Lengthen Rail, Add Bus Now, Panel Says

Saying the CenterLine light-rail project seems inevitable, the Orange County Grand Jury on Wednesday recommended chan-ges to boost ridership: add Santa Ana College as a destination and offer temporary bus service on the route now to prime the public for rail.

The suggestions are in the 10-page report “CenterLine Redux,” a work in stark contrast to a 1999 grand jury study that roundly criticized what was then a 28-mile version of the system. The proposed project has been cut to 11.4 miles.

The earlier study warned that CenterLine would do little to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution -- two of the project’s goals. It also said the system would be costly to build and fall short of ridership projections.

Although it did not retract those conclusions, the new report sounded a more positive note for the controversial project, which has been scaled back because of political opposition and which still faces a critical vote in Irvine on June 3.

The panel, which has the power to evaluate government programs and make recommendations, said preliminary planning for CenterLine should continue and that Orange County -- with 2.9 million people -- can support a light-rail system.

Grand jurors cautioned, however, that highways, roads and commuter rail systems, such as Metrolink and Amtrak, might not be enough to meet transportation demands.

“The overall tone is different,” said Cypress City Councilman Tim Keenan, board chairman of the Orange Country Transportation Authority. “These are laypeople who have heard both sides of the issue. They have come up with the consensus that we are ready for light rail today.”

Despite the more favorable wording, grand juror Ron Harris, principal author of the study, said the report was not an overt endorsement of CenterLine. Panelists, Harris said, believe the project is likely to be built and want to influence the planning process to ensure it becomes “an asset for the county.”

CenterLine opponents contend, however, that the new report does not nullify the key findings of the 1999 grand jury. After studying more than a dozen systems, the 1999 panel concluded that light rail was inefficient, obsolete and could not fulfill the needs of urban travelers.

The new report “reads as if it were written by OCTA,” said John Kleinpeter of Irvine, director of Fund Alternatives Instead of Rail Transit, an anti-CenterLine group. “It sounds like much of the text was taken off the authority’s Web site.”

As now envisioned by OCTA, CenterLine would run from UC Irvine to the Santa Ana train station with major stops at the Irvine Business Complex, John Wayne Airport, the South Coast Plaza area and the Santa Ana Civic Center. It would be the first leg of an 87-mile light-rail network planned for the county.

Planners estimate the initial phase would cost at least $1.5 billion to build and would attract about 21,000 boardings a day during its first year of operation. Ridership would hit about 32,000 a day 15 years after the opening in 2011. A final decision to proceed has yet to be made.

To increase the number of passengers, the grand jury recommended that the first segment be extended less than a half-mile to Santa Ana College, which has 29,000 students and 2,600 employees.

Just as significant, the panel suggested OCTA create a temporary bus route along the proposed rail corridor as a forerunner to CenterLine. That would get people accustomed to the route and build a base of riders for the train before it begins service, jurors said.

The report did raise concerns, including the potential for competition between OCTA and private businesses over locations for stations, and conflicting interests over rights-of-way between OCTA and cities participating in the rail system.

For example, Costa Mesa and prominent business interests in that city want CenterLine placed underground through the South Coast Plaza area, something OCTA opposes because of the cost.

Grand jurors also worried OCTA might have to make expensive promises to cities to win their support.

Keenan said OCTA would consider the recommendations and acknowledged concerns about cost, ridership and political disputes.

“Other transit agencies have gone through this,” Keenan said. “We are being judicious in trying not to fall into those traps. We don’t want to make too many promises to cities.”