ending in 3796.
Please state your name.
You have 30 seconds
to state your comment.
Hi, my name is Peter Auer.
I've been a resident of
Studio City, West
Hollywood, now in the
Calder Palms area.
I'm writing to express my
support and enthusiasm
for the Metro staff
recommended San Jacinto
Fairfax, one of the K-Line
North expansions.
West Hollywood is an
absolutely critical
destination
for every possible reason,
be it employment,
restaurants, living
neighborhoods,
and nightlife.
It's also the largest
walkable and bikeable
community in LA,
and it really deserves a
Metro route that capitalizes
on that.
I hear the fears.
In the Lafayette residence, I
understand.
I just really don't think
that that sort
of B-board tunneling is going
to cause problems.
I really hope you guys
support this alignment and
continue this project.
Thank you.
That was the last public
comment.
Okay, thank you.
I appreciate everyone coming
forward,
making concise arguments.
And you have allowed us
to move on
in an appropriate,
timely manner.
And I'm going to go to my
colleagues and recognize
Director Horvath.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair, and thank you
for the presentation and
for the many comments
from everyone who was able
to join us today, and I know
there will be more coming
forward as well.
The comprehensiveness is a
testament
to the incredible amount
of work that's been done
to bring us to this point,
and as was mentioned
by staff, what we have before
us is a major milestone and
one of the most
transformative rail projects
in metro history.
I've been working with Metro
staff and members
of this board
for more than a decade,
since early in the Measure M
campaign and even
before that, to advance the
San Vicente-Fairfax alignment
for the K-Line Northern
Extension.
Since my time as a council
member and mayor in West
Hollywood, I have always
known how transformative this
alignment would be
for the region,
for our agency, and for the
many communities that have...
have historically been an
afterthought in our regional
transit investments.
This project and the
investment we're making
in diverse communities along
the alignment is a sign that
the board is course
correcting.
First and foremost, I want
to thank the many Metro team
members who have gotten us
to this point.
Ray, Anthony, Georgia,
Mary, Roger, and of course,
Nicole and our CEO,
Stephanie Wiggin.
I also want to thank the many
labor leaders, the building
trades, Liuna Local 300, and
I know you gave specific time
to be here today, AFSCME and
TCU, the Chambers of
Commerce from Torrance to
Crenshaw to Hollywood, the
transit and mobility
advocates, Move LA and
Streets for All,
among others, Cedar Sinai and
the major stakeholders in the
project area who have
forcefully stood up
in support of the project.
and the thousands of
community members and
countless others who have
continued
to voice their support for
the project and the alignment
up
to our consideration today.
It takes a village
to make a project
like this happen, and you all
have my gratitude.
The project
before us and the recommended
San Vicente-Fairfax alignment
would build nine new stations
between the B and E lines,
connecting four rail lines
and six
of the region's top.
10 busiest bus lines.
The estimated 100,000 daily
trips would rival the highest
ridership light rail lines
across the country,
not just our county,
the entire country.
That is how much this
alignment is needed
in our region.
It would bring an estimated
325,000 residents and nearly
250,000 workers to hundreds
of regional destinations and
major employment centers.
It's an alignment that is
estimated
to create more than 10,000
well-paying construction
jobs, generating $9.7 billion
of labor income,
and connecting riders
to more than 125,000 jobs
within a half mile
of our stations.
This transforms not just our
physical landscape, but our
culture and our environment.
Most importantly, the
alignment will serve those
who rely
on our system the most.
More than two-thirds
of the trips would be made
by low-income individuals,
those coming from
equity-focused communities,
many of whom cannot be here
today because
of their work commitments.
Director Mitchell wrote
something
in her motion related
to the K-Line to Torrance
project that caught my
attention and I think applies
well here today.
Lower costs and ease of
construction should not be
conflated with best value.
nor should they serve as the
primary determinants
of alignment selection
at the expense of long-term
community benefits.
And I truly couldn't have
said it better.
But this project, and the
San Vicente-Fairfax alignment
specifically, is a unique
opportunity because of the
financial commitment the
City of West Hollywood has
made
to delivering the project.
