|
Post by spokker on Jul 28, 2009 20:53:26 GMT -8
Most Blue Line pedestrian strikes, like last Sunday, involve people with psychological problems: suicides, homeless, younger and older people with mental problems to the level that they can't see or judge a train coming toward them. I would think it'd be much more productive for Fix Expo folks to direct their efforts into getting those kinds of people the care they deserve than trying to obstruct a vital link for South LA. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would rather our tax money go toward getting those people help instead of fighting an unjust war in a foreign land.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jul 28, 2009 23:44:34 GMT -8
If you bring a train to a full stop, you can probably safely run it through Bourbon Street during Mardi Gras. So, CPUC is bound to approve all four applications. Then the question is not which application will be approved but which will be picked for implementation. And these people are drunk and rowdy...
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jul 29, 2009 6:57:32 GMT -8
It appears Damien Goodmon is withdrawing as a party to the CPUC process at Farmdale - leaving it to LAUSD - per his email to the Service List following Expo's new application: I wonder if he was asked by certain parties to withdraw, due to his apparent instability.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 30, 2009 19:56:27 GMT -8
Fix Expo has claimed that the Expo Line is very similar to the Blue Line and therefore will be as deadly.
I studied some of the Blue Line grade-crossings in the Long Beach - Compton area this evening. The grade-crossings on the Blue Line are a relic from the freight days and are poorly designed. The signage is confusing, such as where the drivers should stand at red -- as a result it's very easy to stand on the tracks at a red. Turns are even more confusing and less protected. There is no guidance and protection for pedestrians other than a posted sign saying "Don't cross when lights flash and bells ring." Moreover, some of the cross streets are highways with fast and light traffic, with little expectation for the drivers for fast urban trains. There are no such cross streets for the Expo Line.
So, the Blue Line, thanks to being the first light-rail line, is just slow freight trains replaced by fast light-rail trains, without any thinking for light-rail grade-crossing design. It's an outdated design but it works, despite not being very safe. The Expo Line will not be a Blue Line. It will be a Gold Line, actually even better, with the state-of-art grade-crossing design.
Visiting these light-rail lines also reminds you how beautiful these railroad corridors are. Wish we had more light-rail for a better environment.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Sept 2, 2009 12:31:57 GMT -8
From the June 15 Expo Board Minutes, following the Closed Session: Chair Perry asked Mr. Thorpe if there were any reportable actions from Closed Session.
Mr. Thorpe stated that the Board directed staff to file a Farmdale Crossing application with the following options:
1. Stop and Proceed 2. Add a station at Farmdale 3. Pedestrian Overcrossing 4. Combination station with stop and proceed until such time the station is complete. Expo Authority filed these applications with the CPUC today. To the service list for Application 06-12-005, etal.: Attached is Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority's Amendment to Application 07-05-013, filed today with the Commission. Amendment to Application (224K PDF) Exhibits B-1.1 and B-1.2 (1.3M PDF) - Farmdale Closed with Pedestrian BridgeExhibit B-2.1 (1M PDF) - Stop and ProceedExhibits B-3.1a and B-3.1b (1M PDF) - Near Side StationsExhibit C-1.1 (19K PDF) - Legal Description It's worth reading the "Amendment to Application" all the way through, especially for its recap of the CPUC's previous decision relating to this crossing. Attorneys for UCA / NFSR filed a motion today to strike options 2-4 (new station at Farmdale and/or stop-and-proceed) on the grounds that the CPUC had already ruled against an at-grade crossing there. But does their argument, based on the existing CPUC decision for a grade-separated pedestrian crossing, only strengthen Expo's hand against LAUSD or UCA calling for grade separation beyond a pedestrian bridge? CPUC Proceeding A0702007 history
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Sept 2, 2009 14:10:56 GMT -8
With respect to these four options, FixExpo's preferred option would obviously be "none of the above". So I think it is significant that UCA/NFSR only requested options 2-4 removed, and left in option 1.
It could be that UCA and NFSR are thinking more about what is good for Cheviot Hills than what is good for their "allies" in South L.A. Such a fragile alliance!
