OCTA Says 25% of Road Projects Delayed a Year

By DAVID HALDANE

Jan. 28, 1997 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

SANTA ANA — Nearly one-fourth of municipal street improvements since 1992 have been delayed at least until the year after the scheduled start date, according to a study released Monday by the Orange County Transportation Authority.

Delay rates ranged from no delays on scheduled projects in some cities to 67% of the 18 scheduled for Placentia.

Orange County, which has overseen 43 street projects since 1992, experienced major delays in 25.6% of them, according to the report.

“These are missed opportunities,” OCTA spokesman John Standiford said of the delays, which he attributed to causes ranging from uncontrollable cash-flow problems to simple lack of good planning.

OCTA is the agency through which road funds are funneled to the cities and county, which are responsible for carrying out construction.

While waiting for construction to begin, he said, the transportation agency has been forced to keep the money for the delayed projects--about $53 million, mostly in Measure M funds--in special accounts that cannot be used for anything else.

“Other projects which could have been completed on time could have used that funding,” Standiford said. “We want that money out there paying for projects.”

Stan Oftelie, the agency’s chief executive officer, agreed. “The OCTA takes starting times seriously,” he said. “Once a project is approved, we expect it to proceed.”

The report, presented to OCTA’s board of directors Monday, came along with requests for changes in the scheduled starting dates for several current projects, including 24 requests for delays and eight for advancements.

While the board approved those requests, the statistics contained in the report accompanying them prompted some members to express concern and ask that a more detailed study be compiled for future consideration.

“Nobody likes delays,” board member Todd A. Spitzer said. “We all want to be responsive to our constituents.”

Board member Susan Withrow said, “I would like to see the study fine-tuned.”

City and county officials attributed the delays to a variety of factors, some of which they said were out of their control.

Officials in Placentia, which experienced the county’s highest rate of delays in project starting dates, could not be reached for comment.

Ismile Noorbaksh, director of public works for La Palma, however, attributed his city’s 50% delay rate to the Orange County bankruptcy. “We were not sure what impacts it would have on the city’s finances, so we just held off on doing the projects,” he said.

Ignacio Ochoa, Orange County’s traffic engineer, blamed the county’s delays on the complexities of negotiating for property rights of way. “Oftentimes it’s difficult to predict when you’re going to have difficulties acquiring right of way,” he said. “Sometimes it goes smoothly, other times it doesn’t.”

And Phil Wray, a spokesman for La Brea, said that his city’s delay rate--50%--was partly caused by the slow response time of state bureaucracies.

“I’m sure there are good reasons why projects are delayed,” he said. “This study may be a bit misleading because of the extenuating circumstances that are not reflected in it.”

Indeed, OCTA officials said, the study is not meant to point accusing fingers.

“This is not a report card,” transportation analyst Paul Rodriguez told board members in presenting the report. “It’s just a snapshot in time.”

Standiford agreed that there are probably valid reasons beyond a city’s control for delays in specific projects.

“The purpose of the report was not to determine what was a good delay or a bad delay,” he said, “but just to illustrate that this is a concern. The idea was not to come up with who’s been naughty or nice--it’s just an overall look at delays, where some interesting comparisons can be made.”

The board discussed the issue during a busy meeting at which at least two other important actions were taken. First, board members voted to urge the California High Speed Rail Commission to consider adding the Irvine Transportation Center to a proposed rail route between Los Angeles and San Diego that now goes inland and completely bypasses Orange County. And, finally, the board accepted a report outlining steps to be taken--at an estimated cost of $1.5 million--to upgrade the agency’s computer system to reflect correct dates after 2000.

“I think the price tag is amazing,” Spitzer said. “I would like to see all our [computer consultant] contracts examined for negligence; if I were a consultant and I led someone into this chaos, I should be sued.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Project Delays

Nearly one-fourth of city street improvements funded by Measure M since 1992 have been delayed. Here’s the timetable for projects countywide:

Delayed: 23%

Started on time: 75%

Started early: 2%

And here’s a look by city:

*--*

Number Percent delayed delayed Anaheim 19 18% Brea 5 50% Buena Park 11 61% Costa Mesa 6 12% Dana Point 2 40% Fountain Valley 11 50% Fullerton 2 11% Garden Grove 3 11% Huntington Beach 7 21% Irvine 9 15% La Habra 4 25% Lake Forest 10 42% La Palma 1 50% Los Alamitos 3 25% Mission Viejo 10 31% Newport Beach 5 33% Orange 5 24% Placentia 12 67% San Clemente 2 13% San Juan Capistrano 5 36% Santa Ana 5 12% Seal Beach 3 38% Stanton 2 33% Tustin 3 27% Westminster 5 22% Yorba Linda 2 10% County 11 26%

*--*

Note: Some cities experienced no delays

Source: Orange County Transportation Authority