Nowhere else in L.A.
County has a city stood so
strongly In support of
bringing transit and all the
benefits that come with it
within its borders,
nor has any city committed
to bringing this significant
of an amount of funding
to a project.
The City of West Hollywood
has said yes to transit,
to mobility, to jobs,
to housing.
and to bringing the financial
resources to the table to
make this project a reality.
To that end, I want
to thank Mayor Heilman, who
has been at the forefront
of this effort for years,
Vice Mayor Danny Hing,
Council Members Byers and
Erickson, who are here today,
and Council Member Meister
for their continued
commitment to bringing rail
to West Hollywood.
Now, as Mayor Bass said
in a letter to Metro,
advocating
for the acceleration
of this project, Delaying
construction risks...
missing a rare opportunity
to leverage over $5 billion
in LAX-related investment and
grassroots passion in West
Hollywood.
Metro has taken that
direction seriously.
And in 2018, a couple years
after the adoption of
Measure M, the Metro Board
approved an early project
delivery policy,
providing a critical avenue
for acceleration for some of
our more transformative
projects.
Some of those who voted to
support the EPD policy are...
still on the board today.
And so in August 2020, the
board directed staff
to begin work
to prepare a draft EIR.
In April 2021, Metro
initiated public scoping
for an environmental document
with a 45-day scoping period.
Following the public scoping,
Metro prepared advanced
conceptual engineering
drawings for project
alignments and design
options, including
refinements, and advanced
environmental analysis and
technical studies.
And in July 2024, Metro
released the draft EIR
for public review
over a 60-day comment period.
Toward the end
of that period, we heard
from mid-city residents in
Lafayette and Wellington
Squares who expressed
concerns
about tunnel safety,
dissatisfaction
with proposed alignment
between the E and D lines,
as we've heard today,
and impacts
to property values.
So in October 2024, our board
allocated another $2.3
million
for further technical
analysis
to address these concerns.
We also devoted another 18
months
to community engagement with
the mid-city communities
specifically.
And I can only hope that a
similar level
of engagement,
of collaboration, and
investment will be made if
and when concerns arise
in other communities
along this alignment.
So because of that...
Continued investment.
I have a few questions.
First, I understand that this
alignment was originally
proposed above ground,
and it was actually driven
by the community
to underground, first
by requests from those
in the West Hollywood
community, and later
for an equity focus to ensure
that the entire alignment was
made underground.
Is that correct?
During the 1990s, when the
major investment study
on the Crenshaw alignment was
being looked at, it was
always an alignment that
would look to connect the
South Bay to what would be a
future extension of the
Purple Line at the time,
or even West Side extension
at the time, now D-Line.
During those...
Reviews of alternatives,
alignments,
there were a number
of different configurations,
at-grade.
In this particular segment,
we looked at at-grade aerial
configurations.
Because of the underground
configuration of the D-line
that was selected and because
of the location
of the stations,
there was a commitment
to look at underground
alternatives extending.
the alignment north
of the E line,
which is why the K line
at the E line, the K line is
in an underground
configuration.
And are the Lafayette and
Wellington Square communities
the only communities that
will experience
undergrounding tunneling
for this alignment?
No, there will be a number
of communities along the
entire alignment that will
have underground easements
throughout the alignment.
Okay, and as you noted, there
were three additional
technical studies conducted
at the request of the
Lafayette and Wellington
Square communities,
an additional alignment
analysis, a tunnel safety
study, and property impacts
analysis.
So can you go into more
detail?
We have continued to hear
those concerns raised.
Can you go into more detail
on the results
of those studies?
Some of our speakers today
did mention previous impacts.
So if you can speak
to what you know
about that as well
in reference to that and how
you can be certain That there
will not be the impacts that
the community fears Start
with some of the tunnel
safety findings.
So we collected data from the
regional connector
construction teams,
D-line construction teams,
and K-line, as well as
previous research that had
been collected as part
of other linements, like the
B-line and the E-line that
goes to East LA.
We looked at groundwater,
seismic issues, noise,
vibration,
gassy grounds.
a whole host of issues and
found that our recent
construction had performed
very successfully.