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Sept 2, 2009 14:13:34 GMT -8
To put it in plain and simple English, Fix Expo, LAUSD, and NFSR are not only not wanting the station or stop options but also strongly opposing them. Here is the link for all CPUC proceedings on Expo on Phase 1. The latest protests are not posted there yet.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Sept 2, 2009 14:17:33 GMT -8
It could be that UCA and NFSR are thinking more about what is good for Cheviot Hills than what is good for their "allies" in South L.A. Such a fragile alliance! Eh, not that "the poor man's" (i.e. the Axis of Evil's -- Fix Expo, LAUSD, and NFSR) elaborate plans would have any effect on Phase 2...
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Sept 18, 2009 15:17:33 GMT -8
A prehearing conference is scheduled:
Wednesday, September 30, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Junipero Serra State Office Building 320 West 4th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90013
IT IS RULED that:
At the prehearing conference, the parties should be prepared to discuss the substantive issues remaining in this proceeding and efficient procedures for resolving these issues.
Dated September 18, 2009, at San Francisco, California.
Maribeth A. Bushey Administrative Law JudgeIt sounds like they won't allow any more monkeying around by the NIMBYs. This may be resolved really fast this time. This was the schedule of the circus before. I don't think this will repeat again: Event Date Location
PPH November 5, 2007 Los Angeles (at Dorsey) 1st PHC March 12, 2008 Los Angeles Meet/Confer (parties) April 23-30, 2008 Telephonic Workshop (parties) May 8, 2008 Los Angeles 2nd PHC May 9, 2008 Telephonic Public Workshop J uly 2, 2008 Los Angeles (at Foshay) EH (procedural only) August 11, 2008 Los Angeles Mediation Conference August 12-13, 2008 Los Angeles EH (7 days) September 2-15, 2008 Los Angeles*
* the final day of EH, September 15th was held in San Francisco.Complete list of CPUC documents
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Sept 18, 2009 15:29:14 GMT -8
(I should have posted this on this thread.) Today's CPUC ALJ ruling setting a September 30 pre-hearing conference for the remaining crossing at Farmdale is worth posting in its entirety, giving a good summary of what's happened so far and an expectation of efficient conclusion. -------------------------------- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING SETTING PREHEARING CONFERENCE On February 20, 2009, the Commission issued Decision 09-02-031 where it denied the requested at-grade crossing at Farmdale Avenue in the City of Los Angeles but authorized the applicant to amend that application: Though we deny the application for the proposed crossings at Farmdale, we cannot authorize the construction of any of the alternative design options. The analysis provided by Expo Authority of the of the various design options for Farmdale was an integral and helpful part of our review; and, we also recognize that Expo Authority cooperated fully with all of the directives of the assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge by providing all requested information, analyses, and reports related to the design options. However, these analyses and reports do not include all of the necessary information required by our rules for application of a rail crossing at Farmdale.
In order to expedite the processing of any future requests for crossings at Farmdale, this proceeding will remain open to allow Expo Authority to file any amendments or a new application for that purpose. On July 29, 2009, the applicants filed and served their amendment to this application offering four options for the Farmdale Avenue crossing. Three of the four options provided for train operational limitations along with at-grade pedestrian and vehicular crossings, and the fourth option closed the crossing to vehicles and grade-separated the pedestrian crossing. The Los Angeles Unified School District as well as United Community Association, jointly with Neighbors for Smart Rail, protested the amendment contending that three of the options were inconsistent with D.09-02-031. Applicants replied that the purpose of the options was to address the safety concerns raised by the Commission and the parties with substantially modified at-grade crossing options. A prehearing conference is scheduled: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 at 1:00 pm Junipero Serra State Office Building 320 West 4th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90013 IT IS RULED that:At the prehearing conference, the parties should be prepared to discuss the substantive issues remaining in this proceeding and efficient procedures for resolving these issues. Dated September 18, 2009, at San Francisco, California. /s/ MARIBETH A. BUSHEY Maribeth A. Bushey Administrative Law Judge
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Sept 18, 2009 15:35:11 GMT -8
The Farmdale issue has been thoroughly discussed by all parties. There is nothing new to discuss. After the preliminary hearing, the judge should issue a ruling that no evidentiary hearing is necessary and then approve one, some, or all of the crossing options. This could be done in a month. No one wants to see the previous circus for which I posted the schedule for in my previous post.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Oct 23, 2009 18:39:48 GMT -8
I spoke to a representative of the Expo Authority at last Wednesday's community meeting in regards to the Farmdale St. crossing. He told me that the authority wants to build a station at Farmdale and to not close the street. A station is much less expensive then a pedestrian bridge with elevators. LAUSD has concerns about how far back the platform is from Farmdale St. They want the train to stop right at the intersection so the train doesn't have time to gain speed before intersecting Farmdale. The authority is proposing to install a wheel chair lift so that ramps can be eliminated and the station brought closer to the Farmdale St. Expo Authority will meet with LAUSD officials and lawyers to see if they can come to an agreement this Tuesday. The station would be finished after the opening of Phase one. The train will operate under Stop-and-Proceed mode until the station is completed.
