$900-Million Rail Project Proposed : Transportation: A state panel is expected to approve Caltrans’ plan for more passenger trains on major-city lines. But implementation is contingent on many factors.

The Caltrans staff is proposing a $900-million, seven-year plan for enhancing intercity rail passenger service in California that would result in several more trains by 1997 between Los Angeles, San Diego and Santa Barbara, and a revival of trains between Los Angeles and Bakersfield.

Under the plan, the number of daily Los Angeles-San Diego trains each way would increase from eight to 10, and they would run 20 to 25 minutes faster, offering service between the two metropolitan centers in as little as 2 hours, 20 minutes.

Meanwhile, daily Los Angeles-Santa Barbara service, in addition to the long-distance Coast Starlight, would be increased from one to four trains each way, and the service would be extended to Goleta. These trains would provide San Diego-Santa Barbara service, stopping at Los Angeles’ Union Station.

The plan, which the California Transportation Commission is being asked to approve next month, would also inaugurate rail service between San Jose and Sacramento, with eventually six trains a day in each direction. Some trains might be extended to Auburn, northeast of Sacramento.

Even if the plan is approved as expected, its implementation is contingent on other major factors, cautioned Cindy McKim, head of the rail division at Caltrans, the California Department of Transportation.

McKim noted that the plan assumes that voters will approve two more billion-dollar rail bond issues in the 1992 and 1994 elections as companion measures to the $1-billion Proposition 108 enacted in last June’s primary. (Much of the total of the $3 billion would go to finance commuter rail projects not directly involved with intercity service).

Besides voter approval of the bonds, the Legislature would have to make operating funds available for the projected services, and the railroads that own the lines would have to permit Caltrans to make the improvements and then begin the actual service. Amtrak, the federal railroad operator, would also have to agree to operate the service.

McKim further cautioned that cost estimates may change, depending on such factors as the amount of inflation, the state of the economy and the cost of specific items. Some inflation is built into the estimates, but it might be greater than expected.

“This, in short, is our tentative plan, based on what we know at this point in time and what we think may be feasible,” McKim said. She noted that the plan mainly reflects results of recent state-sponsored studies of the various rail passenger corridors.

The plan calls for the use of about $600 million from Proposition 108 and subsequent bond issues, and about $300 million from Proposition 116, also approved by the electorate last June, and transit improvement funds provided directly by Caltrans.

Since adding substantial new rolling stock is a prerequisite to expanding service, about $235 million of the total amount would go to buy new passenger cars and locomotives for the trains.

According to Caltrans’ proposal, the lion’s share of expenditures and enhancements of intercity rail service would come in the latter part of the seven-year period, not this year or next. Projected expenditures in the 1990-91 fiscal year would run only $30.7 million.

Guidelines for applying for the Proposition 116 bond money, for example, are not expected to be approved until early 1991.

Still, the new plan outlines dramatic improvements in rail service along major existing rail passenger corridors and envisions study of opening new corridors, such as San Francisco-Santa Rosa-Eureka.

New service would be provided between Los Angeles and Sacramento in three steps.

First, in 1992, the plan proposes a new Stockton-Sacramento service, connecting with the present Oakland-Bakersfield line now served by three trains a day.

Then, in 1993, Bakersfield-Los Angeles service would be revived along the old passenger route of the “San Joaquin Daylight” through Tehachapi and Mojave, which was shut down 30 years ago.

Finally, in 1994, the San Joaquin Valley line would be moved from the Santa Fe tracks to the Southern Pacific between Fresno and Stockton, providing more convenient access to downtowns along the route.

A fourth daily San Joaquin Valley train would also be added each way during the seven-year period.

As for Los Angeles-San Diego service, some of the 20- to 25-minute time savings might not be possible until a $20-million improvement of the present antiquated signaling system is undertaken.

The plan does not envision completing the signaling modernization until 1995, when new technology is expected to be available. But Sharon Greene, executive director of the Los Angeles-San Diego rail corridor agency, said she hopes the work could be started earlier if the technology becomes available. She said Caltrans is showing a willingness to be flexible about start-up times.

The Caltrans staff has also given the Transportation Commission, which performs oversight and policy-setting functions for Caltrans, a priority list indicating that, of the projects contemplated in all passenger corridors, buying new rolling stock, improving stations along the routes and implementing new service are toward the top of the list.

Capacity improvements, double-tracking, building bypass sidings and so forth, are usually in the middle of the annual priority lists.

Grade separations, putting rail lines at a different level, either above or below traversing highways, are not a frequent feature of the seven-year improvement plan. Some experts have said this would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and be necessary before any European-style, high-speed service could begin.

There is no such high-speed service envisioned in the staff plan. A proposed magnetic levitation line between Orange County and Las Vegas is being advanced by private investors and is not a part of the Caltrans staff plan, which is concerned only with investments of public funds.

The Caltrans staff in its plan has provided a priority list of investments totaling $600.1 million and an additional list of $241.8 million of desirable projects if money can be obtained, presumably through appropriating the Proposition 116 bonds, once the guidelines are adopted.

McKim said that although the $600 million has been adjusted for expected inflation, the $241 million has not, and therefore total expenditures, if the plan were fully carried out, would be expected to mount to about $900 million.

Among the desirable projects listed above the initial $600 million are $9.5 million of track and station improvements in Goleta, to facilitate extension of the Santa Barbara service; $43.6 million for signal and automatic train control work in the Los Angeles-Sacramento corridor, and track and other improvements of $57.8 million in the San Jose-Sacramento corridor to allow faster service than is now available on the Coast Starlight between those points.

Regional Taxes For Transportation Los Angeles County: Voters OKd half-cent sales tax for transit system in 1980. . .FirstSouthern California county to adopt such a measure. Another half-cent tax to be on November ballot. San Bernardino County: Half-cent tax passed in November, 1989. . .Pays for transit and highway improvements, including regional systems. Riverside County: Voters approved half-cent tax in 1988 to pay for highway, rail and other transportation projects, including plans to widen Riverside Freeway. Orange County: Rejected 1-cent tax in 1984. . .Rejected half-cent measure in 1989. . .Voters get third shot on Nov. 6, with measures nearly identical to last year’s. San Diego County: Backers overcame conservative opposition and easily passed half-cent tax in 1987. . .Won on first try. Interstate 5: Plans to widen from San Clemente to Los Angeles County line have been slowed, pending approval of Orange County sales tax. Improvements to interchange with San Diego Freeway (405) also can’t be done without tax money. Riverside Freeway: Widening already approved in Riverside County to accommodate commuters from Inland Empire, but plans to widen it through Orange County are on hold. Widening the Costa Mesa (55) and Orange (57) freeways, which take traffic off the Riverside Freeway into Orange County, also awaits passage of local tax.