Light Rail Proposal Gains Steam in O.C.

Both the brutal pitfalls and gleaming potential of urban rail can be found in Southern California.

In Los Angeles, an ambitious subway project has been staggered by cost overruns and construction fiascoes. But in San Diego, a more modest and far cheaper light rail system built at a measured pace has become a national model of success.

Now comes Orange County, with hopes of building something right in the middle.

Four decades after freeways paved the way for explosive suburban growth in Orange County, local leaders will gather today to map the path of a proposed $1.5-billion urban rail line that backers see as a crucial step in the county’s evolution into an urban metropolis.

The concept has captured the imagination of traffic-weary residents: A new Times Orange County Poll shows resounding support for the project, and a modest majority even favors a sales tax to pay for it. The plan also enjoys wide support from county leaders, who are already vying with eight other cities for federal rail funding.

But this public eagerness has not silenced critics who question the wisdom of building the pricey system and worry that the massive undertaking could lead to the same problems that have plagued Los Angeles.

“There are no logical reasons to build this system, and only amateurs think it’s going to be a [traffic] solution” said Charles Lave, an economics professor at UC Irvine. “No rail system built in the past 20 years has gotten people out of their cars. It’s a symbol of things cosmopolitan. It’s a dream.”

Lave and other doubters point to studies showing that rail siphons passengers from buses, not cars. They argue that the money earmarked for rail should go instead into sure-thing improvements: Wider freeways, better roads, more buses. Urban rail, they say, is nothing more than a shiny, impractical toy.

Advocates, however, insist the 28-mile rail line linking seven local cities would reshape development in local downtowns, whisk tourists from the airport to Disneyland or ballgames and thin out the crush of commuters on freeways.

“Orange County is changing from being seen as a suburb of Los Angeles, and there’s a feeling along with that change that it has to become more cosmopolitan,” said Alistair W. Baillie, who leads a team of consultants hired for the project. “With that, you have to provide choices to people on how they travel.”

Strong Support for Urban Rail

There is no doubt that urban rail holds a romantic allure for the public, even among those who say they would rarely hop aboard. In a recent Times Poll, 74% of respondents said they support building a local urban rail system. More than half said they would be willing to pay a half-cent sales tax to pay for it.

For Orange County residents such as Ralph D. Mitchell of San Juan Capistrano, the thought of a train winding through the streets of Santa Ana evokes the aura of New York, Chicago and other urban centers to the east.

“It gives you a choice and versatility, and it’s an asset to the community,” the 49-year-old educator said. “And I’m sure it would help get some traffic off the road. It’s better than nothing. That’s an improvement over people simply driving around in their cars.”

But while Mitchell’s business routinely takes him to Anaheim, Irvine, Santa Ana and Costa Mesa--four of the cities on the proposed rail path--he says he doubts he would ride the rail line. He might hop a train to get to an Anaheim Angels game or to take his grandson to Disneyland, he said. But the nature of his workday and Orange County geography makes it tough to leave his car parked at home.

“I think tourists would use it mostly,” he said, adding that he uses the rail when visiting other cities. “It makes you feel like you’re in a modern metropolis, and it’s quaint having trains running through.”

Mitchell’s comments cut to the heart of the debate over urban rail. How much of its popularity is based on hard fact and how much of it is based on a suburb’s desire for a lasting symbol of Big City life? The question is especially fitting in Orange County, which has struggled for years to emerge from the shadow of Los Angeles to be viewed as more than a patchwork of conservative bedroom communities.

To Alan C. Wulkan, whose Arizona-based engineering firm has worked on rail systems across North America, the answer is a combination of both. Rail is a huge transportation boon to growing cities, he says, but there’s no denying that it serves also as a touchstone.

“This country has had a fascination with rail way before the automobile was around. It was an image of the opening up of the West and opportunity,” said the vice president with Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas. “When we’re young kids, what toy do we get? A miniature railroad set. It’s part of our culture. But that doesn’t mean it’s not a practical thing too.”

Joining a ‘Renaissance’ in Rail Development

Orange County seeks to join a “renaissance of rail” that began in the 1970s with a new breed of mass transit that relies on light rail rather than the old-fashioned subways and streetcars.

Unlike older transit systems, light rail is designed to handle fewer riders and shorter trips, with the goal of making urban centers more accessible.

Twenty of the nation’s 30 largest metropolitan areas have heavy or light rail, and eight others are studying or building new systems. Four urban rail systems have opened in California in the last two decades, and the two closest to Orange County provided markedly different lessons.

In Los Angeles, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has built two light rail lines and the shortest and most expensive subway system in the nation. It now finds itself facing $7 billion in debt after a frenzy of borrowing that began in the 1980s. The debilitating debt has called into question the agency’s ability to expand or maintain a creaky bus system that serves the nation’s most populated county. Critics cite politics and mismanagement as the culprits behind the MTA’s woes.

Despite the problems with the subway, the MTA’s Blue Line light rail system between Long Beach and downtown Los Angeles is considered a major success. Ridership is approaching capacity, and officials are struggling to accommodate more commuters.

