Freeway Expansion Revisited

Regional transportation officials, concerned about worsening air quality and the potential loss of tens of billions of dollars in future funding, are taking another look at controversial plans to add lanes to two Los Angeles-area freeways.

A few months ago, proposals to widen the Ventura and Long Beach freeways were shelved after community opposition erupted over fears that homes and businesses could be destroyed in the process.

But faced with a recent uptick in unhealthful ozone levels, planners for the Southern California Assn. of Governments are reexamining ways to reduce congestion and the smog caused by idling vehicles.

Still, the planners are treading lightly. They would like to add freeway capacity, but only if homes and businesses would not be razed to do so, they say.

For the Ventura Freeway, planners are exploring the possibility of adding a light-rail line or squeezing a carpool or toll lane into the existing right of way.

For the Long Beach Freeway, planners are considering adding elevated truck lanes.

“It has to be done so that there’s no impact on surrounding communities,” said Hasan Ikhrata, director of transportation planning and policy for the local governments association.

Renewed discussions about improving the freeways are taking place at public meetings as the association, which represents 188 cities in six counties, hammers out the details of its next regional transportation plan. A draft outlining specifics is to be released this fall for public comment. A final plan is due in April.

State Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), whose deputy heads the steering committee for a study on the 101 corridor between Thousand Oaks and downtown Los Angeles, is applauding the restrained efforts.

“It means they were listening, as were the rest of us, to businesses and homeowners,” Kuehl said. She initially supported adding two lanes in each direction to the Ventura Freeway, but changed her mind after many people objected to the possibility that nearly 1,000 structures could be destroyed.

Wayne Tanda, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, said he believes the association’s efforts could improve the livability of communities adjacent to the freeways.

“To the extent you have a good freeway system, it relieves pressure on city streets,” Tanda said.

But some residents, saying they need more specifics, remained skeptical of any freeway-improvement efforts.

“It’s one thing if they don’t take my house, but are they going to build the freeway lane above it, like an aircraft carrier?” asked Connie Hearn, a post-production supervisor for movie trailers whose Sherman Oaks home is across from the Ventura Freeway. “I don’t want trucks flying off the freeway and falling on my house!”

Officials say their renewed interest in the two freeways is driven not only by a desire to improve mobility, but also by a fear that the region could lose up to $37 billion in transportation funding during the next 20 years if it fails to comply with clean-air laws.

Federal money for transportation, which makes up 25% to 30% of the region’s transportation dollars, is contingent on compliance with air-quality regulations. Officials say that means developing a realistic plan to decrease vehicle emissions through such projects as transit or freeway improvements, and then ensuring that the projects are funded and completed on schedule.

Vehicle emissions account for about 76% of the carbon monoxide, 63% of the nitrogen oxides and 45% of the hydrocarbons in the region’s air, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The last two pollutants form ozone, a colorless gas that can damage lungs.

The region’s unhealthful ozone level, which had been decreasing since 1976, recently went up. That means government needs to become more aggressive about cutting emissions by reducing congestion on the two freeways, said Mark Pisano, executive director of the association.

But others say putting money into freeways is not the answer.

Cars and trucks “may move faster for a year or two or three, but sooner or later, traffic will build up,” said Gilbert Estrada, public health organizer for Positions for Social Responsibility, a Los Angeles-based environmental justice group. “You create more traffic and more pollution ... you made air-quality worse.”