 |
|
STATE, FEDERAL AGENCIES SAY STATE ROUTE 241 SAFE FOR WILDLIFE, HABITATS, SURF
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State Fish and Game, Surf Experts Validate Sensitive Route to Connect with I-5, De-Bunk False and Exaggerated Claims of the Opponents
IRVINE, Calif. (July 17, 2008) – The proposed route for the extension of State Route 241 to connect with the east side of Interstate 5 south of San Clemente is safe for the environment, watershed, wildlife, campers, surfing and the beaches, according to a series of independent reports from federal and state agencies and respected experts released by the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA).
“Outside experts and agencies have validated the sensitive design of the route to avoid endangered habitats and protect the beaches,” said Jerry Amante, chairman of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency. “The 241 extension is clearly good for reducing gridlock and improving our regional transportation system. The overwhelming evidence now shows how it will protect the environment, endangered habitats and our beaches. The findings clearly support the U.S. Department of Commerce overturning the decision of the California Coastal Commission voting against the extension, which was based on bad facts and false assumptions. In addition, the Federal Highway Administration noted the importance of the 241 extension to our national interests. The data is detailed and compelling.”
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a biological opinion that the road will not jeopardize the existence of any endangered species. The report issued a strong rebuttal to the “unsubstantiated assertions” made by the Coastal Commission staff about apocalypse for the pocket mouse and other species. The California Department of Fish and Game approved the measures the TCA will implement to protect fish and wildlife resources during construction and operation of the roadway. One report even noted that the hikers and bikers cause more damage to the pocket mouse population than any road would; hikers and bikers routinely crush the mice and ruin their burrows.
Highlights of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report include:
- “Currently, no designated or proposed critical habitat exists in the action area of the toll road project….Therefore, critical habitat for the tidewater goby, arroyo toad, Riverside fairy shrimp, San Diego fairy shrimp, southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell’s vireo, coastal California gnatcatcher, and thread-leaved brodiaea are not considered further in this opinion.”
- Related to growth, southern Orange County is almost entirely built out. “No urban or commercial growth attributable to the toll road is anticipated on Camp Pendleton and the State Park leased lands. Therefore, we do not anticipate potential growth-inducing effects as a result of the toll road project.”
- The toll road will have no impact on the arroyo toad population.
- “Following completion of the proposed restoration, we anticipate that the number of gnatcatcher pairs range wide will be similar to or slightly greater than pre-project conditions."
- Mitigation actions will support recovery of the Least Bell Vireo.
- “Overall, the proposed project footprint avoids all known occupied PPM habitat, while providing much needed management and protection described in the PPMRMP for the San Mateo North population….it is the Service’s biological opinion that construction, operation and maintenance of the toll road is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the PPM.”
- “[A]ll known occupied PPM habitat and nearly all restorable land adjacent of such habitat and west of Crisitianitos Road will be managed with the 29.5-ha (72.9-ac) PPM Management Area. These potentially restorable lands represent the best opportunity to stabilize or expand known occupied PPM habitat through management actions that are not in conflict with existing military training activities."
The 241 was designed to protect the beaches with best practices in water quality management. The opponents claimed otherwise. Even Surfer Magazine noted that the change in sediment discharge from the toll road would only be enough to fill up a public restroom at San Onofre. “Spread along the entire beach that is considered immeasurable,” according to the magazine. Click here for details.
The Federal Highway Administration noted:
- Collaborative agencies studied 43 potential routes, including no-build and no-toll-road alternatives.
- The Interstate 5 alternative would cost $2.8 billion (versus $1.3 billion for the 241 extension), no funds exist for the construction, it would have a higher cost per hour of travel time saved and the refined plan submitted by a consultant hired by the opponents (Smart Mobility) used non-standard geometrics and interchange configurations that would be “unacceptable or impractical for use on a highway of Interstate 5’s national importance.” It would also encroach on the coastal zone.
- Alternatives found unacceptable to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) “are indeed acceptable.”
- Given the national interest in a safe and efficient transportation system, the critical importance of Southern California’s transportation viability and air quality improvement, the orderly process undertaken for this project, and the commitment to minimize and mitigate adverse effects, “we believe that the national interest outweighs the activity’s adverse coastal effects.”
- The proposed route furthers the national interest as outlined in the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA).
- The administration recommended that the Secretary of Commerce override the CCC objection and allow the project to move forward.
Extending the 241 will relieve traffic on Interstate 5 in South Orange County by providing an alternative route. Without the toll road, travel from the San Diego/Orange County border to Rancho Santa Margarita will take one hour in 2025. With the toll road constructed, the same drive on Interstate 5 will take 25 minutes and it will take 16 minutes on the toll road. In addition, the 241 is expected to take pressure off Interstate 15, currently used by many driving from eastern Orange County into San Diego County. The new road will provide an alternative to Interstate 5 for the hundreds of thousands of motorists a day who travel between San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles Counties. The toll road will carry 58,000 vehicles a day. Those are cars that would otherwise be on neighborhood streets and Interstate 5.
|
