SD Business Journal Tired of "Eco-Extremists" Delaying Foothill-South

The San Diego Business Journal's Editor-In-Chief Tom York blasted Foothill-South opponents for using lies and deception to delay the completion of the 241 Toll Road.  He specifically refers to the talking point used by project opponents that connecting the 241 to the I-5 will result in the "loss of the Trestles' surf break" and other outright lies that have no basis in reality.  It's good to finally see a journalist say, "the emperor has no clothes" and asking these activists to back up their indefensible claims that make good soundbites, but are simply untrue.

Eco-Extremists Have Made Proposed Foothill South Toll Road 10-Year Drive to ‘Nowheresville’

Editor’s Notebook — Tom York

North County drivers heading to and from Orange County on Interstate 5 are the forgotten motorists during weekday traffic updates.

They are neither here nor there when it comes to media attention … but the commute is growing in size, as anyone who has traveled the route at the most popular hours of the day can attest.

Officials estimate that 150,000 vehicles traverse the two counties each weekday — a number expected to jump 60 percent in the next 18 to 20 years.

Commuters who work in OC and live in San Diego are also the forgotten motorists in the debate over a proposed 16-mile toll road, the so-called Foothill South Corridor that would parallel Interstate 5 alongside Trestle Beach near San Onofre State Park.

Eco-extremists have blocked the forward progress of the toll road at each and every twist and turn of the approval process. They’ve spent a decade keeping the route from becoming a reality.

The issue is an important one … because it pits the self-appointed guardians of the ecology against the rest of us, who are trying to muddle through.

They argue that construction and placement of the highway so close to the ocean could disrupt wave patterns by changing the underlying contours of the beaches, and hence, ruin the surfing along a long stretch of the beach.

Just Speculation

There’s no proof of this, of course. Just speculation.

The latest obstruction comes attached to a defense authorization bill now before Congress that would force the Transportation Corridor Agencies, sponsor of the road, to submit its blueprints before the California Coastal Commission, among other state regulators, for OKs.

Needless to say, the all-powerful and highly partisan commission is unlikely to approve the road, effectively shelving a desperately needed driving alternative from North County.

The fight, as noted, raises important social questions.

At what point do the greater needs of society, such as roads and other infrastructure, stop taking a back seat to the narrowly defined interests of a few?

As traffic continues to worsen, there is an increasing recognition that connecting the 241 to the I-5 will provide a needed alternative in the southernmost section of Orange County.  More than 6,500 residents support the completion of the 241 and as traffic grows, so will that number.

Officials estimate that 150,000 vehicles traverse the two counties each weekday — a number expected to jump 60 percent in the next 18 to 20 years.

Commuters who work in OC and live in San Diego are also the forgotten motorists in the debate over a proposed 16-mile toll road, the so-called Foothill South Corridor that would parallel Interstate 5 alongside Trestle Beach near San Onofre State Park.

Eco-extremists have blocked the forward progress of the toll road at each and every twist and turn of the approval process. They’ve spent a decade keeping the route from becoming a reality.

The issue is an important one … because it pits the self-appointed guardians of the ecology against the rest of us, who are trying to muddle through.

They argue that construction and placement of the highway so close to the ocean could disrupt wave patterns by changing the underlying contours of the beaches, and hence, ruin the surfing along a long stretch of the beach.

Just Speculation

There’s no proof of this, of course. Just speculation.

The latest obstruction comes attached to a defense authorization bill now before Congress that would force the Transportation Corridor Agencies, sponsor of the road, to submit its blueprints before the California Coastal Commission, among other state regulators, for OKs.

Needless to say, the all-powerful and highly partisan commission is unlikely to approve the road, effectively shelving a desperately needed driving alternative from North County.

The fight, as noted, raises important social questions.

At what point do the greater needs of society, such as roads and other infrastructure, stop taking a back seat to the narrowly defined interests of a few?

As traffic continues to worsen, there is an increasing recognition that connecting the 241 to the I-5 will provide a needed alternative in the southernmost section of Orange County.  More than 6,500 residents support the completion of the 241 and as traffic grows, so will that number.

