A fight on the Expo Line, Chapter 2

I posted yesterday about the ongoing dispute involving the Expo Line light rail that is under construction from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City. Yesterday’s post looked at the controversy from the point of view of Damien Goodmon, who is heading a group called Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Line.

The gist of it is that Goodmon wants to see the light rail line put underground as it travels through South Los Angeles for safety reasons. He says that at-grade crossings will be unsafe and put residents at risk, particularly near two schools that sit next to the tracks, which run along Exposition Boulevard. Above is a drawing of the proposed crossing outside Dorsey High School.

Goodmon notes that 90 people have been struck and killed by the Blue Line since it opened in 1990 and connected Long Beach and L.A. The Blue Line runs up the middle of some streets and also features numerous at-grade crossings.

On Tuesday, I interviewed Rick Thorpe, who is the chief executive of the Expo Line Construction Authority, the public agency that is building the $863-million line. Thorpe said that he’s been building transit systems for 30 years (which included the Gold Line to Pasadena) and that the current Expo Line project is the toughest of them all due to rising construction costs, the shortage of transit funding and the controversy involving the South L.A. crossings.

Thorpe also took me just across the 1st Street bridge over the Los Angeles River to the site of a new high school that is under construction. Thorpe is clearly exasperated that the LAUSD board has passed a resolution that the Expo Line should forgo at-grade crossings. Why?

The new LAUSD school, shown below, sits next to the tracks for the east side extension of the Gold Line that’s under construction. That train runs right up the middle of 1st Street, maybe 30 feet from the new school. "Talk about being close to a school," Thorpe said. "But for pedestrians, it will be just like getting across a busy street. The train won’t be running any faster than automobiles."

There is a crosswalk across the tracks and Thorpe said that pedestrians will be guided by both pedestrian signals and a sign that will warn when a train is coming. As it happens, a station is next to the school.

We then drove a few minutes east to the site of another school, the Ramona Opportunity High School. The Gold Line tracks wrap around two sides of the school on both Indiana and 3rd Place and there is a new station on Indiana. To reach the platform in the middle of the tracks, students will use a crosswalk to get across the tracks.

Again, Thorpe maintained that it is safe -- as long as students and other pedestrians don’t jaywalk. I asked him what about students who are wearing headphones. A train is, after all, much bigger than a car. A car can swerve. A train can’t.

His point: People are going to have to exercise caution around the train just like people are careful around trains that run on or along streets in many cities around the world. "This is an urban environment, and you have to be paying attention to what you’re doing," Thorpe said. "You have a better chance of getting run over by a car or truck than by a train."

As for Goodmon, Thorpe praised him as both "tenacious" and "very intelligent." But he criticized him for stirring up the community with facts that he said are false. He took particular umbrage at Goodmon’s assertion that the train line spent money to make crossings safer near wealthy USC and Culver City, but not South L.A.

"Talk about environmental justice," Thorpe said. "Why should South L.A. get anything better than what they’re getting in East L.A.?" He also pointed to the numerous at-grade crossings along the L.A. to Pasadena line, including one near Blair High School in Pasadena.

At USC, Thorpe said that while the train will travel under Figueroa in a tunnel, all three stations near the school will be at street level and students will cross tracks using crosswalks. In Culver City, Thorpe said that the station will be elevated to cross busy Washington Boulevard and perhaps Venice Boulevard, if the line is extended in that direction.

As for comparisons with the Blue Line, Thorpe argued that it was built two decades ago and didn’t include many of the safety features incorporated on later lines.

He also rejected Goodmon’s estimate that it would cost no more than $300 million to put the train underground in South L.A., saying it would cost at least $100 million just to put it under Farmdale Avenue at Dorsey High School -- a problematic place because an underground stormwater drain would have to be moved.

Goodmon has argued that the Construction Authority, in its applications to the state Public Utilities Commission, has asked to run trains at speeds up to 55 mph near the school. Thorpe said that the request was in the application, but the authority has offered to slow trains to 10 mph near the school and post a police officer on either side of the track both before and after school.

At the least, it’s pretty clear that there’s a stalemate for the time being between the authority and Goodmon. The PUC will make the call in November. Thorpe said that the delay has already put one of the project’s contractors two months behind schedule, but that if he gets a favorable ruling the line could still potentially open by the end of 2010. If the project must build over- or under-crossings, he said the line would likely be delayed at least two years, presuming money could be found to build those structures.

