Rail Authority Seeks to Build at Disputed Sites

Facing a drawn-out regulatory review that they say could threaten completion of the Pasadena Blue Line, the builders of the light-rail project have asked a state agency to allow construction to continue at street crossings that have drawn the ire of local activists.

The Pasadena Blue Line Construction Authority filed a motion Friday with the state Public Utilities Commission, asking permission to begin laying track at about 60 locations where the rail line crosses roadways. Neighbors have formally protested construction at 17 of the crossings, mainly because they will place trains at street level, where they could one day collide with cars or hit pedestrians on the route from downtown Los Angeles to Pasadena.

“The requested relief is both appropriate and necessary to avoid the waste of public funds and make it possible to complete an important public project on a timely basis,” reads the petition by Martin A. Mattes, lawyer for the rail authority.

Managers of the rail project say they need permission to build at the street crossings immediately to keep construction within a strict $732-million budget and to ensure the line opens on time in the summer of 2003.

The rail builders say the petition will not put the public at risk because trains will never run on the line if the PUC later decides the crossings are dangerous.

But the petition will be firmly opposed by a cadre of neighborhood activists who have long contested the rail line. “We will certainly fight this,” said Pasadena resident Karen Cutts. “There’s no way they are going to be allowed to circumvent the public process.”

The activists have voiced a number of concerns about the rail line. The trains, they claim, will be too loud, cause too much nearby development and endanger the environment. They have 15 days to file their opposition to the request.

Richard Bilas, the PUC member assigned to oversee Blue Line construction, ruled in September that a decision on whether to allow the crossings would not be made until May at the earliest--a potential eight-month delay.

The PUC is the regulatory body responsible for approving train crossings at all street intersections.

“We did not anticipate that the process for the PUC decision was going to take so long,” said Rick Thorpe, chief executive of the Blue Line Construction Authority, who said he had thought a final ruling would come by early next year.

With the decision in doubt, the authority’s board agreed last month to stop construction at all intersections, including 17 crossings in Mount Washington, Highland Park, Pasadena and other communities.

Construction of the line is about half complete and work has continued in other locations.

Thorpe argues that if the PUC forces the line at street crossings to be built on bridges or in trenches the cost could run up to $300 million, imperiling the entire project. That’s because the $732-million line is being built on a tight budget, and there is little wiggle room for construction delays, he said.

Thorpe said that waiting to build at the intersections would soon cost the authority up to $60,000 a day because workers likely would be left idle and plans would have to be reordered. Spread over seven months, until the PUC was scheduled to rule on the case, that could cost $14 million, Thorpe said.

The authority uses a process called design/build, a cost-saving technique that relies on laying track in precise sequence, segment by segment--as if laying out track on a model train set.

Installing track in disjointed segments can cause engineering problems because it is harder to bring the pieces together precisely. It is also extremely costly, Thorpe said.

“It seems to us this is a win-win situation,” Thorpe said. “We save the taxpayers $14 million and still allow PUC to go through the process.”

Opponents of the road-level construction said Friday the authority has not proven that the delay for PUC safety hearings would threaten the Blue Line’s completion or trigger huge increased costs.

It’s unclear how the PUC will react to a request to allow construction to proceed now and consider safety issues later.

PUC lawyer Patrick Berdge said his staff was surprised by the request. “It would be better to work with our staff in developing the proper protections for the public,” he said. “It is really pretty much putting the cart before the horse.”