2. Procedural Background
These applications are among a series of applications related to the construction of the Los Angeles to Pasadena Blue Line light rail system.1 Unlike the other applications, which were filed by the Construction Authority for permission to construct a number of crossings for the light rail system, these applications were filed by PAMRC, a community group in South Pasadena, and the City. In Application (A.) 03-01-013, PAMRC requests that variances from some of the requirements of General Order (GO) 143-B be granted to eliminate the sounding of horns or other audible warning devices by Gold Line trains in South Pasadena. In A.03-07-049, the City and PAMRC request a variance from GO 75-C to limit or eliminate the sounding of bells on the crossing gates at all eight South Pasadena at-grade crossings of the Gold Line.2 In A.03-07-050, the City requests, pursuant to Pub. Util. Code § 7658, that the Commission approve the City's Ordinance 2121, which, among other things, would impose a speed limit of 20 miles per hour (mph) on Gold Line trains in South Pasadena.3 The three applications were consolidated by the Assigned Commissioner's ruling in the revised scoping memo dated October 30, 2003.4
In its initial application, A.03-01-013, PAMRC requested that the Gold Line in parts of South Pasadena be designated a "no horn" zone, as a pilot program under § 1202(d). This request was dismissed by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) because it was made too late to be included in the statutory pilot program. PAMRC's initial requests related to crossing warning devices were also dismissed because GO 143-B-the basis of the application-does not apply to crossing warning devices. The requests for a variance in the requirements for horns to be sounded and for a 20 mph speed limit for Gold Line trains in the City were allowed to proceed. (See Administrative Law Judge's Ruling on Preliminary Legal Issues, Requiring Prehearing Conference Statements, and Allowing Late Filing of Reply Brief (June 30, 2003), which we now confirm.)
After the proceedings were consolidated, an evidentiary hearing (EH) was originally set for January 26, 2004. At the request of the parties, the EH was rescheduled to April 12, 2004. After written testimony had been distributed for the EH, the City, LACMTA, and the Construction Authority (settling parties) filed a Motion of the City of South Pasadena, Los Angeles to Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for Adoption of Proposed Settlement on April 1, 2004. A copy of the proposed settlement (settlement) is attached as Appendix A. PAMRC contested the settlement. Pursuant to Rules 51.4-51.6, all parties filed comments and responses on the settlement, concluding on June 22, 2004.
PAMRC's comments made a showing that there were contested factual issues related to the effectiveness of the settlement in reducing noise impacts on South Pasadena residents from Gold Line operations. In view of the longstanding public interest in the construction and operation of the Gold Line, the Commission held a public participation hearing (PPH) in South Pasadena on August 24, 2004, to address the settlement and other public concerns about Gold Line operations related to these proceedings.
In accordance with Rule 51.6, a limited evidentiary hearing (LEH) was held on August 31, 2004, in San Francisco to address the extent to which the proposed settlement reduces or mitigates noise levels in South Pasadena from the current operation of the Gold Line and the safety considerations relevant to the noise reduction or mitigation provisions of the proposed settlement. Witnesses at the LEH provided testimony on noise measurements and noise impacts and on safety issues.
Concurrent closing briefs were filed by all parties on September 20, 2004, and this matter was submitted on that date.
1 Since the initial applications were filed, the line has been renamed the Gold Line. That name will be used here. 2 Resolution SX-58 (September 4, 2003) approved a request by LACMTA to permit the silencing of bells after crossing gate arms have lowered at five at-grade crossings in the City. Therefore, this decision addresses the silencing of the bells after the gate arms descend at the three other crossings in the City. PAMRC has also requested that bells not sound at all at any crossing in the City. This request is discussed in Section 4.2. 3 Unless otherwise indicated, all subsequent citations to sections refer to the Public Utilities Code, and citations to rules refer to the Rules of Practice and Procedure, which are codified at Chapter 1, Division 1 of Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations. 4 Notice of A.03-01-013 was published in the Commission Daily Calendar on January 21, 2003. LACMTA filed a timely protest to A.03-01-013 on February 20, 2003. The Construction Authority filed a timely response to A.03-01-013 on February 20, 2003. Notice of A.03-07-049 was published in the Commission Daily Calendar on August 6, 2003. LACMTA filed a timely protest to A.03-07-049 on September 5, 2003. Notice of A.03-07-050 was published in the Commission Daily Calendar on August 6, 2003. LACMTA filed a timely protest to A.03-07-049 on September 5, 2003.