How did San Diego succeed? The answer lies in taking modest steps and understanding how rail fits into neighborhoods and overall transit, said Jack Limber, deputy general manager of the Metropolitan Transit Development Board in San Diego.

“I don’t want to criticize Los Angeles in any way, but I think the fundamental problem was overreaching,” said Limber, who explained that the 54-mile San Diego system started with a 15-mile segment and expanded only after enjoying some success.

And, unlike Los Angeles, San Diego leaders opted to use only one type of rail technology and upgraded and coordinated bus service to complement the trains. They fostered development around the stations--allowing a school district to set up an adult education center in one station, for example, and placing another station in the heart of a business complex to spur ridership.

The most vital step, Limber said, was identifying a route dotted with “natural origins and destinations” that would foster immediate ridership. “The corridor they’ve identified in Orange County seems to have that,” Limber said.

Cutting Through County’s Urban Core

Orange County’s system would look and operate much like the San Diego trolley. But like Los Angeles’ subway, it would cut through the heart of the community’s urban core.

The county’s vision is, so far, a system of trolley-like trains that would pull into stations every five minutes and that, for a $1 or $2 fare, would ferry passengers to work, school, government offices, ballgames or the mall. The path would run through a dense corridor of cities that are home to 34% of the county’s population and 57% of its jobs.

The proposed line would start near downtown Fullerton, then head south along Harbor Boulevard into downtown Anaheim and down to Disneyland before veering sharply to the east for stops at Edison International Field--home of the Anaheim Angels--and the adjacent Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim, home of the Mighty Ducks.

The line would then zigzag through Orange, Garden Grove and Santa Ana, making stops near the MainPlace/Santa Ana mall. The line would then parallel the San Diego Freeway, with stops in the South Coast Plaza district, the Irvine corporate hub, John Wayne Airport, the Irvine Spectrum and finally the Irvine Transportation Center.

The system would be a complement to Metrolink, the commuter rail system that has far fewer stops and primarily serves longer-distance riders. The two rail networks would share stations in Fullerton and Irvine.

The Orange County Transportation Authority board of directors will meet today to hammer out the specifics of the proposed route through Santa Ana and Irvine. The board will decide whether the line would follow Main Street or Bristol Street and whether it would run through Barranca Parkway, a proposal that has sparked a backlash from city officials and residents concerned about noise.

The path decision is the first in a series of votes that are expected to climax in December 1999 when officials decide whether to build the system. If it is built, the line could pick up its first passengers as soon as 2008.

The price tag? The low-end estimate is $1 billion for a rail system that runs at street level, but those costs could swell to $1.8 billion and beyond if the trains run on an elevated rail. The project would start with $340 million from Measure M, the sales tax approved in 1990 for transportation projects, and rely heavily on federal funding and the cooperation of involved cities, such as Irvine, which holds $125 million in state transportation money that would probably be tapped for the endeavor.

State highway funds, competitive grants and OCTA discretionary funds also have been targeted as monetary sources if the project gets approved, said Dave Elbaum, OCTA planning director.

But even with those funds, officials doubt they could finance the entire project without a tax increase, which would require voter approval. So planners would follow the lead of San Diego and build a single segment--the 15 miles linking Disneyland to John Wayne Airport--and expand later. This first leg of the system would cost $700 million, which Elbaum described as “very doable.”

Basic Design Decisions Still to Be Made

Unlike the rail system in Los Angeles--and perhaps because of its woes--no one in Orange County is discussing a system that ventures underground or uses heavy rail, aspects that would ratchet up costs and complicate engineering. The key remaining decision is whether to build at street level, on elevated tracks or, the most likely option, a hybrid of the two.

While elevated rail is more expensive, it offers some significant advantages over ground-level rail, officials say. A street-level system would run down the center or alongside city streets, creating traffic problems at intersections. If cars have to wait for the train, it increases urban congestion. Also, street-level trains have to run slower for traffic safety reasons, reducing efficiency and overall ridership capacity.

The proposed system would cross four freeways, the Riverside, the Orange, the Garden Grove and the San Diego, offering extra wrinkles of engineering difficulty, Baillie said.

But the harder challenge to creating a success story in Orange County may not be deciding where the system will run but where and how it will stop. Officials must discuss where to put stations and how they will connect and interact with sites such as Disneyland, John Wayne Airport and South Coast Plaza. Finding a consensus and predicting trouble spots will be daunting, Baillie said.

In the end, Baillie said, the potential of rail in Orange County is a rich one. The consultant said he has repeatedly walked, driven and flown the proposed route, and he can envision centers of commerce and pedestrian traffic popping up around the stations, and workers hopping aboard the trains to dash to the Irvine Spectrum or South Coast Plaza for lunch or shopping.

‘More Trouble Than They’re Worth’?

That is an alluring idea to John Matthews, 57, of Capistrano Beach, who said he enjoys visiting San Francisco and using the local rail transportation to make quick trips around the city. “I love that. We need that here,” the artist said. “It would change the feel of the place. And I’m all for anything that would take pressure off the freeways. They’re packed.”