No building damage,
no noise and vibration.
We've tunneled
below very sensitive uses,
including sensitive sound
recording studios
in downtown Los Angeles.
We're very close to the
Walt Disney Disney Hall and
the Colburn School, where we
worked very closely
with those stakeholders.
on noise and vibration
concerns.
Similarly, the B-Line goes
near the Kaiser Hospital,
where we've worked
with those owners, so we have
a very successful track
record.
We also worked with the
Tunnel Advisory Panel that
advises on projects outside
of L.A.
County to other transit
agencies in Seattle and
abroad, and found that with
modern tunnel-boring
machines,
which include sensors
below ground as well as
at the surface, There's
extensive monitoring that
occurs
to prevent damage as part
of tunneling.
And so tunneling
at this point
across the globe is in a very
safe and successful state
of affairs.
Similarly, your previous
question, there was a map in
the presentation that showed
that we do tunnel
below several parts of
L.A.
County today.
We have done so safely.
We most recently tunneled
below the D line in
Westwood.
And Beverly Hills, we have
other sections that go
below the mountains, the
Hollywood Hills along the B
line and other parts
of the county.
This project would include
several areas where there
would be tunneling
below private properties,
and that's because we want
to have safe,
efficient connections
between stations.
The tunnels themselves cannot
make a 90-degree turn.
And part of the benefit of
subways is that they're
high-capacity, fast-moving
tunnels, unlike a streetcar,
for example,
which would travel
above ground at a slower pace
and be subject
to the street grid.
The subway tunnels are able
to travel below ground,
and they do need to have safe
turns where we need
to connect to stations.
And when you tunneled under
the communities that you had
mentioned for the variety
of other alignments that
exist in the network, Did you
hear similar concerns as we
heard today?
The greatest concerns we
heard during the draft D.R.
comment period were from the
mid-city neighborhoods, but
tunneling is a concern that
we hear
from other neighborhoods and
on other projects.
And did you want to add
to that?
Yeah, I would say we've also
heard, as we would normally
for tunneling segments, any
place when there's a land use
that has sensitive equipment,
like hospitals and so forth.
We have heard concerns as
well related to any
of those types of uses
along our alignment.
And when you have heard those
concerns, I know we've built
other projects.
Were you able to allay
in total those concerns
before proceeding?
We've worked with different
property owners and tenants
to address their concerns as
we continue
to do the engineering.
We have to respond
to all the comments
on the draft environmental.
We do continue to do outreach
and provide the list
of things that can be done to
allay those concerns
regarding being proactive
in mitigation, surveying the
buildings that are
in the vicinity
of the tunnel, doing
before and
after investigations, and
developing mitigation plans
that are monitored.
If federally funded by the
federal government as well as
by us throughout
construction, do we satisfy
everybody's concern?
No, but we do our best to
address the concerns and
comments raised.
I don't know if Anthony wants
to add more to that.
No, I think that that sums it
up, but I will say that
during construction, we
actively monitor both
mitigation measures that have
been identified as part of
the environmental process as
well as just the construction
methodology.
We have sensors that are
placed within buildings,
within the streetscape.
We also regularly communicate
with residents and business
owners to ensure that any
concerns are addressed by our
contractors when they're
under construction.
As Georgia mentioned, we have
tunneled successfully and
safely.
Some of the most challenging
soil conditions in Los
Angeles County, including
right next to the La Brea
Tar Pits, in front of the
Peterson Museum, where you
actually have ground seepage
of tar.
We've gone through
methane-rich areas, all
safely, and continue
to do that as we move forward
with the D-Line extension as
well.
I think that's important to
note.
I think you also rightly
noted that this conversation
began in the 1990s.
Not everyone has been here
for that entire journey, and
we heard today that some
community members appreciated
the additional engagement
that Metro did
over these past 18 months
in particular to make sure
that they were able to ask
their questions directly.
And I would expect you
highlighted a timeline of how
this project would move
forward from this juncture,
how it eventually reaches
completion.
