EPA Objection to Auxiliary Lanes Could Slow I-5 Work : Transportation: The federal agency fears that the two unbroken lanes on one segment could lure too many cars and produce too much smog.

The $1.6-billion Santa Ana Freeway-widening project may be scaled back from 12 lanes to 10 along one critical stretch because the Environmental Protection Agency believes that the present design will attract too many cars and generate too much smog, officials said Monday.

Most immediately, the dispute between Caltrans and the EPA could frustrate plans to speed purchase of land for the widening project. If the argument persists for several months, progress on the massive project could be stalled, increasing costs dramatically.

Specifically, the EPA objects to a continuous lane in each direction between the Garden Grove and Riverside freeways that would be used for merging traffic between on-ramps and exits. Such lanes, known as auxiliary lanes, normally reduce pollutants by easing traffic congestion.

But EPA officials contend that the Caltrans’ plan effectively turns the auxiliary lanes into regular lanes because they run continuously along the freeway instead of starting and stopping at the various ramps. As a result, the lanes will attract too many single-occupant cars, the EPA contends.

County and Caltrans officials say, however, that the lanes will merely improve traffic flow and will not influence how many people use the freeway. The same dispute flared up once before, only to be resolved in the state’s favor, and officials are confident that they will also prevail in this case.

Nevertheless, the EPA’s objections are holding up environmental clearances, and Caltrans needs such clearances before the agency can acquire rights of way. Local officials hope to use money generated by the new transportation sales tax approved by voters this month to begin buying land early next year, saving potentially millions of dollars in inflation costs.

“The issue for us is how fast can we acquire right of way,” said Stanley T. Oftelie, executive director of the Orange County Transportation Commission. “If we have to maneuver outside of Caltrans, we might do just that.”

Oftelie said it may be possible to acquire the needed parcels--expected to cost several hundred million dollars--through an arrangement with the city of Anaheim and then transfer the land to Caltrans later.

The dispute, officials acknowledged, hinges on the definition of a single word--”auxiliary.”

Caltrans officials contend that they merely modified the concept and designed the Santa Ana Freeway auxiliary lanes to run continuously rather than intermittently. They have done the same on other segments of the Santa Ana Freeway-widening project already under construction. The EPA raised objections in those instances but eventually approved the design.

The massive widening project is broken down into segments, and each segment must be approved by various agencies. Construction began last year on the segment between the El Toro “Y” and the Costa Mesa Freeway, and construction recently began on the next segment located between the Costa Mesa and Garden Grove freeways.

No date has been set for construction on sections north of the Garden Grove Freeway.

Officials with the Southern California Assn. of Governments, a six-county, regional-planning agency that is seeking to enforce the EPA’s clean-air plans for the Los Angeles-Orange County basin, believe the auxiliary lanes planned for the Santa Ana Freeway are really regular traffic lanes in disguise.

“The trouble is, the continuous lanes they have designed are nothing more than regular, mixed-flow lanes, and drivers would use them that way, adding to the capacity of the freeway,” James Gosnell, SCAG’s director of transportation planning.

While adding regular mixed-flow capacity may sound like a good idea, Gosnell and EPA officials said that this attracts more motorists to a highway that is already so overburdened that it will never be able to satisfy pent-up demand, even if it were tripled in size.

Currently, two car-pool lanes are scheduled to be added to the freeway, but Gosnell said that he has raised the issue of possibly adding two more.

EPA officials, meanwhile, said they voiced their concerns about the auxiliary lanes on the segment north of the Garden Grove Freeway in September, 1989, in letters to Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration.

Documents provided to The Times by the EPA on Monday show that the agency refused to approve the draft environmental impact report because Caltrans and local officials had failed to show what the air-quality benefits of the freeway-widening would be, given its likelihood of attracting more traffic.

Generally, the EPA requires that freeway improvements not add to the basin’s air pollution problem, which is the worst in the nation. For example, the EPA welcomes highway projects that improve the flow of existing traffic but frown upon projects that attract new traffic.

The issue of auxiliary lanes was raised Monday at an Orange County Transportation Commission meeting, where a memo from OCTC project coordinator Kia Mortazavi was circulated.

In the memo, Mortazavi said: “The number of lanes is being questioned by the EPA. According to the State Implementation Plan, I-5 is shown as a 10-lane facility in the ultimate configuration. The proposed project is consistent with this but adds two auxiliary lanes. EPA and SCAG are interpreting the facility to be a 12-lane facility and, citing air-quality concerns, they officially questioned the project and effectively stopped the review process.”

Mortazavi’s memo said the solution to the dispute “is to reconfigure the proposed project to exclude the auxiliary lanes.”

But after the meeting, Mortazavi said that down-sizing the project to 10 lanes was only one option being explored. And he insisted that the current dispute is only minor--a disagreement over the word “auxiliary.”

Officials said they could not estimate the effect on traffic congestion if the auxiliary lanes are not built.

SANTA ANA FREEWAY--WIDENING PROJECT

Traditional auxiliary land (A) extends only between an on-ramp and an exit. For I-5, Caltrans has proposed a second auxiliary land (B) that extends continuously from the Garden Grove Freeway (22) to the Riverside Freeway (91).