I asked the gentlemen how much time this would add to the cross town travel time. His response was about two minutes but we shouldn't be concerned about two minutes as the City of Santa Monica will have street running on the west end. The street running will add comparatively much more travel time then the two minutes this station will.
Nothing has been decided of course but this is an indication of what the authority is proposing.
He convinced me, given the cards on the table, this is the best solution.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Oct 23, 2009 22:56:16 GMT -8
Great info on both the Dorsey status and Expo progress, Jason, thanks!
I don't know why the gentleman told you that a station would cause a delay of two minutes but it's actually about 40 to 50 seconds, including the 20-second station dwell[/b]. If it was a stop only, it would be about a 20- to 30-second delay, excluding any wait at the stop.
There is so much paranoia about this crossing. There is really no need to put the (near-side-stop) platforms too close to the street. With the crossing gates and the trains going very slow, this is already perfectly safe. When too many people interfere with the design, you get an inferior design. Platforms too close to the crossing can cause other problems.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Oct 30, 2009 16:41:58 GMT -8
Latest on Farmdale:
Apparently the opposition had actually never wanted to settle and they made this clear today by filing a request asking for their previous request to omit the station and/or stop options to be reconsidered.
It's now becoming apparent that their tactic is to drag this as long as possible so that they can force underground at Farmdale as well as at Overland and perhaps at other Phase 2 crossings. This is probably why Fix Expo laughed at us when I mentioned a possible settlement on a Farmdale Station. And, on top of that, I'm sure Fix Expo is still having "nuclear" dreams of filing environmental-justice lawsuits as well.
They should have built the pedestrian bridge from the start. It was already practically approved by CPUC.
So, now, it's not clear whether it will be a station or pedestrian bridge at Farmdale. What will never happen is underground -- the NIMBY's dream to stop the Expo Line and get personal gratification out of it.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 2, 2009 9:13:26 GMT -8
I think the delay will be closer to two minutes, when compared to the option of closing the street and not stopping at all. The big difference is not only with the stop at the station, but the acceleration and deceleration at the station.
With a station at that location, those neighbors are going to have bells ringing and lights flashing until 2AM. They would be better off closing the road and installing the ped bridge.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Nov 2, 2009 10:17:25 GMT -8
I concur with metrocenter and Gokhan, and am deeply saddened by the failure to implement the virtually-approved CPUC Farmdale closure/pedestrian bridge option.
Was it not pursued by the Authority because a lack of grade-separation at Dorsey would create a "precedent" at Overland Elementary School? Or is that just a conspiracy theory?
Either way, I'm just sick of this dance, and I'd like to see this pretty-much-resolved issue just put to rest.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 2, 2009 10:58:41 GMT -8
I think the delay will be closer to two minutes, when compared to the option of closing the street and not stopping at all. The big difference is not only with the stop at the station, but the acceleration and deceleration at the station. With a station at that location, those neighbors are going to have bells ringing and lights flashing until 2AM. They would be better off closing the road and installing the ped bridge. Actually my calculations showing that a station causes less than one minute of extra trip time (including slowing down an speeding up) are pretty robust. It's not two minutes but slightly under a minute. (Note that slowing-down or speeding-up trains still gain distance; so, unlike station dwelling, acceleration and deceleration are not an entire waste of time.) If it were two minutes, with 18 stations along the line, we would be spending more than half an hour at the stations and the total trip time would be more than one hour. As you see it obviously doesn't make sense. Apparently LAUSD has been objecting street closure and that's why Expo pursued additional options. But, clearly, all LAUSD, NFSR, and UCA have in mind is to have the line underground, and they will object anything and everything else.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 2, 2009 11:00:17 GMT -8
I've heard that LAUSD opposed closure of Farmdale, and at least at the CPUC Pre-Hearing Conference, LAUSD appeared to favor the added station at Farmdale.
