crossings have been authorized most often in situations where the applicant agrees to close an existing at-grade crossing. At-grade crossings have also been approved in situations where it is expected there will be fewer than 10 trains per week and/or trains will be traveling at slow speeds. In 2003, the Commission held that a separated grade crossing was impracticable for a heavy and light rail crossing that was part of a redevelopment project in San Diego. In that case, the community was divided, with some supporting an at-grade crossing and others opposing the redevelopment project as a whole. Ongoing development in the downtown area proximal to the crossing presented anticipated increased traffic concerns. Separated grade crossings would have cost $30,000,000 more than an at-grade crossing. The Commission found that the separated grade would divide the downtown and interfere with many buildings’ views of San Diego Bay. In 2015, the Commission found that a two-track light rail crossing for trains not exceeding 35 mph did not warrant a $250,000,000 expenditure on a grade-separated crossing. In that case, several community groups opposed the at-grade crossings. When weighing the factors, the Commission emphasized that safety requirements had been met and that the high cost of the separated grade crossing was not justifiable. The Commission has also denied crossing proposals in part because of lack of support from local emergency authorities. In this case, representatives from both the fire and police departments have submitted comments regarding the impracticability of a separated grade alternative. Local authorities have also
crossings have been authorized most often in situations where the applicant agrees to close an existing at-grade crossing. At-grade crossings have also been approved in situations where it is expected there will be fewer than 10 trains per week and/or trains will be traveling at slow speeds. In 2003, the Commission held that a separated grade crossing was impracticable for a heavy and light rail crossing that was part of a redevelopment project in San Diego. In that case, the community was divided, with some supporting an at-grade crossing and others opposing the redevelopment project as a whole. Ongoing development in the downtown area proximal to the crossing presented anticipated increased traffic concerns. Separated grade crossings would have cost $30,000,000 more than an at-grade crossing. The Commission found that the separated grade would divide the downtown and interfere with many buildings’ views of San Diego Bay. In 2015, the Commission found that a two-track light rail crossing for trains not exceeding 35 mph did not warrant a $250,000,000 expenditure on a grade-separated crossing. In that case, several community groups opposed the at-grade crossings. When weighing the factors, the Commission emphasized that safety requirements had been met and that the high cost of the separated grade crossing was not justifiable. The Commission has also denied crossing proposals in part because of lack of support from local emergency authorities. In this case, representatives from both the fire and police departments have submitted comments regarding the impracticability of a separated grade alternative. Local authorities have also
167320134.docx