Finally, I asked Thorpe about the issue of speed. Goodmon argues that if the region is going to spend gobs of money on a project that is intended to last many decades, it’s best to do it right the first time – and get the maximum return in the form of speed and ridership. Thorpe said that in an ideal world he can understand that point of view, but transit funding these days is hardly ideal.

"If as a country we ever decided to invest like Europe does in infrastructure, then yeah, we can do all these things as subways," Thorpe said. "But our country has never done anything like that.

"My feeling is that it doesn’t get any cheaper" to wait to build rail lines, he added. “You can come back and retrofit the lines later. The speed of the trains for now is locked in. What are we projecting the freeways to do? The longer we go [in terms of time], the faster the train gets."

I’ve tried to lay out both sides of the dispute. In coming days, I’ll be looking at some of the politics involved here, as well as the escalating dispute over the second phase of the line and how that is impacting the first phase.

In the meantime, please make liberal use of the attached comment board. Those boards are what make these blogs lively and interesting.

--Steve Hymon

Drawing: Expo Line Construction Authority

Photo: Steve Hymon/Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Rail for the Westside]

Mattapoisett in LA said "Thorpe said that the request [55 mph] was in the application, but the authority has offered to slow trains to 10 mph near the school 10 MPH? I can ride my bike faster than that."

For crying out loud Mattapoisett in LA, it's 10 MPH only thorugh the Farmdale crossing. This will add only 20 seconds to the travel time, about eight seconds to slow down the train, four seconds to run it at low speed, and eight seconds to speed it back up.

Enough with these outrageous NIMBY claims! The Gold Line, even with the 15 MPH slow down through the entire Highland Park neighborhood (which the Expo Line won't even have), travels through the 14-mile-long route in 29 minutes!

[Paul]

If the train slows down to 10mph near schools, it will be worthless. The last thing L.A. needs is another line as slow as the blue line.

[Dan Wentzel]

"We of Light Rail for Cheviot have many supporters now, people who favor using the existing Right of Way and who favor fair application of the grade-crossing criteria all along the line, phase 1 and phase 2."

I am glad to hear there are light rail supporters in Cheviot Hills.

One of their fears is that rail will lower their property values. In every ciity with a world class transit system, being close to the system is a plus and adds to the value of nearby property.

[Bob in LA]

Beware the warnings of the Cheviot HIlls Homeowners' Association.

They are concerned that the light rail will pass too near to the Overland Ave. Elementary School -- a stellar, high performing school. They advocate that the rail be routed away from the now dormant right of way (used primarily as a toilet for Cheviot Hills dog walkers and the occasional homeless transient) and routed to Venice/Sepulveda Blvd....

....where it will pass right by the Charnock elementary school, a wretched, low-performing elementary school with a majority Lationo population.

Quite simply, it's a question of whose children the train places at risk...

[Darrell Clarke]

"Some in Santa Monica are looking for Expo at Grade Level. Those who are concerned with Cost not safety, reliability, and effectiveness."

Light rail in boulevard medians with signal priority performs well and fits the scale of neighborhoods in other cities. It's the model for the Eastside Gold Line and what the City of Santa Monica is seeking. Their new Land Use and Circulation Element Strategy Framework includes this explicit policy:

"D5.3 The City shall strongly encourage the Exposition light rail line to be at-grade in the Downtown and discourage the light rail above grade as this would negatively impact the quality and character of the street and Downtown. ("Santa Monica's Districts", page 3.4-12)"

--------

"If the NIMBY's don't want the Expo line, and continue to delay it, Mr. Thorpe, move the money where they do want it."

Expo Line supporters have shown we overwhelmingly do want the line! It's under construction because of popular support, and it will be finished.

--------

On monorails, the Las Vegas line cost around $100 million per mile. It would be substantially more now with inflation. And, as Kymberleigh Richards noted, Expo Line opponents don't want aerial rail.

For more monorail considerations -- with images -- see http://lavisions.blogspot.com/2008/05/wilshire-monorail2.html and its links to two earlier posts.

[Mattapoisett in LA]

"No, but it is gold plated to expect to build the whole thing underground. Santa Monica is seeking the line to be at grade level."

Some in Santa Monica are looking for Expo at Grade Level. Those who are concerned with Cost not safety, reliability, and effectiveness.
--------------

"No, Expo will be a popular, reliable alternative. And I don't mutter under my breath about NIMBYs. I'm angry enough now to shout it out loud."

