Avenues 45 and 50

Blue Line proposes an at-grade crossing for these streets. In order to provide protection to the public, Blue Line plans to have four-quadrant gates specifically designed to inhibit motorists from driving around a lowered gate. There will also be swing gates for pedestrians. (Exh 18, Tab G) Blue Line's project manager testified that separating Avenue 45 would require substantial changes to the Southwest Museum Station immediately north of Avenue 45. Association, MWHA, and Staff oppose Blue Line's plan, instead, recommending grade separations, or other alternatives. We shall first address the issue of grade separations.

Association asserts that we should not even consider the safety of an at-grade crossing since Blue Line never examined the possibility of separations. Association cites City of Merced (1983) 12 CPUC2d 744, 755 as authority for requiring a complete investigation of alternatives before requesting an at-grade crossing. Blue Line claims there is no money in its budget for additional separations. (Tr 1688) This argument is circular. When seeking funds from the Legislature a supplicant presents a sum to cover its plans. The plans for this project did not include separation at Avenue 45. Thus, lack of funds is a direct result of not seeking them.

Blue Line did present a cost comparison between a separation at Avenue 45 and its at-grade proposal, as well as detailed explanations of the safety measures it intends to undertake. Blue Line also referred to property condemnation that would be required if a separation were to be built. The threshold announced in City of Merced, supra, does not require creation of a complete straw man, with detailed engineering and environmental analyses. We believe that Blue Line has presented sufficient evidence to warrant consideration of its applications.

Next we examine the claim of Association, MWHA, and Staff that Blue Line has not met its burden of proof with regard to the safety of the at-grade crossing at Avenue 45. All of these parties desire a grade separation but propose safety conditions should an at-grade crossing at Avenue 45 be approved. These shall be addressed below.

Staff originally did not oppose the applications in so far as they related to Avenues 45 and 50, but later amended its position to oppose at at-grade crossing at Avenue 45. It argues for a grade separation, with alternatives should this be rejected. In advocating a separation Staff looked only to public safety, with no consideration of cost. (Tr 2051)

Blue Line went to great effort to illustrate the various safety features that are to be built into the proposed Avenue 45 crossing. It also drew on the experience of the Blue Line in Long Beach. (Tr 1027, 1453-57) Recognizing the intensity of the controversy over Avenue 45, Blue Line's project manager made several suggestions to ameliorate the situation. He proposed installing additional traffic signals, employing a traffic guard during school commute times, restricting speed of the train to 25 miles per hour, replacing pedestrian gates with swing gates, changing pedestrian crosswalks and relocation of a bus stop on nearby Marmian Way, and installing a vehicle detection feature that would automatically signal the train to come to an immediate stop if a vehicle is in the crossing. (O.B. pp 79-81, 84-87)

Staff argues that if a separation is not ordered, then an alternative could be the closing of Avenue 45 to both auto and pedestrian traffic. (Tr 1868, 2040) Staff was clear that this would not provide the same level of safety as a separation, since pedestrians could evade the barriers and access the tracks. (Tr 1868) Avenue 45 is a preferred route for school children. Whether this Commission can order the closing of a city crossing without notice and an opportunity to be heard to that city is a legal matter raised at the hearing (Tr 2038) and not addressed in Staff's briefs.

Staff also proposes that should either separation or closure be rejected, a further alternative could order the trains to stop at Avenue 45, require the operator look both ways, and if the intersection is clear of motorists and pedestrians, then proceed through the crossing. (Tr 2042-3) Staff does not believe that merely reducing the speed of the train at Avenue 45 would provide sufficient safety (Tr 2029), though it does not have this hesitation for Avenue 50. (Tr 2032) We note that Staff does not propose a similar "stop and proceed" measure for more heavily traveled proposed at-grade crossings, such as Del Mar Blvd. A "stop and proceed" measure would not diminish any noise problems to be considered later, since bells on the gates would still be required, and the engine horn would sound upon commencement of the train through the intersection. (Tr 2048) It would not eliminate the fear of the Staff witness that motorists waiting at a stoplight at an adjacent intersection might find themselves stuck on a queue that extended over the Blue Line tracks and thus be vulnerable to injury. We note that the same Staff witness testified that all three of his proposed alternatives are equally safe. (Tr 2050)

While preferring a grade separation at Avenue 45, MWHA has few illusions that it would become a reality. (O.B. p 2) It decries closure, since this would inconvenience the public and impede access to Mount Washington for safety vehicles. (O.B. p 5) The "stop-and-proceed" alternative is also rejected by MWHA because of its potential delay of emergency vehicles (O.B. p 6).

