Pasadena Blue Line Hits a Crossing Jam

The Pasadena Blue Line project that was supposed to help set the standard for on-time, on-budget efficiency in local mass transit now faces the most elemental kind of problem: It rushed into construction without all the necessary regulatory approvals.

The much-anticipated Blue Line is being built by an independent authority that was supposed to spare it the many cost overruns, safety hazards and management miscues that plagued the city’s subway construction.

But the construction authority has been unable to shake critics who contend that, for safety reasons, more of the rail line should be built above or below city streets, to minimize contact with pedestrians and auto traffic.

Among those raising concerns about the new rail line are the California Public Utilities Commission, the city of South Pasadena, and activist groups in Mt. Washington and Pasadena.

The problems have placed a legal cloud over the project. They are serious enough to lead the official heading the $800-million construction project to warn that protests could delay the 14-mile line’s July 2003 opening, if not halt construction altogether.

The issues are expected to come to a head in the next several months in hearings before the PUC. Many observers believe the concerns will be resolved without shutting down the project.

But many of the proposed solutions will cost more money and the construction authority is operating on a bare-bones budget, said Rick Thorpe, the chief executive of the Los Angeles to Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority. Local officials hired Thorpe because of his reputation for successfully building light rail lines in San Diego and Salt Lake City.

If any significant expense is added to the construction budget, Thorpe said, “This project will be done, finished. . . . We will have to shut it down.”

The new challenges to the showcase project come with $350 million in construction and planning money already spent.

As lawyers from both sides polish their arguments and activist groups work their neighborhoods, construction of the rail line is proceeding at a brisk pace.

Tunnels are being excavated in Old Pasadena and Mt. Washington. Grading work is underway on the median of the Foothill Freeway. An elevated section of the line through Chinatown is 60% finished.

The question of the hour among critics is why Thorpe and the construction authority didn’t get necessary clearance before work began.

“They are now starting to scream, ‘We have to get this resolved quick!’ ” said Larry Hoffman, attorney for the Mt. Washington Assn. “It’s like a homeowner who doesn’t get a building permit and starts building, then says, ‘I have so much money in this thing, I can’t stop building.’ ”

Safety Concerns at Several Street Crossings

Driving the dispute is concern about safety issues at dozens of points where the rail line will cross busy city streets.

Critics say they do not want a repeat of the problems of the MTA’s Los Angeles-to-Long Beach Blue Line, which had the highest light rail accident rate in the state during the 1990s, according to PUC records.

The PUC staff is recommending that a “grade separation” be put in at Pasadena Avenue and Monterey Road in South Pasadena, a requirement that the construction authority and city officials believe is unnecessary. (Engineers separate streets and rail lines by raising tracks onto bridges or lowering them into trenches or tunnels.)

Regulatory agency officials also would like South Pasadena to honor what they believe was a 1995 promise to close off two cross streets that intersect with the rail line.

The city, at least for now, is saying no to both suggestions.

On Wednesday, members of South Pasadena’s Transportation Commission reaffirmed their refusal to close any of the city’s streets. After a 3 1/2-hour debate, the commission voted 3 to 2 to keep two streets, Fairview Avenue and Magnolia Street, open to traffic.

The final determination on street closings, however, will be made by the South Pasadena City Council, and there is strong sentiment in the city to close the streets. Martha Van Rooijen, the city’s transportation manager, will recommend to the City Council that Fairview and Magnolia be closed. A vote by the council is scheduled for Wednesday.

The conflict between the PUC and South Pasadena has taken on added importance because it has put the powerful state regulatory agency on the same legal side as activist critics up and down the line.

Over the objections of the construction authority, the PUC put all legal challenges to the light rail line into a single, consolidated case. That means that rather than fighting on their own, activists in Mt. Washington, Highland Park and Pasadena will have their complaints heard at the same time as the state agency.

The Mt. Washington Assn. is asking the PUC to sink the tracks at Avenue 45 below street level, citing noise, traffic and safety issues.

Residents of the hillside community contend that the sounds of the trains’ horns will be magnified as they ricochet up the hills. With trains going by every few minutes at rush hour, they argue that the noise will be unbearable.

Further up the line, Highland Park activist Jo Anne Barker is challenging the authority’s environmental review of the project, contending the rail line would create safety risks for both pedestrians and motorists.

In Pasadena, a group organized as “Citizens Against the Blue Line At-Grade” would like the line built below ground, contending that running trains at street level will create a traffic nightmare and lead to immense safety problems, similar to those experienced by the Long Beach Blue Line.

Plans call for just one below-grade section in the city of Pasadena: a tunnel running from Del Mar Boulevard to Memorial Park in Old Town.

Critics Say Added Costs Are Worth It

Critics concede that lowering more of the line could be extremely expensive. Still, it would be worth it, said Karen Cutts, a spokeswoman for the Pasadena citizens group.

As presently conceived, Cutts said, “There is actually no way this train is going to run safely at grade through this city.”

Thorpe fought to keep the various challenges separate, contending that the majority of grade crossings were not being contested and therefore should have been approved by the PUC.

He argues that there are objections to only 19 of 72 street crossings, but consolidating the cases places a legal cloud over all of them.

The PUC refuses to back down.

Patrick S. Berdge, the PUC’s attorney, said his agency “felt it would be more economical for the commission and staff to review all the crossings at one time and treat them as a package.”

“The staff has concerns with each of the crossings it filed a protest on. Until those are resolved we don’t want them de-consolidated,” Berdge said in a telephone interview from his San Francisco office. “What we are looking for here is the protection of the public at these crossings. That is all we are concerned about.”

Thorpe believes that he will win the disputes with the activist groups. He said the entire light rail line was designed to use state-of-the-art safety features, such as quadrant crossing gates, computerized signals and signs.

He bristles at comparisons to the Los Angeles-to-Long Beach Blue Line, saying a more appropriate comparison would be with the state’s other light rail lines, which have a much better safety record.

“I guarantee you that the accident record on this line will be nowhere near what it is on the Long Beach line,” he said.

So far, no one is pushing the panic button. A hearing before an administrative law judge is scheduled later this month to get talks started to resolve the thicket of disputes.

Most of those close to the issue believe the differences between the PUC and South Pasadena can be ironed out. State officials have indicated that if the city agrees to close two other streets, they might consider dropping their recommendation for the more costly raising or lowering of the tracks at Pasadena Avenue and Monterey Road.

The controversy is the latest in the troubled history of the Pasadena Blue Line. Work on the line had began during the early 1990s. But the MTA stopped development on all but one of its rail lines because of financial and political problems.

Then, through an act of the Legislature, responsibility for construction was taken away from the MTA and given to the new Pasadena construction authority. The leaner start-up was supposed to move ahead swiftly.

*

Times staff writer Richard Winton contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Traffic and the Pasadena Line

With construction well underway on the Pasadena Blue Line, challenges over safety issues and raffic congestion are mounting. Disputes over street-level crossings could delay completion of the line.