The Exposition Line Construction Authority will host public hearings next week to discuss the environmental impact of an above-ground rail system that includes a stop on Westwood Boulevard.
The light-rail transit would not directly benefit the UCLA area, said Monica Born, the director for Phase 2 of the project, because the closest station to UCLA would be on Westwood Boulevard near Pico Boulevard.
The project would serve as another option for traveling around Los Angles County, she added.
Due to the station’s distance, the UCLA community should try to ensure a more efficient route between the station and campus, said Mikhail Silin, external president of Bruins for Traffic Relief. The public hearings are scheduled for Feb. 23 and 25, Born said.
The Exposition Corridor Transit Project Phase 2 is a light rail system composed of proposed stations that would run from Culver City to Santa Monica.
Phase 1 of the project is currently under construction. It will run from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City, she added.
At the hearings, the public will have the opportunity to comment and ask questions about the project.
However, the Expo Authority staff will make no immediate responses, Born said.
“This is the time for the supporters and opposers to come and give comments on the document,” she said. “Then, we will take time to respond and publish the responses in the final draft environmental impact report.”
The first of three public hearings was held on Feb. 19, to which about 75 people came, Born said.
The environmental report proposes six transit alternatives to expand on the Expo Phase 1 project, Born said.
She said the drafted report proposes alternatives that both oppose and support the project’s development.
One alternative discourages new constructions on the already existing projects, and another one only allows for bus enhancements. The majority of the alternatives consist of versions of a Light-Rail Transit that would use the Olympic, Venice and Sepulveda Boulevards.
The drafted report shows 16 study areas that present potential implications on each of the alternatives. These study areas include transportation, traffic, noise and air quality, Born added. Keeping this criteria in mind, Silin questioned the efficiency of the alternatives.
He said the attempt at keeping the neighborhoods’ tranquility and an increase in traffic could prevent the project’s construction.
Frequent public transportation users Debora Ayala and Claudia Vasquez, both first-year English students, said they doubt the project will benefit the UCLA community. They also questioned the implications of the proposed alternatives.
“If it promotes for people to use public transportation instead of their cars, then it could help the environment,” Vasquez said.
However, Ayala did not seem convinced that the project would actually reduce traffic congestion.
“It’s a good idea, but looking at the realistic side, people don’t like to use public transportation,” she added.
Born said that based on the public’s comments and the Metropolitan Executive Board’s final response, only one alternative will be certified.
According to the drafted report found at the Expo Authority’s Web page, the “LRT 1 Alternative” proposes the most benefits. It provides a better connection between existing transportation systems and a reduction in traffic.
Though the project would not include a stop right at the UCLA campus, it would run nearby.
The closest stations to the UCLA campus would be the Sepulveda Boulevard station near Pico Boulevard and Westwood Boulevard station also near Pico Boulevard, according to the report’s map.
But Silin said that there are faster routes to getting to downtown like the Bus Rapid Transit buses, which also travel closer to campus.