🚀 go-pugleaf

Widen Ortega Highway? Some Won't Go There
O.C., Riverside County officials take sides on 'extremely difficult' 
overhaul that would add lanes to antiquated commuter link.
By Dan Weikel, Times Staff Writer

October 2, 2005

Ortega Highway has for years been one of California's deadliest roads - 30 
miles of twisting narrow asphalt, plunging cliffs, say-a-prayer blind spots 
and heavy commuter traffic meandering through the mountains of south Orange 
County.

Now, transportation officials are considering a multibillion-dollar plan to 
widen the antiquated two-lane road to relieve congestion on the Riverside 
Freeway - the primary transportation corridor connecting Orange County and 
the fast-growing Inland Empire.

But Ortega Highway is going to be a tough road to tame.

Its slim right-of-way squeezes through the tight gorges and steep slopes of 
the Santa Ana Mountains, presenting builders with significant engineering 
hurdles.

The highway crosses some of the most sensitive wildlife habitat in Southern 
California, including the San Juan Creek watershed, the Cleveland National 
Forest and Ronald W. Caspers Wilderness Park. The San Mateo Canyon 
Wilderness is nearby.

Municipal officials in south Orange County are mindful of the Riverside 
Freeway's growing congestion. But they aren't enthusiastic about proposals 
that could nearly quadruple traffic from the Inland Empire to their cities 
and Interstate 5 - a freeway, planners say, that is overtaxed and needs its 
own expensive overhaul.

"We just can't be a receptacle for more motorists from Riverside [County]," 
said Sam Allevato, a San Juan Capistrano councilman. "The project would 
destroy the scenic character of the Ortega. And it's so narrow in spots 
there's barely room for two lanes, let alone four."

The proposal to super-size Ortega Highway is one of several options pending 
before a committee of policymakers and transportation officials from the two 
counties interested in developing alternatives to the Riverside Freeway - 
the stretch of California 91 from the 60 Freeway in Riverside to the I-5.

Traffic on the Riverside Freeway is expected to almost double in the next 25 
years, from 260,000 vehicles a day to about 450,000, most of them Inland 
Empire residents commuting to jobs in Orange and Los Angeles counties.

Other options include expanding public transit, widening the Riverside 
Freeway to as many as 17 lanes, building a new highway paralleling the 91 
and digging a 12-mile tunnel under Cleveland National Forest from Cajalco 
Road in Riverside County to California 133 in Irvine. The committee is to 
decide on the proposals in December.

Improvements to the Ortega would include widening the highway to four lanes 
from Lake Elsinore to several miles east of San Juan Capistrano at a 
proposed Foothill South tollway, a turnpike from Oso Parkway east of Mission 
Viejo to the I-5 near San Clemente. The 10-foot-wide lanes would be 
increased to the standard 12 feet. Shoulders would be added to help prevent 
cars from tumbling down the mountainside - a not-uncommon mishap along the 
Ortega.

"There're so many accidents, you can get over the top of the mountains and 
have to turn right around and go all the way back," said Joe Narciso, 44, a 
state building inspector from Wildomar who commutes over the Ortega. "The 
improvements are needed bad."

Although the alignment hasn't been determined, planners say two new lanes 
might be built in tunnels on the north side of San Juan Creek. To avoid the 
Ortega's spiraling descent into Lake Elsinore, planners are considering a 
tunnel bypass that would connect to Interstate 15.

The cost to widen the Ortega would be about $3 billion, a figure that 
doesn't include extensive environmental protections that would be required 
for the wilderness areas, national forest and the San Juan Creek watershed. 
Those areas are home to centuries-old stands of oak, mountain lions and 20 
threatened species of plants and animals, such as the arroyo toad and 
southern steelhead trout.

Planners say the expanded road would accommodate at least 35,000 vehicles a 
day - nearly four times its capacity now.

Over the last decade, the Ortega has emerged as a secondary commuter link to 
Orange County from southern Riverside County, a purpose it was never 
designed for when the highway was built in 1929 along an old Indian trail.

In such tight quarters, cars and trucks sometimes sideswipe each other, 
ripping off side-view mirrors, door handles and trim. Motorists who pass 
illegally often force other drivers to hug the guardrails or hillsides to 
avoid getting hit.