I will do a big Mea Culpa if it is successful but I truly believe that Expo will be busy during rush Hour and empty all other times because @ 10 MPH most buses will go faster. Also consider adding the time for Phase 2 travel and think about a Light rail from Santa Monica which because of needed speed restrictions will take over an hour to downtown. Plus this ROW was designed in 1875 A lot has changed around the ROW since then and I'm not sure the MTA has fully taken it into consideration.
__________________

"Close off the Farmdale crossing and build a twenty-foot fence to prevent trespassing. Build a pedestrian bridge over the tracks. Whatever. But BUILD EXPO NOW!"

Agreed."

All of those walls and fences you want built add significantly to the costs in construction and maintenance. since they walls will become magnets for Taggers and will have to be restored frequently. Plus the Walls will most likely depreciate land values of properties near the line, which would not be good for the community. All this wasting of money in the future of the line could be prevented if it is put underground.

[Karen Leonard]

Damien keeps alleging that Culver City is being favored since the station there will not be at-grade. He is
quite wrong about Culver City's elected officials being the
determining factor. In fact, the Venice-Robertson intersection is (barely) in LA, but the aerial station there will certainly be in CulverCity so that's a minor point. But the reason for that one elevated station in Culver City is due to the application of the grade-crossing
criteria, as was the case for La Brea and La Cienega. The line otherwise runs at-grade in Culver City, and future light-rail lines there will probably do that as well, eg. on Culver Boulevard when an Expo-Green
line connector is built. Please see Darrell Clarke's rebuttal of Damien's false claims; it is no longer available on CityWatch but is copied at

http://friends4expo.org/citywatch.htm

And note that, in fact, consistent application of Metro's Grade Crossing Policy has resulted in twice the overpasses in (minority) Los Angeles (La
Brea and La Cienega-Jefferson) as in (minority*) Culver City (Washington-National). (*The neighborhoods north and south of National in Culver City are also majority-minority.)

Finally, note that all in Cheviot Hills are not NIMBYs. We of Light Rail for Cheviot have many supporters now, people who favor using the existing Right of Way and who favor fair application of the grade-crossing criteria all along the line, phase 1 and phase 2. We will find out this coming Monday, June 9, what the proposal is for grade-crossings at Overland and Westwood and others...

Karen Leonard, Co-Chair of Light Rail for Cheviot

[transit-rider]

After living and chocking on traffic and car fumes of the Westside for 20 yrs, I picked up my belongings and moved to Long Beach. I rode 8 miles on a bus each day from La Cienega to Downtown....one hour, door to door. I ride from Long Beach to Downtown on the Blue Line...25 miles, 40 mins. door to door. If the NIMBY's don't want the Expo line, and continue to delay it, Mr. Thorpe, move the money where they do want it. The Gold Line to Montclair folks are dying to have it. The Purple Line to the sea is desperate for it. Just as the Valley residents stopped the Red LIne in North Hollywood so many years ago (and do they now regret that!), let'm suffer in their own world of horrible traffic.

[Dan Wentzel]

"Is it Gold Plated to think that Public transportation should move people in a reasonable amount of time? "

No, but it is gold plated to expect to build the whole thing underground. Santa Monica is seeking the line to be at grade level. I do not believe the people who live along Phase I are less intelligent than the people who live along Phase 2.

--------------

"When No one takes the Expo Line except for a few fanatical transit advocates who mutter under their breath about NIMBYs, it will be considered a failure."

No, Expo will be a popular, reliable alternative. And I don't mutter under my breath about NIMBYs. I'm angry enough now to shout it out loud.

It's about time we had politicians and elected officials standing with the common good instead of grandstanding with the NIMBYs.

"Close off the Farmdale crossing and build a twenty-foot fence to prevent trespassing. Build a pedestrian bridge over the tracks. Whatever. But BUILD EXPO NOW!"

Agreed.

[Alek F]

It's purely astounding that - at those times of soaring gas prices, the times when we need Rail lines the MOST, and to be built ASAP, as fast as possible - there are those senseless groups and individuals who are trying to prevent construction... How ridiculous and outrageous!
And - yes, unfortunately in this city NIMBY'ism has way too much power. Those pathetic NIMBY's should have their mouth shut, and should be completely ignored, like they are in other countries!

[Kymberleigh Richards]

Monorails are not the answer. This is obvious to anyone who attended the most recent Westside Corridor public meetings.