And it would be
at least my expectation,
and I would think our full
boards,
that you continue that level
of engagement
with communities to ensure
that they have the
opportunity to express
concern and have those
questions answered
to the best
of our ability as an agency.
And so to that end, I want
to once again thank you,
as well as all of the
residents and stakeholders
who see the benefits
of this project
for the region and
for our future.
And who have stood up
to say not only yes,
but also sooner than 2041.
I don't want
to amend the recommendation
before us.
Staff, I believe,
has done tremendous work
to get us to this point.
And I understand we will also
be taking a pencils
down approach to the project
following board approval.
So in that vein, I just want
to offer a couple
of comments before I
conclude.
I understand there are
segments of the project,
particularly areas
near stations where Metro is
contemplating cut and cover.
And as much as it is feasible
and would contribute
to a reduction
in overall project costs,
once engineering work is back
up and running,
I would ask that Metro
undertake a robust value
engineering analysis,
including the use
of cut and cover in areas
of segments two and three
to bring down costs as much
as possible.
The depth of the tunnels in
the mid-city area.
likely wouldn't be conducive
to cut and cover.
But given that we're
tunneling
at a much shallower depth
in segments two and three,
there may be opportunities to
realize additional
efficiencies.
And as an agency,
we know that we have
to be mindful of all
of the additional costs.
We are making additional
investment in this alignment
at the request
of communities
to address concerns,
including the relocation of a
grocery store that is much
needed in this neighborhood.
I haven't seen Metro do
anything like that before,
so I am glad to see that we
are taking that extraordinary
measure for this community
this time.
And I hope you will also
consider these opportunities
to create cost efficiencies
so we can make those proper
investments in communities
that deserve them.
Thank you very much.
See any other...
Director Butts, did you want
to weigh in on this?
I'll give you a pass if
that's your desire.
Okay, very good.
Well, I have a few comments
to make.
First of all, I would very
much like to applaud the
multi-year efforts of
Director Horvath as well as
the members, elected members
of the City of West...
Hollywood, the support
groups, the commissioners,
and everyone.
This was a project that was
very far
off just a few years ago,
and now, lo and behold, it's
before us.
So I think it is a testament
to your perseverance,
both as a let's see,
you started out I don't even
think you were
on the you were
off council.
You got on council,
became mayor.
off again and then back
to supervisor.
So it was a long-term effort.
Regardless
of your position, you were a
fierce advocate.
I don't think anyone can
dispute that.
So congratulations
for bringing this forward.
And it is sometimes a rare
feat where members of the
community so often support a
transit project.
Boy, do I have problems
in my neck of the woods just
to get a BRT through.
That's another story,
but I do applaud.
all of your support
of transit.
Second, the San
Vicente-Fairfax alignment
before us is a very
compelling route.
You really can't argue
with the metrics.
before us.
I don't know if you remember
that slide, but almost every
category that is measured
supports strongly the San
Vicente-Fairfax alignment,
and I think it would be
really difficult
to make any argument
against that route.
As far as the Lafayette
Square, the option two,
alignment goes.
Clearly, we've heard
concerns.
These concerns came to my
attention just perhaps a week
or so ago.
I have heard the technical,
I guess, analysis and the
arguments, not arguments, but
the support and the position
that drilling the tunnels are
not going to cause any
significant impact.
at 90 feet.
However, I'm not an expert
in that.
It's my history and
experience that it's
generally a safe level
of drilling, of boring.
But let me just say that that
is something that has come
to my attention
at this point.
I do want to also say that I
have heard from directors,
other directors who would
like to weigh in on this
issue and would not
necessarily
like this committee
to make a decision prior to
the full board meeting.
I think in any event, this
issue would be addressed
fairly fully
at the full board.
There are representatives,
elected representatives
of the Lafayette Square area
who are not here,
who are not present.
to make an argument either
for an adjustment,
opposing option two, or
supporting option two.
I think that we ought
to give them a chance.
And when I say them,
in particular,
I believe that there's at
least one other county
supervisor's district,
as well as the mayor of
L.A., because that area
definitely is the city of
Los Angeles at that point.
I know that there are
probably residents.
who also want to come back
and have a more full
discussion.