At rush hour "it's a steady line of cars," said Steve Bobbett, 53, of Lake 
Elsinore. "The road is narrow and winding and a lot of people just don't 
know how to drive it."

On weekends, the highway takes on another personality. Car clubs, 
sightseers, campers and trucks hauling boats compete for road space with 
high-performance motorcycles that weave in and out of traffic.

Compared to similar state routes, the risk of death or serious injury on the 
Ortega is among the highest for motorists.

Because of engineering, financial and environmental constraints, the 
California Department of Transportation has concentrated largely on making 
the Ortega safer. In 2007, Caltrans plans to upgrade the highway's most 
dangerous section: Ricochet Alley, so named because drivers who lose control 
here carom off the guardrails and sheer rock walls into traffic.

Widening just two lanes along that 3.3-mile stretch would take two years and 
cost $27 million. But a major project, said Ahmed Abou-Abdou, a Caltrans 
project manager, would be "exponentially more expensive."

H. Tony Rahimian, an Irvine-based civil engineer who is coordinating the 
study committee, agreed. Overhauling 20 to 30 miles of the Ortega, he said, 
would be "extremely difficult" because of its looping turns, mountainous 
setting and San Juan Creek.

The new lanes would require blasting through granite, building viaducts over 
the creek, retaining walls to hold up slopes and extensive excavation of the 
steep mountainsides. Heavy equipment would be harder to operate in the 
narrow right of way, and historic structures such as the San Juan Creek 
Bridge, built more than 70 years ago, would have to be preserved.

Tunneling, Rahimian said, would be costly and add another dimension of 
uncertainty during construction.

"There is a safety problem on the Ortega that needs to be addressed," said 
San Juan Capistrano Councilman Dave Swerdlin, who, like other south Orange 
County politicians, questions the widening proposal. "But should it become a 
major artery? I would have to question that."

San Juan Capistrano, known for its Spanish mission and adobe buildings, 
notified the Riverside Freeway's study committee in July that widening the 
Ortega would threaten the town's historic setting and quality of life.

During rush hour, traffic from the road already backs up through San Juan 
Capistrano, clogging the highway's outmoded interchange with I-5 near 
downtown.

Meanwhile, traffic has surged on the 5 through south Orange County. 
Motorists make as many as 390,000 trips a day on some sections of the 
highway.

Widening Ortega "would have an overwhelming impact on Interstate 5 and the 
commutes for south Orange County residents," said Laguna Niguel Councilwoman 
Cathryn DeYoung, a former Orange County Transportation Authority director.

"They need to show us how to fix the 5," said DeYoung, who is running for 
county supervisor, "before they dump another 25,000 motorists a day down 
here."

Other local politicians also question whether it is worth spending $3 
billion on the Ortega to accommodate only 25,000 more vehicle trips a day.

Swerdlin and others say the money could be better spent elsewhere, such as 
the Cajalco tunnel under Cleveland National Forest, getting far more 
Riverside County commuters to central and northern Orange County, where the 
jobs are.

The latest estimate for the Cajalco tunnel is at $5 billion to $6 billion if 
six lanes are built. Planners say it could handle 100,000 vehicle trips a 
day, less if tolls are charged.

In south Riverside County, the perspective is different. Cities such as 
Temecula, Murrieta, Hemet and Lake Elsinore want the Ortega widened. Those 
towns have seen an explosive population growth in the last decade - 18% to 
20% a year.

The power brokers and business interests want the transportation solutions 
to be north of Lake Elsinore, such as widening the Riverside Freeway and 
building the Cajalco tunnel, said Lake Elsinore Mayor Bob Magee, who sits on 
the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the study committee.

"The tunnel might be too expensive, and the solution is far away," Magee 
said.

"An overland alternative" - fixing the Riverside Freeway and Ortega 
Highway - "can happen cheaper and quicker" even with the required 
environmental protections, he said.

Magee conceded that south Orange County cities have realistic concerns about 
potential increases in traffic from Riverside County.

But improving the Ortega would bring more traffic from Orange County to the 
Lake Elsinore area as well - a trend, Magee said, that could benefit local 
business.

"We want people to come to see our lake, our outlet malls and our baseball 
team," Magee said, referring to the minor league Lake Elsinore Storm. "We 
hope we get the same level of attention and consideration [by policymakers] 
as south Orange County."