Expo Line update

Updated: 9 p.m. An earlier version had the wrong crossing that was in mediation. It's Farmdale, not Harvard. I also cleaned up some grammar and clarified my clarification below.  -- Steve Hymon

A quick follow-up to yesterday's post about the Public Utilities Commission's hearings on the two disputed crossings on the Expo Line in South Los Angeles:

The Expo Line Construction Authority and community groups, including the Citizens' Campaign to Fix the Expo Line, met for about three hours on Monday in a mediation session. At issue was the proposed at-grade crossing of Farmdale Avenue, just outside Dorsey High School.

At this point, all I know is that a proposal has been made and the Construction Authority is going to take that proposal to its board on Monday, according to Samantha Bricker, the COO of the Construction Authority.

For the purposes of mediation, the PUC gave the parties involved three options: either have the train go under Farmdale, over Farmdale or construct a pedestrian bridge over the tracks and close Farmdale as a through-street -- so the proposal likely involves one of those or a variant of it.

If the Expo Line Construction Authority Board chooses not to adopt the proposal, then PUC hearings are tentatively scheduled to resume Sept. 2 in Los Angeles. Both the Authority and community groups would present evidence to the PUC on the best way to construct the crossings and the at-grade crossing would be back on the table.

One clarification from yesterday's post: The other disputed crossing is outside the Foshay Learning Center. The Construction Authority is asking the PUC for permission to build the train on top of an existing pedestrian tunnel that must be reinforced. It's not technically a new at-grade crossing, as I called it, although community groups are asking the Authority not to build the train at street level.

-- Steve Hymon

Comments

[Randy Talbert]

I agree, no at grade. Not only is it dangerous, but it wastes time.

Let's be bold with this. I want a .5% sales tax increase in both L.A. and Orange County, with 100% of this money used to build an elevated heavy rail system that would blanket the entire metro area.

Every freeway, every major street, about every two miles apart. Stations at every major point of interest. Both local and express service, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, every 10 to 30 minutes, depending on time of day.

We can do it!

[Scott Mercer]

J:

Forget it. We have people killed in traffic accidents on roads every single day, and nobody proposes banning cars or getting rid of roads.

Yes, some people are going to get hit by trains. Just as they do every day by buses, trucks, cars or buses.

Trains are inherently no more dangerous than other forms of transportation, but they do pose dangers. They are very large and heavy, and sometimes the tracks are in mixed traffic with cars, trucks and pedestrians.

It is up to pedestrians to protect themselves while crossing streets, just as they do with cars. Trains don't swerve to hit people: they are bolted down in place. Trains are part of the transportation mix and should not be dismissed out of hand because some accidents have taken place.

[J in Pasadena]

OKAY. Here is where the MTA has yet another chance to do the right thing. Let's see what happens. Considering the frequency of accidents and injury with MTA rail crossings, absolutely no new rail corridors should be constructed at grade. This is well demonstrated with hundreds of casualties and fatalities over two decades at MTA commuter rail crossings. Yet the MTA persists mindlessly to design and promote ground-level rail crossings in every new project. (See http://web.archive.org/web/20030627210241/noblag.org/consequences/safety.htm .) Ask the MTA board about the cost of a human life, and they will rationalize it away over funding and time concerns, blustering that commuter lines will never get built if adhering to such drastic safety measures. This is ludicrous and insulting to the people of Los Angeles County. Meanwhile their construction history is involvement in million dollar scandals involving bribery and graft. This is another reason I know the MTA is just a money wasting behemoth of an ineffective bureaucracy. They do not (repeat DO NOT) have accurate concerns of county citizens at heart, instead wasting time, money and disregarding common sense. As history usually repeats, I believe the MTA will again make the wrong decision. Do not trust them to spend your tax dollars wisely, take control of mass transit locally. This whole thing is yet another joke. I can't believe there is a debate over an at-grade crossing near a high school. Give me a break!

[Darrell Clarke]

Thanks for the update and correction, but "practically speaking that's the issue on the table -- whether the train is built at street level or not" is still incorrect for the Harvard crossing.

Both options before the CPUC about the Harvard crossing would have the tracks at street level. Either the pedestrian tunnel will be used as it is now, or a new pedestrian bridge would be built over Exposition Boulevard and its median tracks to replace the tunnel.

Also see the 5/9/08 post at http://friends4expo.org/news.htm for links to images from the Expo Authority of the potential Farmdale at-grade crossing, pedestrian bridge, and rail bridge.