The new ALJ Bushey emphasized that she was brought in to reach a prompt result. I hope she holds to that.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 2, 2009 11:22:21 GMT -8
I've heard that LAUSD opposed closure of Farmdale, and at least at the CPUC Pre-Hearing Conference, LAUSD appeared to favor the added station at Farmdale. The new ALJ Bushey emphasized that she was brought in to reach a prompt result. I hope she holds to that. When they appeared to favor the station at the conference, they were just being hypocrites. It's part of their game and deceit. As I said all they (LAUSD and other opposition) have in mind is underground and they will drag the process as long as possible and will oppose anything and everything else. I'm sure the previous judge also wanted this to be resolved promptly, but, with the new judge, it's already appearing to be as slow as the previous judge, having promised to resolve this weeks ago but in actuality nothing has been heard from her since. So, the end still needs to come in sight.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 2, 2009 14:59:46 GMT -8
It sounds like the LAUSD is not pushing hardcore for an underground line. These two powerhouses (LAUSD and the Expo Authority) are now moving toward a resolution. Unfortunately, the solution may wind up satisfying nobody.
To me, the idea of putting a station at Farmdale is ludicrous. Nobody will use it. It will bring additional noise and traffic to that neighborhood, beyond what a passing train would have brought. What a waste of money.
Of course, the real waste is the waste of energy on the part of some in this community. The people were not upset about the Expo Line until Fix Expo dangled the bait of perceived racial discrimination in front of them.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 2, 2009 15:37:00 GMT -8
It sounds like the LAUSD is not pushing hardcore for an underground line. These two powerhouses (LAUSD and the Expo Authority) are now moving toward a resolution. Again, apparently this is not true. It turned out that LAUSD was likely simply pretending to accept a station. UCA/NFSR recently filed a joined motion opposing the station. Laughing at me for Darell and I believing that there would be a station, the Fix Expo leader told me that he is very smart and everyone else on this board is "so stupid." The group Fix Expo should have been ignored by CPUC from the start and the original application should have been approved. That was the mistake CPUC did.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 2, 2009 17:02:52 GMT -8
Again, apparently this is not true. It turned out that LAUSD was likely simply pretending to accept a station. UCA/NFSR recently filed a joined motion opposing the station. Laughing at me for Darell and I believing that there would be a station, the Fix Expo leader told me that he is very smart and everyone else on this board is "so stupid." It looks to me like LAUSD has diverged from UCA/NFSR. What evidence do you have the LAUSD is "pretending"?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 2, 2009 17:41:39 GMT -8
Again, apparently this is not true. It turned out that LAUSD was likely simply pretending to accept a station. UCA/NFSR recently filed a joined motion opposing the station. Laughing at me for Darell and I believing that there would be a station, the Fix Expo leader told me that he is very smart and everyone else on this board is "so stupid." It looks to me like LAUSD has diverged from UCA/NFSR. What evidence do you have the LAUSD is "pretending"? At the conference they all seemed to be converging on the station and there was no opposition by anyone, only some talk about technical details such as the distance of the platforms from the crossing. A settlement was expected to happen in ten days but no progress have taken place since. Then came the objection to a station or stop by UCA and NFSR. It's not clear if LAUSD and UCA/NFSR have now parted or they are all playing their game together. My feeling is that these groups talk to each other all the time and they still have a strong alliance.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 3, 2009 20:11:55 GMT -8
Well, I was driving by the Expo right-of-way tonight and I noticed a sign at the Crenshaw Station saying that "10 new stations between Downtown and Culver City -- Expo Line Coming Soon," as well as its Spanish version. So far so good. But, after a few minutes, I realized that something was wrong with that picture. Not counting 7th/Metro Center and Pico, there are only 9 new stations in Phase 1. So, are they counting Pico as a new station? Can't be. Is the Palms Station being added to Phase 1? Can't be -- also Palms is beyond Culver City. Did the Expo Authority make a mistake? Perhaps but I doubt it. Then, I realized that the 10th station quite likely is the Farmdale Station. I guess Farmdale Station might already be a done deal and it's only the slow-turning wheels of bureaucracy before its official announcement. And Fix Expo were then actually oblivious and delusional as always in thinking that they will still get underground there -- what a surprise. And, by the way, here is why the NIMBYs always want underground. Because they are actually from the underground: Perhaps someone can post a picture of the "10 new stations" sign. If I thought about it immediately, I would take a picture. But I have the strong feeling that the 10th station is not a typo.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Nov 3, 2009 21:00:19 GMT -8
Perhaps someone can post a picture of the "10 new stations" sign. If I thought about it immediately, I would take a picture. But I have the strong feeling that the 10th station is not a typo. Pic at the Jefferson station site I posted on the main Expo thread. Although not a "10 new stations" sign, here's the sign that was posted at the Vermont station site:
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Nov 3, 2009 21:10:11 GMT -8
So, Gokhan, are the NIMBY's the demons or the damned?