They have the same passenger carrying capacity as a short light rail train, but with a longer length (so to carry the same passenger load as light rail would require an extremely long station platform). They require an overhead structure to hold the rails which is considerably more intrusive to a neighborhood's aesthetics than any other mode. In order to go through major intersections, a cross-beam support must be constructed for a block in each direction which will either eliminate the sidewalk or reduce it to a very narrow walking area. To construct a station at one of these intersections requires not only the cross-beam support but a structure that will cast a permanent shadow for a block or more over the street below, plus require the taking of adjacent property in order to construct the station access escalators/elevators/stairs.

Mr. Brooks appears to have a romanticized view of the monorail. I do not blame him for that, because I think everyone who has ever visited Disneyland has a soft spot in their hearts for them. But as a public transit mode in a region with the potential ridership that Los Angeles has, the monorail has no viable place.

[mattapoisett in LA]

Is it Gold Plated to think that Public transportation should move people in a reasonable amount of time? Above MTA's Rick "Thorpe said that the request [55 mph] was in the application, but the authority has offered to slow trains to 10 mph near the school " 10 MPH? I can ride my bike faster than that. And they will need to do this after the first few cars and or people get hit, like with the opening of the Orange line in the Valley. This will turn a reasonable trip from Culver City to DTLA [20-25 Minutes] into a trip that reasonable people will consider not taking because it takes too much time. [45-50 minutes or more] When No one takes the Expo Line except for a few fanatical transit advocates who mutter under their breath about NIMBYs, it will be considered a failure.

[Joel C]

Local NIMBYs have way too much power in this city. That's why nothing ever gets done here. That's why we're the only major world metropolis with a rail transit system so small.

This project has been on the books for over a decade. No more delays! Close off the Farmdale crossing and build a twenty-foot fence to prevent trespassing. Build a pedestrian bridge over the tracks. Whatever. But BUILD EXPO NOW!!!

[Bob Zwolinski]

Steve, thank you once again for another of your in-depth reports!
I’d sure like to know why that the East LA extension of the Gold line, being built at-grade, adjacent to schools and is being hailed as a great neighborhood improvement but in the mid-city area, having the Expo line being built next to Foshay & Dorsey is being cited as “Environmental Racism”. GIVE ME A BREAK! And now Goodman wants it in a trench? That will add about $150 to $200 million per mile to the cost of the project.
What really made me laugh was Goodman’s blurb in yesterday’s related blog about rival gangs at Dorsey potentially dukeing it out on the right-of-way when a train is coming.
Those gang members are going to have a real tough time trying to climb a 10 foot fence along the line just to get on the right-of-way just to duke it out with their rivals.
These NIMBYs are getting weirder with every new project!

[Dan W.]

I agree. I am so sick and tired of what NIMBYs have done to this city. The Purple Line (Wilshire subway to the sea) got delayed for 20 years because of NIMBYs.

The people MOST supportive of these unnecessary gold plated improvements intended to sabotage and bankrupt the Expo Line project at Phase 1 so it never gets to Phase 2 are the remaining delusional NIMBYs living in Cheviot Hills who still fantasize they are living in Sam Yorty's Los Angeles.

NIMBYs seem to have inexhaustable abilities to thwart public transit improvements.

Other cities around the world like Taipei, London, Singapore, Beijing, even Denver etc. are RAPIDLY expanding their transit systems yet we still have to fight the battles of the 1980s from people in denial about the irrevocable decline of the L.A. car culture.

NIMBYs have far too much power in this city.

[Brian C. Brooks]

Obviously all of these issues and 3/4th of these costs would have been eliminated by a fair consideration of monorail in the design phase. Mr. Goodman's choice of subway (even if physically feasible) would cost ten times what monorail would cost. Elevated grade crossings are "included at no extra charge" with monorail and the right of way below could be a riding and hiking route for most segments. Even now monorail would save taxpayer's money and allow construction to Santa Monica and speeds of sixty miles per hour at one-tenth the operational cost and less construction time.

Mr. Hymon, you and Mr. Goodman know this becuse we have discussed it. Do you not print it because it does not fit your plan? Monorail is the elegant solution and one the people would prefer if given all of the facts. I would be pleased to meet with you and discuss the issue.

[Jason]

Just build the line. Enough with the NIMBYs! We need to invest our infrastructure now. Or our economy will suffer and jobs will be lost. Why is South LA being so combative against a line that will help them?