Other Caltrans Tollway Deals Hurt Freeways

Caltrans’ controversial promise to a toll road operator not to make improvements to the Riverside Freeway--lest it hurt the operator’s business--was similarly made to two other would-be developers of toll roads in Orange and San Diego counties, documents show.

In signing noncompetition clauses with those companies, Caltrans agreed not to improve major thoroughfares, including the Santa Ana and Costa Mesa freeways, for at least 35 years from the time the new toll roads open.

In Orange County, an Idaho construction giant and Arizona developer have plans to build a $1-billion, 11-mile elevated tollway over the Santa Ana River bed, from the Orange Crush, near Edison International Field, south to the San Diego Freeway, at the Costa Mesa-Fountain Valley border.

Although the project--an extension of the Orange Freeway--is still on the drawing board, the state already has promised not to add any more lanes to the Santa Ana or Costa Mesa freeways--beyond what is currently under construction.

The project in southern San Diego County consists of 11 miles of new highway between State Route 54 south to the Mexican border in the Otay Mesa area. Although that road is still being planned, Caltrans already has agreed to protect potential business on the toll road by not converting nearby State Route 905 into a freeway.

Some officials are concerned that the 35-year agreements with the toll road operators will only worsen traffic on the Santa Ana and Costa Mesa freeways, which already are among the most snarled routes in Orange County. The controversial clauses came to light after the private toll lanes operator for the 91 Express Lanes sued Caltrans earlier this year to block proposed safety improvements planned for the adjacent Riverside Freeway.

Caltrans retreated in October, agreeing to settle the lawsuit brought by the California Private Transportation Co. As part of that settlement, Caltrans promised to delay minor repairs to the road until 2006 and any widening projects until a year after traffic counts rose to 370,000 cars a day. Currently, about 240,000 cars travel the corridor each day.

On Friday, state Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana) said he was troubled by the noncompetition clauses, particularly for the Orange Freeway toll-road extension.

“In my view this will lead to even more dramatic impacts than the problems we’ve seen with the 91 because this toll road would cut right through the core of central Orange County,” Dunn said after reviewing the clause. “This has created an environment where public safety could ultimately be compromised as a result of these noncompetition agreements.”

Dunn and others have criticized the state’s decision nearly a decade ago to forsake improvements on state-run freeways in order to protect the profits of the toll-road operators.

The core conflict, critics say, is that gridlock is the best incentive to steer drivers to the toll roads. State legislators plan to review the matter in committee hearings next month. They must resolve whether Caltrans should delay road improvements simply to benefit the toll road operators, or whether the state should instead maintain and widen roads to benefit commuters who don’t want to pay the tolls.

State transportation officials defended the agreements on Friday, saying Caltrans has reserved its right to make necessary safety improvements.

“Caltrans has a lot of flexibility in these agreements,” said Bill Sessa, deputy secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, which oversees Caltrans. “Caltrans always has the responsibility to monitor safety conditions and find solutions to safety problems.”

Proponents of the toll roads argue that the state had no choice, during an era of shrinking budgets, but to give up development rights to encourage investors to spend millions on roads that otherwise would not have been built.

But the agreement allowing the Orange Freeway toll road extension could jeopardize future widening projects on the Costa Mesa Freeway, said Orange County Transportation Authority officials.

The agreement says that Caltrans can make improvements to the San Diego, Orange, Garden Grove and Corona del Mar freeways. But adding any lanes other than carpool lanes to the Costa Mesa Freeway would be prohibited.

Additional lanes could not be added to the Santa Ana Freeway from Irvine to Anaheim. The state and county would also be prevented from turning carpool lanes into regular traffic lanes on all freeways in Orange County.

“There is currently a debate over the effectiveness of [carpool] lanes,” Dunn said. “Without taking a position on that debate, what if [carpool] lanes are suddenly undone in California? Does that mean that all of these [carpool] lanes would have to sit there unused?”

Sessa downplayed the consequences of the noncompetition clause for the Orange Freeway toll road extension.

“What’s the probability of this road being built?” Sessa asked. “We’re talking about potential problems that haven’t manifested themselves yet. Some of this is an academic discussion.”

In fact, the group planning to build the toll road extension has numerous hurdles ahead. The group, called American Transportation Development, inherited the franchise agreement two months ago and has 13 months to begin construction. If work doesn’t begin by January 2001, the group will lose the state franchise agreement, which had been granted to another developer in 1991.

“We will not meet that deadline,” said Grant R. Holland, American Transportation vice president. However, he said, the group has the ability to negotiate an extension from Caltrans. “We’re working right now on a realistic schedule that we feel that we can meet.”

The reason for a noncompetitive clause, he said, is to prevent Caltrans from deciding to build an expressway along local streets such as Bristol Street, which would provide direct competition.

Even if Caltrans made improvements it deemed necessary, Holland said his firm--a joint venture of Interwest Co. of Arizona and Morrison Knudsen Corp. of Idaho--would not sue the state to block road improvements, like the 91 Express Lanes operator did.

Holland said his company will build the lanes, then turn them over to a nonprofit group, whose board of directors would most likely consist of locally elected officials whose cities were near the road. Although Holland has no connection to 91 Express Lanes, the same bond underwriters, traffic and revenue consultant and public relations firm are working on his firm’s project.

Meanwhile, the general manager of the California Private Transportation Co., involved in the ill-fated attempt to sell the private 91 toll lanes, conceded Friday that the company’s poor communications helped sink the deal.

“Unfortunately, we overlooked the very delicate and sensitive nature of our relationship with key local officials in regard to the sale of the 91 Express Lanes,” said Greg Hulsizer, the company’s general manager.

“We hope this will begin to lessen the firestorm of media attention and public fury that has besieged our company for the last couple of weeks,” he said. “We’ve gotten the message.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Toll Road Extension Deal

Caltrans signed a noncompetition clause agreeing not to improve the Santa Ana and Costa Mesa freeways near a proposed toll-road extension of the 57 Freeway.

Source: Caltrans