Those incentives are not enough to win over everyone, especially those who blanch at the costs of the project. “More than a billion? That’s ridiculous,” said Danny Harris, a resident of Costa Mesa. “Unless that train is made of solid gold, there’s no way it’s worth it.”

Harris, 21, believes that stronger carpool lane incentives, bicycle commuting and better roads are the best ways to reduce traffic congestion. As for the $1 billion being considered for the rail project, he suggests pumping that into local schools.

“No one is going to use urban rail here,” he said. “Everyone around here has a car. Trains are more trouble than they’re worth.”

Too true, says Lave, the UCI economics professor, who has studied rail systems across the United States and Europe. He points out that no existing system--including San Diego--makes or expects a profit, and they draw their ridership from buses, which Lave describes as far more practical and flexible than a fixed rail system.

As for traffic, Lave said grim projections of increasing gridlock on local freeways in looming years do not take into account human nature. He cites studies showing that most people will drive about 20 minutes to reach their workplace, and when traffic stretches that drive time too far, people will move or change jobs. He says the one thing the vast majority of them won’t do, however, is park their cars at a train station or home and use rail to commute.

“The majority of people who say they are in favor of building it say that because they think it will get other people off the road, like that person driving in front of them,” Lave said. “But how many would actually use it? Very few.”

But many Orange County drivers may long to do just that. A majority of drivers polled expressed nagging or deep frustration with their commute, and most said they feel endangered by others amid the chaos of traffic. To them, urban rail has the sound of a reprieve.

“I’d love to see it. I’d love to use it to get around,” said 17-year-old Robert Synder, a student at Magnolia High School in Anaheim. “Driving in traffic is just bad. If they build it, people will use it.”

* EDUCATION PAGE

The Times’ Launch Point Web site focuses on modes of transportation. B2

* ROADS SCHOLAR

Tracking the on-again, off-again history of rail transit in Orange County. B3

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Light Rail: Weighing the Options

Orange County residents want a light rail system and favor a half-cent sales tax increase to fund it. The proposed system’s route and the advantages and disadvantages of the two formats under consideration:

STREET LEVEL

Follows the street, traveling over and under freeways.

Advantages

* Less expensive to build, operate and maintain

* More successful attracting pedestrian traffic, more accessible

* Can be built faster

Disadvantages

* More impact on traffic, since cars must yield to trains

* Train lines take up a traffic lane

Estimated cost: $1.3 billion

****

ELEVATED

Built on raised tracks, requiring escalators and stations built on elevated platforms.

Advantages

* No impact on traffic

* Safer, due to less traffic interference

* Moves faster, increasing rider capacity

Disadvantages

* Visually intrusive

* Out of scale with surrounding streetscape

Estimated cost: $1.8 billion

****

What Residents Think

Would you favor or oppose raising the sales tax half a cent to pay for transportation improvements such as building a local rail system, widening freeways and adding more carpool lanes?

*--*

18-34 35-54 55 and Total years years older Favor 53% 67% 44% Oppose 45% 32% 52% 53% Don’t know 2% 1% 4% 1%

*--*

****

Do you favor or oppose building a rail system that would link the major cities and employment centers within Orange County?

Favor: 74%

Oppose: 22%

Don’t know: 4%

*

Rail Comparison

What other cities have constructed:

Dallas (DART)

Type: Street-level, elevated and subterranean

Opened: 1996

Miles: 11.2

Cost: $860 million

Average weekday ridership: 16,700

****

San Diego

Type: Street-level and elevated

Opened: 1981

Miles: 47.8

Cost: $121 million

Average weekday ridership: 47,900

****

Portland, Ore.

Type: Street-level and subterranean

Opened: 1986

Miles: 33.1

Cost: $214 million

Average weekday ridership: 29,900

****

Vancouver, Canada

Type: Street-level and elevated

Opened: 1986

Miles: 13.4

Cost: $615 million

Average weekday ridership: more than 80,000

****

Los Angeles (Blue Line)

Type: Street-level, elevated and subterranean

Opened: 1990

Miles: 22.0

Cost: $877 million

Average weekday ridership: 58,700

****

Los Angeles (Green Line)

Type: Street-level, elevated and subterranean

Opened: 1995

Miles: 21.5

Cost: $718 million

Average weekday ridership: 61,000

Source: Orange County Transportation Authority

Researched by JANICE JONES DODDS / Los Angeles Times

About This Series

This story begins Beyond 2000, a series of articles exploring how our lives will change in the next millennium. The series will continue every Monday through the end of 1998 as The Times Orange County examines what’s in store for the county in such areas as transportation, education, growth and technology.

*

On the Internet

The Beyond 2000 series and an interactive discussion are available on The Times Orange County Edition Web site at https://www.timesoc.com/HOME/NEWS/ORANGE/beyond.htm

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Orange County Poll was conducted by Baldassare Associates. The random telephone survey of 600 adult Orange County residents was conducted July 23-26. The sample reflects the demographic characteristics of Orange County adult residents. The margin of error for the total sample is plus or minus 4% at the 95% confidence level. That means the results are within 4 percentage points of what they would be if all adults in Orange County were interviewed. For subgroups, such as regions, the margin of error would be larger. For registered voters the margin of error is plus or minus 5%.