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 3, 2009 21:21:43 GMT -8
Perhaps someone can post a picture of the "10 new stations" sign. If I thought about it immediately, I would take a picture. But I have the strong feeling that the 10th station is not a typo. I remembered that Justin already did post that photo: Although it could be that the sign's text was approved when Farmdale negotiations were looking more positive. One way or another the CPUC will approve a crossing at Farmdale. There's an interesting irony there. UCA/NFSR explicitly cited this CPUC decision text We find it is practicable to construct a grade-separated pedestrian bridge and close the roadway to traffic at Farmdale Avenue, because the grade-separated pedestrian bridge will eliminate the potential safety hazards of large number of school age pedestrians crossing the road at-grade. Further, we find that closing Farmdale Avenue will not cause adverse unmitigable impacts and is therefore feasible. in their 10/30/09 "Motion for Reconsideration of ALJ’S Denial of Motion to Strike" Expo's new at-grade applications. But if LAUSD or UCA successfully contest closing Farmdale, the CPUC could decide the pedestrian bridge isn't practicable after all and approve the original at-grade application.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Nov 4, 2009 13:50:52 GMT -8
Has there been a date set to settle the Farmdale crossing? Can the CPUC reverse it's previous decision and allow the original proposal?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 4, 2009 15:41:12 GMT -8
Has there been a date set to settle the Farmdale crossing? Can the CPUC reverse it's previous decision and allow the original proposal? My feeling is that LAUSD and Expo have already settled on the station. They have already been repeatedly meeting on the technical details of platform distances etc. My other feeling is that the UCA and NFSR NIMBYs will not settle; so, the settlement will only be signed by Expo and LAUSD. But who cares? The final outcome will be one of the four options: pedestrian bridge with street closure, station, stop, or initially stop then station when constructed. Note that the last three are the original application plus a stop or station. In other words the original application no longer exists in the original form but only exists in an amended form. CPUC cannot approve something that no longer exists; they only have the authority to approve the amended application -- that is one of the four options. So, CPUC has no longer the authority to approve the 55 MPH gated crossing, as this application no longer exists. In the future, if they move the school to a different location, or if the line proves to be very safe, Metro (the operator) can submit a new application asking for station run-through at 55 MPH outside school rush hours. But this is something for the future, not now. In the event that Dorsey is moved to a different location, they would get rid of the station and run the trains at 55 MPH with gates, after applying to CPUC. There is no expected date right now for the amended application's approval but my guess is December or January. First a proposed decision will come from the judge, then the protests of UCA and NFSR, and then it will go to the CPUC commission meeting.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 7, 2009 23:03:57 GMT -8
I've rechecked my calculations for various alterations of parameters, and in all cases the effect of the Farmdale Station comes to just about 1.0 minute, or perhaps slightly less. So, the 1.0 minute of extra time cost for an extra station is a pretty robust fact.
With the Farmdale Station, adding one minute, the trip time to Venice/Robertson should be about 26 minutes and to Santa Monica about 41 minutes. These times could be quicker by another 5 minutes if they can optimize their operations.
|
|