A divided San Fernando City Council approved a motion last week to provide conditional support for one of the possible build-out options of the East San Fernando Valley Light Rail Train (ESFV LRT) if the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) agrees to make several mitigation measures.
The project is divided into a southern and northern segment: the former, stretching 6.7 miles from Van Nuys to Pacoima, is already underway and is expected to be completed in 2031, while discussions are still ongoing for the latter, a proposed 2.5-mile track from Pacoima to Sylmar.
As part of those discussions, Metro provided the local Council with two different builds for the City of San Fernando segment. However, the City Council unanimously rejected the first option because it would require the construction of four train lines, which would cause a significant impact on safety, traffic, and local homes and businesses. This proposed plan would have street crossing gates affect six intersections every six minutes during peak operational hours.
In a 2-1-1 vote on Aug. 18, the City Council authorized the city manager to provide a letter to Metro expressing their willingness to support the second build, provided that several mitigation improvements be made in addition to the proposed double Metrolink track.
The second build would see the completion of the light rail line at the intersection of Van Nuys Boulevard and San Fernando Road, where a new Metrolink Station would be built and include a “Mobility Hub” to facilitate transfers for riders between the ESFV LRT and Metrolink trains. This scenario also includes the build-out of a second Metrolink track, doubling the number of trains currently running through the City of San Fernando.
Although this option doesn’t have as many potential impacts on the city as the first build, the City Council still hasn’t given unanimous consent due to concerns of traffic and safety. Passing trains would stop traffic flow at the four streets that cross the tracks – Hubbard Avenue, Maclay Avenue, Brand Boulevard and Jessie Street/Wolfskill Street – approximately every 15 minutes. Two streets outside the city, Paxton Street and Van Nuys Boulevard, would also cross the tracks and be impacted.
Both builds would result in a change to the mobility and feel of the small city. The project will effectively cut the city in half between the downtown area and residential homes. Additionally, there will be more safety concerns for students in nearby schools – especially San Fernando Middle School, which is located just feet away from the tracks.
How They Voted
Mayor Mary Mendoza and Councilmember Victoria Garcia voted yes, while Councilmember Joel Fajardo voted no and Councilmember Patty Lopez abstained. There was no explanation from Lopez for her decision to abstain. Councilmember Mary Solorio is on maternity leave.
The mitigations the council is asking for include pedestrian safety improvements at the four crossings in the city, and two to Paxton Street and Van Nuys Boulevard; pedestrian sidewalk improvement in the impacted areas; installation of wayfinding signs; improvements to the Mission City Trail pathway; tree planting efforts along the impacted corridor; and the addition of another Mobility Hub at the border of the City of San Fernando and Sylmar.
Concerns About an Increase in Traffic
During the City Council meeting, Fajardo said that he was in support of the principles of the letter, but was opposed to the construction of a second Metrolink track due to the increase in traffic it would cause.
“Yes, I’m sure that there are some people who would benefit [from a second line], but I think that if people knew that [the crossing gates] would go down twice as much, you’d find many people in the community who would oppose that,” Fajardo said.
Mendoza said that if there were more options for people to use Metrolink trains, it would enable people to travel in and out of the valley more efficiently and would incentivize people to use their cars less often.
Fajardo, however, expressed doubt that this would be the case, saying he doesn’t know many friends or clients in LA who have changed their driving habits due to an increase in transportation options.
“If this were an undeniable fact and we knew how many cars it would remove and what it would do for the future, I might be a little more open to it,” Fajardo said. “But I think it’s more of a philosophical point than an actual concrete fact.
“I presume that most of the community will not be happy if those cross rails are closed twice as often, but this is unfortunately where we are, for better or worse.”
Garcia agreed with Mendoza, saying it would be beneficial to Metrolink riders and local residents to have more options to travel outside the San Fernando Valley, either further north to Antelope Valley or towards downtown LA. She added that none of the requested improvements can be made until they decide to support one of the build options.
A Possible Third Option
During public comments, Tom Ross, representing the San Fernando City Chamber of Commerce, said that members of the executive board have had discussions with Metro representatives independently and devised what he dubbed the “Cesar Chavez option.”
He elaborated that in this alternative, the light rail would be extended down the railroad tracks until it reaches the edge of the city at Wolfskill Street – where the Cesar Chavez Memorial lies. He claimed it would “separate all of the real big problems of having a station in town, while having a station in town, which gives us all the advantages.”
He acknowledged that something would need to be done with the memorial, but he believes that a potential new hub could incorporate the artwork and displays inside the station – which would be called the “Cesar Chavez Memorial Station at San Fernando.” By doing so, it would put the City of San Fernando on all of Metro’s maps and bring in more people to the area.
“By doing this, we’re basically getting a twofer,” Ross said. “We’re leveraging what we always wanted to do with the Cesar Chavez Memorial while getting a station at a point that is less than 2,000 feet from some of our largest employers [and] from City Hall. … It [would be] walking distance from the station to businesses and everything that we have.”
what a scam
I support public transportation, but please take under consideration vibrations from light rail etc that could impact housing over a period of time or over years in addition to the necessity of frequent stops every 15 minutes mentioned in the article. I have a friend who lives in Highland Park very near the Gold line – and the neighbors and her have cracked floors or cracked foundations due to the issue I mentioned above. The houses were there before the trains were there. Keep in mind to keep San Fernando intact – don’t allow it to be divided by transportation structures, like freeways did to many communities. Thank you for the article.