Expo Light Rail. Safety First?

Details: Category: Community News; Published on Friday, 11 June 2010 17:20; Written by Carla Pineda

It only takes a quick glance down Exposition Boulevard to know the Expo Light Rail line is coming, connecting the downtown transportation hub at 7th Street to Santa Monica and the sea and following the route of the old railroad tracks along Exposition.

But completion dates and final plans remain unclear and many of the details of the $862 million Phase 1 remain murky. It’s estimated opening date has been pushed back for at least 50 weeks from May 2010 into late 2011. Nonetheless, the second phase has entered an extensive planning stage.

According to the Expo Authority, the entity in charge of construction, the first leg of the route – covering 8.6 miles from downtown to Culver City – is at 70 percent completion. The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, part of this public-private partnership, will take over the rail line’s operation once it is functional.

Yet as the project takes shape, community concerns over safety are forcing the project to slow down and proceed more cautiously.

Many of the disagreements and cause of delay are centered on how the train will cross the streets along its route. Key players – community groups, the Los Angeles Unified School District, engineering experts, some elected officials – would prefer if many of the crossings, if not all, were located underground or overhead. The Expo Authority has repeatedly responded that this option is not financially feasible.

“The cost of going underground is prohibitively expensive,” said Samantha Bricker, chief operation officer of the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority, adding it would cost $100 million to go beneath the surface just at Farmdale and Exposition due to large sewer lines that intersect the streets.
Additionally, a completely underground train was never an option, she said. “This isn’t a subway; it’s always been a railroad right of way. Any major public works project is a challenge, especially in dense urban environments,” she said. “The community has been very supportive and tolerated a lot of detours and construction that’s been going on a long time.”

Stakeholders’ worries about crossing safety can be found throughout the project’s final environmental document filed with the state in 2005. More than 100 e-mails were published with the document. Some comments congratulated and thanked Metro for the train line’s attributes. Many voiced worries about noise pollution and vibration, property values, traffic and parking. Remarks regarding safety and security constituted about 7 percent of all comments.

Safety Issues
In 2003, Metro developed a policy for street-level, (at-grade) crossings, after reevaluating all crossings described in the draft environmental report. These plans target impatient or oblivious pedestrians and drivers by punishing their resistance to safety with photo enforcement and flashy signage. The policy lists potential safety concerns and possible solutions. Grade separation, (overhead or underground crossings), are suggested for extreme traffic congestion but many of the other identified problem areas, such as school zones are to be addressed with “active warning devices, pedestrian control devices, education and crossing guards.” Many of Metro’s existing street level crossings are operated using either crossing gates or signals to provide traffic control.

The most debated intersections are where Harvard and Farmdale intersect with the train line because of their proximity to Foshay Learning Center and Dorsey High School. The Farmdale crossing is “ground zero” of controversy for community activists, such as Damien Goodmon, coordinator of the Fix Expo campaign. He claims funding for improved safety could have been obtained from numerous sources.
“They always have the money. It has never been an issue of resources but an issue of political will,” he said. “Our objective is to fix the great deficiencies in the line, which are all related to the street-level design”.

Brickman said experts from across the U.S. were brought in to evaluate the safety of the project and they agreed all the crossings were secure.
“I have to say the alignment is safe,” she said.

But this is not enough, according to Najmedin Meshkati, a professor in the University of California’s of Civil/Environmental Engineering department.
No rail line can cross a street without the green light from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which approved 36 of the 38 crossings proposed by Expo Authority in 2007. In 2009, the state commission permitted the Harvard station near Foshay, where enhancements were ordered for a pedestrian tunnel already in place, but denied the Farmdale crossing again.

In testimony to the CPUC on behalf of the Fix Expo campaign, Meshkati claimed Metro’s sole metric for crossings is not the most adequate.
“MTA’s policy designates certain crossings as appropriate for at-grade design without any safety-related analysis,” Meshkati stated.
He called teenaged students who will cross these intersections on a daily basis as a “special” age group of inherent risk-takers whose responsiveness to warning signs is overestimated. These cautionary devices will compete with distractions, such as their cell phones and MP3 players. Brickman added that while teenagers are expected to be aware of warning signs, this has not been assumed and additional safety precautions have been added at these school zones.
Russell Quimby, former chairman of all rail investments in the U.S. as an engineer for the National Transportation Safety Board, also testified on behalf of Fix Expo and said the Farmdale crossing “poses an unreasonably high safety risk to the students of Dorsey High School” and has the potential for a “catastrophic accident.”
“With pedestrians in particular, a lot of people feel, even if you have pedestrian gates there, they duck under them, walk under them, whatever,” Quimby said.

The CPUC instructed the Expo Authority and the Los Angeles Unified School District to settle the Farmdale matter, which resulted in a new proposed stop and redevelopment of a motel property at one of the corners. In May, the Expo board approved the proposed station, where the crossing speed would be limited to 15 miles per hour and a full stop would be required at the platform, in addition to standard safety procedures. Final agency approval is expected in July but this could change after a scheduled public hearing on June 1.

”A street-level station will only add more confusion to the already crazy Farmdale intersection for Metro rail operators,” said Lester Hollins, a former MTA light rail operator and parent of a Dorsey student. “The only way to make the Dorsey crossing safe is to have the train cross the intersection elevated in the air or underground beneath the street.”

Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas has requested Metro to review its overall policy for light rail crossings in a letter dated January 2010. He wrote that the policy uses vague estimates of future automobile traffic, ignores criticism of constituents and the CPUC, and “discriminates against underdeveloped neighborhoods” by neglecting the potential real estate development that these areas could attract.

As these issues continue stirring controversy, the ball is already rolling on the Culver City to Santa Monica segment, as well as a Crenshaw line that will connect to the Expo Line. The Expo Authority certified the final environmental document for Phase 2 in February and construction could begin as soon as the end of 2010. A lawsuit has already been filed against the plan.
“We are extremely disappointed that a small fraction of the community seeks to delay the extension of a project that has the overwhelming support of the communities on the Westside,” the Authority said in response to the recent lawsuit.

The Metro board and Expo Authority are reviewing a plan that would infuse an additional $30 million into safety improvements near Foshay, Dorsey and other junctions. These enhancements, including a safety ambassador program, go beyond Metro’s current guidelines but they are meant to set a new standard for protection for light-rail users, Brickman said. Some of the changes are required by the CPUC, while others have been added by Metro.
Brickman said any further delays resulting from the public hearing could bear heavy delays and additional costs for Phase 1. Concerned citizens worry that rushing through the process could result in tragic accidents.

Photo's Carla Pineda