MWHA offers a fourth solution: extend the proposed type of operations of Blue Line between Avenues 57-51 to include Avenues 50 and 45. (O.B. pp. 6-13) This suggestion would have Blue Line operate much as a streetcar over this portion of its right-of-way, even though it is running on an exclusive right-of-way except for the crossings. Blue Line plans to operate between Avenues 57 and 51 at no higher than 20 miles per hour, and to be subject to any traffic signals at any intersection, just as would any motorist or pedestrian. (O.B. pp 112-114) No gates are proposed for these intersections, since the speed would be reduced. With no gates there is no problem of noise in the area.

Blue Line rejects extending this solution to Avenue 50 on the basis that it would not be as safe as its proposed gated solution. (Tr. 2130) Blue Line's project manager testified that Avenue 51 and Avenue 50 are so close that a separation at Avenue 50 would require a separation at Avenue 51. (Tr 1230-31)

Association also presents some alternatives. It proposes that the 20-miles per hour speed restriction planned for Avenues 57 to 51 be extended to Avenue 50. It supports Staff's proposal for a "stop-and-proceed" procedure at Avenue 45. (O.B. pp. 34-35) It proposes that audible train warnings not be required at Avenue 45 except in emergencies. (O.B. p. 35) It further recommends that audible warnings on the gates be limited to the time that the gates are lowering, and then cease. (O.B. p. 36)

Another suggestion is the establishment of a quiet zone for Avenues 45 and 50, as permitted by Public Utilities Code Section 1202(d)(2)(A).

We shall now employ the six-step approach outlined earlier in this decision to determine the practicability of grade separations at Avenues 45 and 50. Blue Line's initial proposal, combined with subsequent additions and ideas developed from the record, meets the very heavy burden we demand to convincingly show us that an at-grade crossing, properly conditioned, could be safely implemented.

For reasons not necessary to detail in this decision, Staff's alternatives were last minute in origin (Tr 1870) and not well-documented. We do not find either the closure or "stop-and-proceed" alternatives for Avenue 45 to be appropriate. Closure is not supported by the local residents. Furthermore, there has been no opportunity to obtain the concurrences of the local civic or emergency authorities. "Stop and proceed" will cause a significant delay in service, rendering the Blue Line less desirable as an alternative to motor travel. While delay in and of itself is insufficient cause to reject a safety procedure, we believe that there are other protective measures that can be taken to make the crossing reasonably and adequately safe, with the understanding that absolute safety can never be totally guaranteed.

As indicated earlier, the local community authorities and the local emergency authorities support Blue Line's proposal. The additional suggestions that we shall adopt will make the crossing even safer.

The general public is quite divided about the need for grade-separations. In the public participation hearings we received impassioned testimony urging us to provide enhanced service without delay. Other speakers told us that it would be foolish to permit at-grade crossings with the potential for accidents that would ensue. We appreciate these comments and the fervor with which they were given. Our decision will undoubtedly not please everyone, but with an implementation of the conditions imposed we trust reconciliation will arise.

Lastly, we address the subject of cost comparisons. Blue Line asserts that the additional costs for a grade separation at Avenue 45 would be in a range from $27 to 30 million, plus administrative costs that could increase approximately $25 million over the estimated two years of construction. This is disputed by Association's witness Raspa. We would pay closer attention to these estimates if we were in doubt as to the safety of a conditioned at-grade proposal.

As was noted earlier, the proposal of Blue Line will restrict its speed to 20 miles per hour between Avenues 57 and 51. Blue Line's project manager testified that extending this speed restriction to additional intersections would add approximately 30 seconds per crossing to its running time. (Tr 1708, 1794) Reducing the speed to 20 miles per hour at Avenues 50 and 45 would extend a 33-minute trip over the whole route of the project to 34 minutes. (Tr 1707) The slower speed would give train operators greater opportunity to react to a possible vehicle stuck in a queue on the tracks. (Tr 1856, 1882) This was Staff's prime concern about an at-grade crossing at Avenue 45. We do not believe that in the interest of safety one more minute would be too much to ask of transit passengers' patience.

In our judgment, the at-grade crossings at Avenues 45 and 50 can be made safe. They have the support of all civic and safety authorities. Conditions proposed by the local residents are very helpful. Staff's concern can be successfully addressed. On that basis, it is our judgment that a grade separation at either of these crossings is not practicable. As will be seen when we discuss Del Mar Blvd., if we are not convinced of the safety of a proposed crossing, even when conditioned, we will not hesitate to deny an application.