Rail System Question Stirs Comment

The Times’ May 23 editorial, “The Challenge of Rail,” explained estimates for the proposed 28-mile urban rail system in Orange County would start at $1.3 billion and go up from there.

Would our citizens use it enough to justify that expense? If my friends and neighbors are any indication, the answer is an emphatic no.

I cannot help but equate the editorial with suggestions to build an extensive rail system to connect Orange County with an airport a good distance outside of our county.

Once again, common sense tells me we will not use such a system enough to justify the astronomical amount of tax money involved to build it.

S. SCHAFFER

Huntington Beach

* I strongly disagree with the conclusions of the Orange County Grand Jury (“Grand Jury Hits OCTA on Plan for Urban Rail,” May 28).

What exactly constitutes a successful rail link in their opinion? The light rail systems in Portland (33 miles), San Diego and Long Beach (22 miles) each carry more than 50,000 people a day.

How can this be termed a failure? A fair comparison is to calculate the number of cars that the rail line keeps off adjacent roads and freeways.

It is not fair to add up traffic on all roads and freeways in the county and then claim that a rail line only 23 to 28 miles in length will not have much impact on Orange County traffic. That in essence is what the grand jury is doing.

Did they question the expense to taxpayers of $1.1 billion spent on the 11-mile I-5 widening project, which is twice the cost per mile of the light rail project?

Orange County residents want light rail to be part of our transportation solution. That is why Measure M was passed and $340 million was set aside for light rail.

It is time to move toward a balanced transportation system that maintains our quality of life. Freeways alone are not the answer.

LINUS TAURO

Costa Mesa

* Your May 23 editorial was wrong. There are so many valid reasons against a rail system in Orange County that it should not be considered.

For the same expenditure, buses can carry 15 times as many people. They also have the advantage of flexibility; in case of an earthquake or any other impediment to roads and rail lines, the buses can change routes to the nearest available streets which are usable. Trains must wait until the tracks are repaired.

Trains are unsafe. If cars or trucks could not steer and could not brake, they would be illegal, but trains are not. Steel wheels on steel tracks require very long distances for braking because of the low coefficient of friction.

An at-grade route would be subject to collisions because of the braking problem, which is common at all train crossings. It would also diminish the available road area by at least two lanes and would decrease the available time for cross traffic. It would increase congestion.

Much of our road congestion is due to poor design. An example is the proposed Katella Avenue and Costa Mesa Freeway interchange.

Presently there are cloverleafs, hence no stops or congestion. The new “improved” design will have traffic lights, which cause stops and congestion not only at the freeway but also coordination problems with nearby traffic signals.

Orange County is similar to Atlanta, Miami and Phoenix in population and density; none of these cities carries as much as 0.5% of daily traffic on light rail. Why would Orange County be different?

A. TRUJILLO ESCARENO

Tustin

* The Times’ arguments for rail follow the Orange County Transportation Authority’s one-sided propaganda. Not discussed is the lack of real effectiveness.

Unadvertised OCTA analysis shows that the 60,000 daily boardings they talk about only reduces traffic by 12,000 car trips, or only one of every 1,000 projected trips. The rest come from displaced bus riders.

Proponents claim a bit of everything, hoping something sticks. But do we need rail to promote economic development in already booming Orange County? How can rail increase land values and serve low-income housing at the same time?

Central corridor residents need a more effective transit network. Rail’s appeal is its glitz, not its performance. Let’s stop all the slogans that are only skin deep.

DAVE MOOTCHNIK

Huntington Beach