I did only give you 30
seconds.
I know you were all very
capable
in making that argument,
but there may be others
out there who wish to give a
full minute discussion.
I can't promise that you
would have that opportunity
at the full board,
but clearly
at this hearing we did ask
you to cut down.
And lastly, I think we need
to follow the precedent that
we set
with the K-Line extension,
and that was when it did come
to the planning committee
that we did send it
to the full board.
We made comments
at the planning committee,
as many
of us are doing now,
but we did give it to the
full board because this is a
very important project, as
you have all admitted and
attested to.
It is a game changer.
It's going
to change the lives of your
young children who are now
just a few years old.
Perhaps some of us older
members might not see this
occurring,
but that's the nature of an
elected official's job.
You plan in the future.
You decide things that you
might not even be here
to see.
I would prefer, and let's be
clear,
I strongly support the San
Vicente-Fairfax alignment.
I have some questions
on the Lafayette Square.
I'm leaving my...
My mind open
for that.
I can't say I'm
for it.
I can't say I'm against it
at this point.
But I would like this to go
to the full board
for a continued discussion.
And I think, Supervisor,
Director, your compelling
discussion of this, I think,
would be best suited
in a more august forum.
The full board,
rather than my friend.
And Mayor Butts, myself, and
yourself, we don't even have
a full committee
before us.
We have some absences and
some other conflicts.
That's where I'm leaning.
I'm not sure if Mayor Butts
wants to weigh in
on this or just...
Let me tell you something.
You said everything that
needed to be said,
but when you said Auguste, I
had to weigh in, okay?
You know, I tell you, I
really appreciate everybody
that came
down and spoke.
both for and
against and talked
about lafayette square
but this is big and it's just
like the last big hearing we
had and i want to compliment
the supervisor former mayor
former councilman It was
Hollywood
for the work that she's done
on this,
and it deserves a hearing
before the full board,
so I agree with you.
But you got me with a gust,
buddy.
And I hope I'm not causing
you disappointment,
Director.
I am very stunned and awed
at the work that you've done
to bring this forward.
You have
to be given the chance
to bring this to the full
board and invite the
supporters so the whole board
can weigh in on it and no one
can say this wasn't fully
vetted.
And I hope to be alive,
at least
for the groundbreaking
of this in 2041.
Would you be so upset if we
asked to move this
to the full board? Well, I
see where the votes are. But
I will say that we could make
a recommendation today and it
still goes
to the full board.
But if it is the will
of this committee to move
in that direction, I
understand that that's what
will happen today. Well,
thank you. That's very
diplomatic and
stateswoman-like. I do
strongly support the San
Vicente Fairfax. Let there be
no doubt about that. So if
there's no objection, then
this will be the direction
of the committee to give it
to the full board, to that
august body, one more time,
Director Butts, to hear this
out and
for the benefits that... The
director and the community
has raised for the San
Vicente Fairfax alignment
to be brought forward and to
have perhaps some further
discussion allaying some
of the concerns,
addressing the concerns
of the option to alignment
through the sensitive
Lafayette Square area. So if
no objection,
that will be the decision
of this committee. Thank you,
but you unfortunately don't
get a vote. But come back.
Come back. So that's the
whole point. Come back. No
decision has been made
at all. No decision has been
made at all. So I'm going
to turn this over back
to our chairwoman
to complete the balance
of this agenda. Thank you,
Director Najarian. I hope it
went well.
But what we know is that next
Thursday
for the board meeting,
the matter will come back
on the agenda. Thank you
to everyone. Let me join my
colleagues
in saying how important it is
to hear from the public.
This is one of the arenas
where public comment is
heard, received, and
considered very strongly. I
believe next we have general
public comment. This is
general public comment.
Please press bound two if
you'd like
to make a comment. Please
unmute the caller. I do not
see any raised hands
on my end. I see 0735. Can
you unmute that line,
please? Once I only refresh.
Still do not see any hands
raised on my end. I think
there's a technical error
on your end. Okay. There are
no public comments. Thank
you. No further comments
by colleagues. We have
completed the agenda. The
meeting stands adjourned.