Comments

[Bladerunner]

If you folks would just get out of the box and negotiate this you wouldn't have such problems. But it's your way or the highway.

[Pave Me]

And re-start the EIR process all over again? Be real, BR.

[tylerh]

How does adding concrete *north* of San Clemente help make traffic move better *south* of San Clemente?

Wouldn't making it easy for OC drivers to get to San Clemente (a laudable goal) mean more traffic on the same ribbon of concrete through Camp Pendleton and on into North County San Diego?

Then again, name calling is a heck of a lot easier then map reading.

[Alex Brant-Zawadzki]

Someone better adjust Tom's straightjacket - I think he's losing blood flow to his brain.

The TCA ALWAYS had to get Coastal Commission Approval. Always. It's part of the process, just like the EIR, just like the public comment period.

The amendment to the Defense Authorization Act isn't about the Coastal Commission. It's about ensuring the TCA is not above the law.
If you're building a road in California, why should you be exempt from CA state law?

Mahalo, OCB mammerjammers. I almost miss the OCBS. I'm in Hawaii watchin' my brother's team finish TRANSPAC.

[Biff]

More than 6,500 residents support the completion of the 241

More than 6,500 residents of what? Earth? I'm sure the people from Barstow, Los Angeles, Mammoth Lakes, Pasadena, Salt Lake City, Simi Valley, and Sacramento who signed the TCA's online petition are going to be regular San Diego-to-OC drivers ...

[Bladerunner]

Pave me---Conducting an EIR doesn't mean you get automatic approval. And if there is a problem you correct it. You don't say we have to restart the EIR process again(which you would only have to do for changes in the south end). Would you rather have no extension and whine about it for years on the blogs?

[Theodore Judah]

The whole reason the EIR was done a second time to begin with is so the federal and state agencies that grant permits could be part of the formation of the EIR.

For six years they met with TCA and worked on minor adjustments to the alignment and made comments during the draft EIR process. This was a new system they called "streamlining." The idea was that if the various agencies (EPA, US Fish & Wildlife, etc.) were involved in the creation of the EIR, they would not have as many objections once the EIR was certified.

The EIR was certified in February of 2006 with all the input from all the environmental resource agencies incorporated. Here we are in July of 2007 and - for example - US Fish & Wildlife still hasn't released their biologicial opinion on the project.

Why is that? The reason is because USFWS is beholden to the "eco-extremists" who will have their heads on a platter if they permit the project. But since they have no scientifically valid way to deny it, they just delay, delay, delay.

Even though they were part of the EIR process for six years and helped select this alignment, and they know it is the most environmentally sensitive alignment, they have no incentive to make a decision... so instead of saying "yes" or "no"... they just say they're still studying it.

Doing another EIR won't change that.

[Bladerunner]

It doesn't matter if they greased the skids TJ, there apparently are enough people who don't like the route that the thing is on life support. I got the info brochures that were sent out---it was heavily weighted to the preferred route of TCA over alternative routes. More importantly, no effort was made to consider alternative routes through Camp Pendleton because the Marines said no. Well, the Marines weren't excited about the preferred route and went along, were not excited about the Park but went along. And they could be convinced--with teh right price--of another route outside the Park.

But the real deal is your mitigation isn't significant enough. Once you start blazing saddles through a state park--leased, dirt roads and all---you better pony up a lot more then you've put on the table. Going through nature is saving TCA huge amounts as opposed to paying the homes and businesses in San Clemente if I-5 widening was the choice. Use some of those savings and buy more parkland.

[Alex Brant-Zawadzki]

Hey there Theodore - or shall I call you Teddy? Like Teddy Ruxpin - put a tape in his chest and he'll moronically puppet the same lines, over and over again.

Read the RESPONSE TO COMMENTS in the EIR. Nothing but page after page of the TCA minimizing, glossing over or completely ignoring the serious concerns of, among others, the Coastal Commission, Fish & Game, the Native American Heritage Council, and State Parks.

Me llamo TEDDY!

[Chat]

I’d be interested in an updated GoogleAnalytics chart (may be two with about six weeks coverage), just to see if the effect did wear off after a while and also, did others link to your new name with the same link-text (allinurl:…). I hope you will publish a follow up.